5 ms·

If Twitter fails to provide reasonable access to data necessary to secure debt to finance the purchase, it does indeed give a pretext to leave the deal. It is

If Twitter fails to provide reasonable access to data necessary to secure debt to finance the purchase, it does indeed give a pretext to leave the deal. It is part of the merger agreement. You can't tell me that a lender would not want some independent assessment of Twitter's claims before lending.

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
it seems he was given access to the Firehose, AKA all the data, but curiously failed to mention that in his filing (I guess it was enough, and he had no complaints?), instead complaining about rate limiting on more specific APIs (the standard Twitter API), which seem extraneous given the Firehose also, said rate limits were lifted
- sokoloff 4y ago
  The firehose is not all the data. Twitter’s value depends heavily on human views of tweets (not part of the firehose), not on the tweets’ content (the firehose).
tsimionescu 4y ago
> You can't tell me that a lender would not want some independent assessment of Twitter's claims before lending. The lenders have already agreed to the deal, where any such verification was waived.
- DoesntMatter22 4y ago
  That's just you making something up. Elon waived his due diligence but that doesn't have anything to do with the lender. The lender can back out unless they also have some type of clause in which they are lending it without any concern at all, which of course they don't.
  - Marazan 4y ago
    The lenders agreement is with Musk, not Twitter
  - dspillett 4y ago
    Even if that is the case, it is between Musk and the lender(s). None of twitter's business, not twitter's problem (directly). If one or more of the lenders did back out it might not look good for then as a reliable partner for future deals (not just with musk) - would they take that reputational risk? Especially right now when Musk is taking any flack as someone who doesn't keep their word.

5 ms·

If Twitter fails to provide reasonable access to data necessary to secure debt to finance the purchase, it does indeed give a pretext to leave the deal. It is

by meragrin_ 4y ago

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
it seems he was given access to the Firehose, AKA all the data, but curiously failed to mention that in his filing (I guess it was enough, and he had no complaints?), instead complaining about rate limiting on more specific APIs (the standard Twitter API), which seem extraneous given the Firehose also, said rate limits were lifted
- sokoloff 4y ago
  The firehose is not all the data. Twitter’s value depends heavily on human views of tweets (not part of the firehose), not on the tweets’ content (the firehose).
tsimionescu 4y ago
> You can't tell me that a lender would not want some independent assessment of Twitter's claims before lending. The lenders have already agreed to the deal, where any such verification was waived.
- DoesntMatter22 4y ago
  That's just you making something up. Elon waived his due diligence but that doesn't have anything to do with the lender. The lender can back out unless they also have some type of clause in which they are lending it without any concern at all, which of course they don't.
  - Marazan 4y ago
    The lenders agreement is with Musk, not Twitter
  - dspillett 4y ago
    Even if that is the case, it is between Musk and the lender(s). None of twitter's business, not twitter's problem (directly). If one or more of the lenders did back out it might not look good for then as a reliable partner for future deals (not just with musk) - would they take that reputational risk? Especially right now when Musk is taking any flack as someone who doesn't keep their word.