5 ms·
>But Twitter obviously owes it to its shareholders to demand the full $40-some-odd billion rather than settling for the $1B alternative relief — though given Mu
by Imnimo 4y ago
>But Twitter obviously owes it to its shareholders to demand the full $40-some-odd billion rather than settling for the $1B alternative relief — though given Musk’s antics, it’s probably in the best interests of the shareholders to take less and keep Musk’s hands away from the rudder.
I don't understand this. If Musk buys the company for $40B, then what do the current shareholders care whether he does a bad job of running it? They won't be shareholders anymore! They'll have gotten their $52.40 per share and will have no more (financial) interest in whether Twitter does well or not.
Have I misunderstood the situation somehow?
- staticman2 4y agoYeah that part made no sense to me either.
- kareemsabri 4y agoPresumably they mean that on net the shareholder would accrue value > $40B if they got some cash as a penalty, and continued to own a Musk-free Twitter. Bit of a throwaway line though.
- quantified 4y agoFor those shareholders that are bought out, you're right. He could squeeze their buildings and infrastructure into a giant paperweight and lay off everyone after middle-fingering the world in a final tweet, and those shareholders would have their cash and no say or care about it. After all, according to SCOTUS, the cash they get is their sole concern. The shareholders who go private with him, may care, but that's between them and him. Interesting if they would go against the merger. If you get in bed with Musk, expect some procreation, I guess.