6 ms·

>He is asking for proof that spam and fake accounts are less than 5% of total users. Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase, you'd think th

>He is asking for proof that spam and fake accounts are less than 5% of total users. Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase, you'd think the world's smartest man would have had his team do this due diligence? Instead, he mad an offer on a whim and put the deal together in a couple days. Brilliant.

XorNot 4y ago
Unless the contract had a clause requiring this to be demonstrated if requested. In which case it's a good way to get out of it at to he last moment: activate the clause and put Twitter in trouble if they disprove their own statements.
- that_guy_iain 4y ago
  Noob question, but wouldn't it be fraud if the number is higher than they're saying?
  - Hedepig 4y ago
    The contract explicitly states the number could be much higher than their estimate, so although IANAL, I doubt it.
    - that_guy_iain 4y ago
      Fraud isn't about the contract, it's about if someone lies to obtain money. Saying the stats are x when they're y because x sounds better seems like standard fraud to me.
  - jquery 4y ago
    No. It would only be fraud if they knew the methodology was likely to be extremely flawed and there are receipts with executives saying “let’s choose this because of X nefarious reason.” Twitter being wrong about the number, or using a methodology Elon doesn’t like, isn’t enough.
micromacrofoot 4y ago
he knows it’s higher than 5%, everyone does
user_7832 4y ago
> the world's smartest man Did you mean the richest? Or do you actually think he's the smartest?
- ethanbond 4y ago
  I think it’s sarcasm
  - user_7832 4y ago
    Aah thanks, I'm not the best at getting sarcasm lol
bogantech 4y ago
> Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase, you'd think the world's smartest man would have had his team do this due diligence? How would he get access to that data beforehand?
- ctvo 4y ago
  … the company would provide it to their legal team under NDA since it’s material to the deal. Ya know, as part of due diligence. There’s a whole lucrative branch of corporate law (mergers and acquisitions) for this.
  - fullshark 4y ago
    Isn't this what's happening right now?
    - shapefrog 4y ago
      No Elon waved due diligence and bought it as is.
    - coremoff 4y ago
      it's what he should have done before signing the deal he signed
rdtsc 4y ago
> Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase I guess that would be a function of how much Twitter had told everyone their percentage was. Improving Twitter’s 5% bot problem is different than improving it with 30% bots. But, since we consider him the smartest man, he might actually be playing a game. He knew they would lie, or were for years, and put a clause in the contract about it and they fell into a trap. Not sure who gets to pay the contract breakup $1B fee? It may be Twitter. That would be embarrassing. But then, they shouldn’t have been telling lies, if it turns out to be the case.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  > and put a clause in the contract about it and they fell into a trap. What a genius ... oh shit, there isnt a secret bot trap in the contract. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000119312522120461/d310843dex21.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000119312...
  - rdtsc 4y ago
    Let me guess, just searched for the word "bot" and didn't find it. Well, I guess they are off the hook then...
    - adt2bt 4y ago
      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. GP made a decent effort to try to find this clause, couldn't, and you're effectively claiming they're full of it because it's gotta be in there. A more hacker-newsy way to approach this would be to either find the clause yourself (and earn your upvotes the hard way), or perhaps admit your baseless speculation was, indeed, baseless.
      - jdmichal 4y ago
        It's rather silly to assume the clause would be written that narrowly. I replied above with what would likely be a relevant clause, which covers any and all information supplied by Twitter.
mpweiher 4y ago
> would have had his team do this due diligence? What makes you think he didn't? So his team has a number, their team has a number. The numbers diverge wildly.
nailer 4y ago
> Instead, he mad an offer on a whim and put the deal together in a couple days. Brilliant. Do you think smart people don't make decisions quickly? That is interesting.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

XorNot 4y ago

Unless the contract had a clause requiring this to be demonstrated if requested. In which case it's a good way to get out of it at to he last moment: activate the clause and put Twitter in trouble if they disprove their own statements.

that_guy_iain 4y ago
Noob question, but wouldn't it be fraud if the number is higher than they're saying?
- Hedepig 4y ago
  The contract explicitly states the number could be much higher than their estimate, so although IANAL, I doubt it.
  - that_guy_iain 4y ago
    Fraud isn't about the contract, it's about if someone lies to obtain money. Saying the stats are x when they're y because x sounds better seems like standard fraud to me.
- jquery 4y ago
  No. It would only be fraud if they knew the methodology was likely to be extremely flawed and there are receipts with executives saying “let’s choose this because of X nefarious reason.” Twitter being wrong about the number, or using a methodology Elon doesn’t like, isn’t enough.

micromacrofoot 4y ago

he knows it’s higher than 5%, everyone does

user_7832 4y ago

> the world's smartest man Did you mean the richest? Or do you actually think he's the smartest?

ethanbond 4y ago
I think it’s sarcasm
- user_7832 4y ago
  Aah thanks, I'm not the best at getting sarcasm lol

bogantech 4y ago

> Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase, you'd think the world's smartest man would have had his team do this due diligence? How would he get access to that data beforehand?

ctvo 4y ago
… the company would provide it to their legal team under NDA since it’s material to the deal. Ya know, as part of due diligence. There’s a whole lucrative branch of corporate law (mergers and acquisitions) for this.
- fullshark 4y ago
  Isn't this what's happening right now?
  - shapefrog 4y ago
    No Elon waved due diligence and bought it as is.
  - coremoff 4y ago
    it's what he should have done before signing the deal he signed

rdtsc 4y ago

> Considering he said this was a big reason for his purchase I guess that would be a function of how much Twitter had told everyone their percentage was. Improving Twitter’s 5% bot problem is different than improving it with 30% bots. But, since we consider him the smartest man, he might actually be playing a game. He knew they would lie, or were for years, and put a clause in the contract about it and they fell into a trap. Not sure who gets to pay the contract breakup $1B fee? It may be Twitter. That would be embarrassing. But then, they shouldn’t have been telling lies, if it turns out to be the case.

shapefrog 4y ago
> and put a clause in the contract about it and they fell into a trap. What a genius ... oh shit, there isnt a secret bot trap in the contract. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000119312522120461/d310843dex21.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000119312...
- rdtsc 4y ago
  Let me guess, just searched for the word "bot" and didn't find it. Well, I guess they are off the hook then...
  - adt2bt 4y ago
    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. GP made a decent effort to try to find this clause, couldn't, and you're effectively claiming they're full of it because it's gotta be in there. A more hacker-newsy way to approach this would be to either find the clause yourself (and earn your upvotes the hard way), or perhaps admit your baseless speculation was, indeed, baseless.
    - jdmichal 4y ago
      It's rather silly to assume the clause would be written that narrowly. I replied above with what would likely be a relevant clause, which covers any and all information supplied by Twitter.

mpweiher 4y ago

> would have had his team do this due diligence? What makes you think he didn't? So his team has a number, their team has a number. The numbers diverge wildly.

nailer 4y ago

> Instead, he mad an offer on a whim and put the deal together in a couple days. Brilliant. Do you think smart people don't make decisions quickly? That is interesting.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]