Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#971

Post by lupire »

WanderPanda wrote: post #859
sakopov wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems a little funny to me that people flock to the idea that Twitter's market cap in a fed-fueled stock market when literally everything was moving up is some kind of true valuation for Tiwtter. If anything Twitter is likely trading at or very close to its fair value now then it was last year when retail was throwing money into anything.

Gamestop is still at 150 so people are still throwing money into anything

GME is a bit weird because it was essentially a crowdsourced fundraising round for Ryan Cohen SPAC, expecting an NFT play. (Which I expect will fail spectacularly)

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#972

Post by lupire »

myvoiceismypass wrote: post #948
gitfan86 wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter wouldn't exist in this scenario from the stock holder's perspective. They would get cash and then put that cash into other investments of their choosing. The only way this makes sense is if there is a bigger offer incoming OR if the Twitter board has a plan to make twitter much more successful in the near term and succeeds at that plan.

I think the "not a hedge fund" part is referring to the fact that this would be a taxable event for the average stockholder. You can't just presto move that same amount into another tax stock.

No, they meant that Twitter is a specific business that shareholders believe in, not just a financial vehicle. Like part of the value of your house is that it is your home, not just a liquid investment.

Taxation is only a concern for folks who have big unrealized gains and lack harvestable unrealized losses.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#973

Post by lupire »

moralestapia wrote: post #280
axg11 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pushback is simple: Twitter stock price was higher than Musk’s offer for most of 2021. We are in a downturn affecting the entire tech industry, and it’s likely that prices will return to previous levels at some point. Elon’s offer is a lowball and Twitter can bring more value to shareholders with or without Elon.

>Twitter stock price was higher than Musk’s offer for most of 2021. That's cute but the past is gone. Twitter is clearly going downhill, both with their product and with their management (good thing they got rid of Dorsey, but perhaps that was too little too late), the stock just follows on that. If anything, people like Musk are the ones who still attract interest to the platform. >Twitter can bring more value to sh…

If Twitter allegedt failing didn't bring the stock price down before, why would it now?

Trump is mainstream. MSM covers him, as do Reddit and Facebook posters.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#974

Post by vba616 »

furyofantares wrote: post #723
4khilles wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would Twitter profits matter to shareholders after they divest?

They wouldn't be divested. He's said he intends to allow the maximum number of shareholders legally allowed to continue as shareholders, that is, the biggest investors get to not divest if they want. GP is implying that since Musk is relying on this in order to finance it since he doesn't have 43B in cash.

>He's said he intends to allow the maximum number of shareholders legally allowed to continue as shareholders, that is, the biggest investors get to not divest if they want

If this is a plausible scenario, and I don't know that it isn't, do you think it's what he means or is trying to express?

Because it seems to me that the way he says he'll keep the shareholders, it's intended to communicate to his countless groupies that they will somehow still be able to own Tesla in their Robinhood accounts. Which would be nonsense, right?

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#975

Post by lokar »

bko wrote: post #407
woodruffw wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was a member of Twitter's board, Musk's history of erratic public behavior, SEC settlement, and openly hostile attitude towards the company's employees would be more than sufficient to justify my belief that his controlling ownership would not be in the interest of the current average shareholder. That opinion would also be consistent with how "fiduciary duty" is interpreted by US regulators: companies are not r…

It doesn't have to be complicated. The shareholders should have a right to decide through a proxy vote on whether to accept the offer

He could have made a cash tender if he was serious. But he isn't, and does not have the cash.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#976

Post by lokar »

chernevik wrote: post #609
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you were a member of Twitters board, would it be in the interest of the current average shareholder to sell their shares at well above the market price? That definitionally depends on whether you, as that hypothetical board member, believe that Twitter has the potential to reach a share price higher than $54.20 if it stays public. Also, remember there is nothing that binds the board of a company to solely consid…

Right, but they hurt other shareholders by preventing them from taking it. Don't like the bid, fine, say no -- but don't prevent your peers from selling out.

A buyout is all or nothing. Many current shareholders (a majority?) think the offer is low. The board is representing their interests.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#977

Post by vba616 »

Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #925
tempest_ wrote: post #908

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aha is the American Dream be born to well off parents and emigrate to dodge a draft now?

yes, the american dream being "born rich" is the postmodern satire re-enactment of the original. It features a white african for diversity.

I don't understand why there would be something ironic, postmodern, satirical, or unexpected about a relatively privileged white South African who grew up in the era of apartheid being associated with space travel or other technology that is considered futuristic.

Nothing has changed. It is still as it has always been.

The US space program and the Moon landings can be traced directly back to Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun and his work at Peenemünde, utilizing slave labor to build rockets for Nazi Germany.

"More people died building the V-2 rockets than were killed by it as a weapon"

The course of history was shaped by Von Braun being terrified of the Soviets and choosing to surrender to Americans.

Some people see this sort of historical note as extremely relevant to everything today, and some don't. I see nobody trying to bridge that gap.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#978

Post by aliswe »

not2b wrote: post #184

Even before the poison pill was adopted, the evidence is the market wasn't taking Musk's offer seriously. That's because he was offering $54.20 per share (ha ha, 420), but the stock price never closed higher than $48.36. So almost $6/share was left on the table. Part of it is that Musk doesn't have $43B in cash, he'd have to raise it or borrow it. He's worth more than that but it isn't liquid; as an officer of Tesla…

Are you saying that if a share is destined to be sold for 54.20 people will buy it for 54 prior to that? its only reasonable to think it will be somewhat lower.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#979

Post by gnicholas »

georgeglue1 wrote: post #640
FFRefresh wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't immediately buy the logic of "Stock A hit a peak of $X last year, therefore that is the correct price/valuation, and not the lower price it is right now" If Twitter was worth more, it'd be worth more. With that logic, you should put a huge chunk of your savings into Twitter to benefit from the insight, as it's currently trading at 39% below its 52-week high.

I think we have to tolerate a certain amount of irrationality from shareholders. If you bought a $100k home which then dipped to $80k during Covid, would you accept an unsolicited bid of $90k? It's reasonable for some people to take the bid, since you could arguably buy another comparable house for $80k and pocket the $10k difference, but I think a lot of other people would reasonably choose not to. (I'm not totally…

I don't think the logical disconnect here is about whether it scales to billions of dollars. The problem is that people live in their homes and there are many frictional costs associated with moving. You need to pick something much more fungible.

I own several stocks that have dropped in the last few months. If someone offered me a 20% premium to sell them today, I would do so in a heartbeat. I would even do so if it meant the company would go private and I couldn't buy that stock again.

Re: Twitter board adopts poison pill after Musk’s $43B bid to buy company

#980

Post by _qzu4 »

newbamboo wrote: post #904
dm319 wrote: post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would upvote this as insightful if we were still on Slashdot. These one-man pioneers like to further the impression that they are the sole reasons for their success, but the reality is that we all build on the shoulders if giants. I am not shitting on his ability to make his endeavours successful - I am just saying that the proportion of his responsibility for it is much lower than most people think. I'm not sure w…

Ad hom is pushed by the media because “small minds talk about people,” and that sells ads/clicks. Another example beyond personal fanboyism is the vilification of a person which surpasses rationality. Or the vilification of other groups of people. In all of these you will see fundamental attribution error, ignoring the situational factors and placing all perceived agency on the individual, like most all of our media…

> small minds talk about people

This rings so true for Elon Musk fanboys. I also like the full quote, "Small minds talk about people. Average minds talk about events. Great minds talk about ideas."

Post reply on HN