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

Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

991–1000 of 1001 posts

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#991

Post by StopHammoTime »

StopHammoTime wrote: post #535
chernevik wrote: post #264

The filed letter ( https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922... ) isn't the knockdown argument I would be expecting. Musk is saying, you haven't demonstrated your numbers are accurate. But having signed the merger agreement and waived due diligence, I think he needs to demonstrate that they are _not_ accurate. Complaining Twitter rate-limited his API access (which would be very foolish on their par…

During a merger, discovery is absolutely a right the purchasing side has. The target company should open its books, your assumption about them not disclosing is incorrect.

You guys are right, I completely missed that he waived his rights on this term. My apologies, I made an assumption (which was wrong) that Musk was acting reasonably.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#992

Post by diob »

orlp wrote: post #762
diob wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it cause job losses? Wouldn't others be able to hire due to the money transferring to them?

Trickle-down economics has consistently shown to be a failed hypothesis.

What does trickle down have to do with Musk losing money to others though? Right now, it's trickle down hoping he'll do something with it. Like you said, it's a failed hypothesis.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#993

Post by coffeeblack »

maxboone wrote: post #751
coffeeblack wrote: post #746

Where does the Musk hate on hn come from? Edit: that’s an actual question. If you downvote, at least comment why I’m wrong.

I don't think it's irrational https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/elon-musk-twitter-te...

Vanityfair?

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#995

Post by [deleted] »

gsibble wrote: post #252
jeremyjh wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We definitely can have it both ways. We don’t want him to buy Twitter - because he is an idiotic blowhard. Also we are happy he is backing out, because it demonstrates what an idiotic blowhard he is.

That's fine, but then you can't celebrate that he may be forced into buying it which a ton of comments here are doing.

[deleted]

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#996

Post by la64710 »

redeeman wrote: post #417
la64710 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk is a brown bag of shit. He sent his selfie in a tweet response to Parag’s tweet explanation. https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2022/05/16/twitter-b...

so... its just 100% unthinkable Musk is right? edit: dont know why this had to be flagged. I guess some people really take personal offense in that elon musk might be correct in his thoughts about twitter daily bot %

Somebody being impolite or insulting to someone does not mean they are saying the truth. People who do that only do that to rile up their own group and divide people. Anyone can express their opinions objectively without insulting others.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#997

Post by georgeecollins »

redeeman wrote: post #422
georgeecollins wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right- he waived diligence. Twitter has no obligation to prove anything to him. Twitter is obligated to give him documents if they are reasonable to request and helpful for him in financial planning. If the documents Twitter has on hand are flawed or not comprehensive, that doesn't give a pretext to leave the deal. I am sure his lawyers know this and it will all be negotiated.

waiving diligence does not mean that twitter can misrepresent things though. I do not know what the true amount of bot participants are, but IF it is above 5%, that would not be something "due diligence" had to discover, twitter says <=5%, and it had better be that then.

But they have to knowingly misrepresent something (tough to prove) and what they misrepresent has to be material to the deal. Twitter never ever said "we guarantee bots are 5%" they just said that was their estimate and they particularly said in their 10ks that they weren't sure.

Elon said he was going to "fix the bot problem" so claiming he was mislead about this is not going to be very convincing.

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#998

Post by TedShiller »

daemoens wrote: post #248
TedShiller wrote: post #66

He achieved something good though: he exposed Twitter as a corrupt, biased company full of spam bots. Thank you Elon

Everyone knew about the spam bots. They're spam bots so they're extremely visible.

I didn’t

Re: Notice of termination of Twitter merger agreement

#1000

Post by Lord_Zero »

chernevik wrote: post #264

The filed letter ( https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922... ) isn't the knockdown argument I would be expecting. Musk is saying, you haven't demonstrated your numbers are accurate. But having signed the merger agreement and waived due diligence, I think he needs to demonstrate that they are _not_ accurate. Complaining Twitter rate-limited his API access (which would be very foolish on their par…

Or maybe, and bear with me... the entire merger was in bad faith since day 1.
Post reply on HN