4 ms·

I'm curious why you doubt the deal is going to go through.

by HWR_14 4y ago

ForHackernews 4y ago
It only costs him a billion to get out of it. It'll cost him a lot more to go through with it.
- sealeck 4y ago
  That's not how it works – he has to go through with the deal unless one of the possible reasons he may back out for (and pay the US$1 billion) comes into being.
  - strangattractor 4y ago
    If he says that the bots inflate the number of eyeballs that is reason enough to pull out. He is already publicly implying it.
    - sgarman 4y ago
      Publicly implying won't let him back out for free. He needs to prove twitter acted in bad faith or "material adverse effect." No such evidence has been provided. BTW material adverse effect is an very hard standard to prove it needs to “substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally-significant manner."
    - arcticbull 4y ago
      He waived contingency on due diligence. He has no right to back out on the basis of the due diligence he should have done before he signed the contract. A court can order him to complete the purchase as committed ('specific performance').
      - strangattractor 4y ago
        Like reporting inflated numbers. Whatever - then he is stuck with not being able to change anything. Or we will see a protracted court battle. Or Twitter will take their billion and be happy.
        jcranmer 4y ago
        > Or we will see a protracted court battle. Delaware is actually pretty quick with court cases, a couple of months end-to-end.
    - klyrs 4y ago
      Musk's twitter account has a famously tenuous relationship with reality. He declined to perform due diligence, and his attempted pullout was contemporaneous with the TSLA stock (which his loan is leveraged against) plummeting. We'll probably see how it all plays out after years of protracted court battles. If I was Jack, I wouldn't want to stick around for that drama either.
  - bfgoodrich 4y ago
  - mikkergp 4y ago
    I’m very confused by all the news articles being wishy wash on this, but while I understand what you say to be the truth, I think the reality is we won’t know what the “actual” consequences are until 1. Musk makes some kind of decision official, 2. Twitter sues to force him to complete the deal and 3. A judge decides.
- jcranmer 4y ago
  As I understand it, it costs him a billion to get out of it only under a list of circumstances, none of which applies. Which means Twitter could go to court and likely would get the court to force Musk to by Twitter at the full $54.20 price.
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    Does twitter really want a drawn out legal battle with someone who has a history of squirming out of regulatory issues? I feel like I'd much rather take the billion and wash my hands of it.
    - gamblor956 4y ago
      Yes, if it means many billions more, Twitter will absolutely go to court over it. Musk avoiding regulatory issues with agencies is a very different thing from incurring the wrath of a court. A judge can order jail time, fines, etc., to bring Musk into compliance with court orders.
strangattractor 4y ago
Since he has realized the risk of using Tesla stock to back this purchase - he has acquired investors. Investors will want returns on their investment other than "Free Speech" BS. Some of the things he is proposing will hurt Twatter financially like shutting down bots. It is those very same bots that give the impression that Twitter is influential. Hence he will either not be able to deliver his promises or he will find some excuse not to buy.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  Also, bot detection is a quixotic quest. If it were that easy they'd have done it by now.
  - strangattractor 4y ago
    I once worked for a non-profit no less that was trying to use "Article Views" as a new metric to rank academic articles. I did some simple things to filter out some rather obvious bots. Nothing fancy. That reduced the page views %75. Needless to say even the Non-Profit was seduced buy the inflated numbers hoping it would attract more authors. Followers=BullSh*T
  - johannes1234321 4y ago
    Would they? - Bots drive engagement.
    - croes 4y ago
      So investors like bots and getting rid of the bots is a bad idea
      - erik_seaberg 4y ago
        Advertisers hate bots. As a user I only hate spammers (which are mostly beggars), but some users worry about bots because they want to believe Twitter can be representative of voters.

I'm curious why you doubt the deal is going to go through.

by HWR_14 4y ago

I'm curious why you doubt the deal is going to go through.

ForHackernews 4y ago

It only costs him a billion to get out of it. It'll cost him a lot more to go through with it.

sealeck 4y ago
That's not how it works – he has to go through with the deal unless one of the possible reasons he may back out for (and pay the US$1 billion) comes into being.
- strangattractor 4y ago
  If he says that the bots inflate the number of eyeballs that is reason enough to pull out. He is already publicly implying it.
  - sgarman 4y ago
    Publicly implying won't let him back out for free. He needs to prove twitter acted in bad faith or "material adverse effect." No such evidence has been provided. BTW material adverse effect is an very hard standard to prove it needs to “substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally-significant manner."
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    He waived contingency on due diligence. He has no right to back out on the basis of the due diligence he should have done before he signed the contract. A court can order him to complete the purchase as committed ('specific performance').
    - strangattractor 4y ago
      Like reporting inflated numbers. Whatever - then he is stuck with not being able to change anything. Or we will see a protracted court battle. Or Twitter will take their billion and be happy.
      - jcranmer 4y ago
        > Or we will see a protracted court battle. Delaware is actually pretty quick with court cases, a couple of months end-to-end.
  - klyrs 4y ago
    Musk's twitter account has a famously tenuous relationship with reality. He declined to perform due diligence, and his attempted pullout was contemporaneous with the TSLA stock (which his loan is leveraged against) plummeting. We'll probably see how it all plays out after years of protracted court battles. If I was Jack, I wouldn't want to stick around for that drama either.
- bfgoodrich 4y ago
- mikkergp 4y ago
  I’m very confused by all the news articles being wishy wash on this, but while I understand what you say to be the truth, I think the reality is we won’t know what the “actual” consequences are until 1. Musk makes some kind of decision official, 2. Twitter sues to force him to complete the deal and 3. A judge decides.
jcranmer 4y ago
As I understand it, it costs him a billion to get out of it only under a list of circumstances, none of which applies. Which means Twitter could go to court and likely would get the court to force Musk to by Twitter at the full $54.20 price.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  Does twitter really want a drawn out legal battle with someone who has a history of squirming out of regulatory issues? I feel like I'd much rather take the billion and wash my hands of it.
  - gamblor956 4y ago
    Yes, if it means many billions more, Twitter will absolutely go to court over it. Musk avoiding regulatory issues with agencies is a very different thing from incurring the wrath of a court. A judge can order jail time, fines, etc., to bring Musk into compliance with court orders.

strangattractor 4y ago

Since he has realized the risk of using Tesla stock to back this purchase - he has acquired investors. Investors will want returns on their investment other than "Free Speech" BS. Some of the things he is proposing will hurt Twatter financially like shutting down bots. It is those very same bots that give the impression that Twitter is influential. Hence he will either not be able to deliver his promises or he will find some excuse not to buy.

arcticbull 4y ago
Also, bot detection is a quixotic quest. If it were that easy they'd have done it by now.
- strangattractor 4y ago
  I once worked for a non-profit no less that was trying to use "Article Views" as a new metric to rank academic articles. I did some simple things to filter out some rather obvious bots. Nothing fancy. That reduced the page views %75. Needless to say even the Non-Profit was seduced buy the inflated numbers hoping it would attract more authors. Followers=BullSh*T
- johannes1234321 4y ago
  Would they? - Bots drive engagement.
  - croes 4y ago
    So investors like bots and getting rid of the bots is a bad idea
    - erik_seaberg 4y ago
      Advertisers hate bots. As a user I only hate spammers (which are mostly beggars), but some users worry about bots because they want to believe Twitter can be representative of voters.