4 ms·

It's also bad for Musk. He's being forced to own a company he doesn't want. And probably can't offload for anywhere he paid for it. He can either try and make i

by bena 4y ago

It's also bad for Musk. He's being forced to own a company he doesn't want. And probably can't offload for anywhere he paid for it. He can either try and make it work or just eat billions in loss.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
maccard 4y ago
Nobody forced musk to sign a contract binding him to buy twitter. He did that of his own volition. Let's not pretend that he is caught in some red tape here
- bena 4y ago
  I'm not saying "Woe is Musk", I'm saying this is a deal where everyone is going to lose. I don't even know what the worst/best case scenarios would be here. If he's right about Twitter, now he has essentially a toxic asset and everyone knows it. But he made a bad deal in the worst way. No one is buying it from him. And people are going to be more hesitant to deal with him in the future. Because he's obviously not doing due diligence. If he's wrong, it's not a good look for him either and while someone may eventually buy Twitter off of him, he'll likely have trouble with other deals still. Because of the diligence issue, and his conduct through this ordeal. Like, who is coming out of this deal happy?
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > Like, who is coming out of this deal happy? TWTR shareholders are being paid $54.20 per share for a company worth probably only $30/share (maybe less, now that Elon spent months trash talking the deal) TWTR shareholders are going to be throwing parties all around the country with a big windfall. I know a bunch of online people who also put option plays on this.
    - hef19898 4y ago
      Betting on being able to sell Twitter shares for 54.20 was, and is, one of the safest bets on the stock markets this year.
  - maccard 4y ago
    > I'm saying this is a deal where everyone is going to lose. I don't agree - I think there's a win for the Twitter shareholders, for example. There's also a win for precedent here, where a billionaire can't just say "j/k no I don't want it" because they've realised it's a bad idea. > Like, who is coming out of this deal happy? It doesn't really matter who is happy IMO. I'm not one for revenge justice, but nobody needs to be happy if one person makes a series of incredibly dumb decisions, signs multiple legally binding contracts along the way, and then changes their mind after the fact due to information that they claimed was the reason they were undertaking the deal in the first place.
gilrain 4y ago
Is Musk really incompetent enough that he can’t be responsible for contracts he signs? Does he need a legal guardian?
- coldpie 4y ago
  Honestly? Maybe. Unimaginably high wealth genuinely seems to be a risk factor for severe mental illness.
multiplegeorges 4y ago
He can still pay the $1B to back out, can't he? But that would involve ego damage, so maybe not.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  I thought this too, initially (as did a wide swath of the news media covering it at the time). He can not. The $1B is for a different scenario; he doesn't have the option to back out of the deal voluntarily. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-away-from-twitter-deal-by-paying-1-billion.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-awa... > A reverse breakup fee paid from a buyer to a target applies when there is an outside reason a deal can’t close, such as regulatory intermediation or third-party financing concerns.
- YawningAngel 4y ago
  No, he can't. He's on the hook for 1B if the deal falls through but he has no right to cancel
- pliny 4y ago
  Given where the markets are today, Twitter is a ~$30B write down for him once the deal closes, so if he could pay $1B to make it go away he would have done so already.
jjulius 4y ago
He signed the contract, I'd say he agreed to put himself in the position to be forced.
- bena 4y ago
  Totally, I'm just saying I don't think anyone leaves this deal happy. Maybe the people getting the money, but that's it.

by bena 4y ago

It's also bad for Musk. He's being forced to own a company he doesn't want. And probably can't offload for anywhere he paid for it. He can either try and make it work or just eat billions in loss.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

maccard 4y ago

Nobody forced musk to sign a contract binding him to buy twitter. He did that of his own volition. Let's not pretend that he is caught in some red tape here

bena 4y ago
I'm not saying "Woe is Musk", I'm saying this is a deal where everyone is going to lose. I don't even know what the worst/best case scenarios would be here. If he's right about Twitter, now he has essentially a toxic asset and everyone knows it. But he made a bad deal in the worst way. No one is buying it from him. And people are going to be more hesitant to deal with him in the future. Because he's obviously not doing due diligence. If he's wrong, it's not a good look for him either and while someone may eventually buy Twitter off of him, he'll likely have trouble with other deals still. Because of the diligence issue, and his conduct through this ordeal. Like, who is coming out of this deal happy?
- dragontamer 4y ago
  > Like, who is coming out of this deal happy? TWTR shareholders are being paid $54.20 per share for a company worth probably only $30/share (maybe less, now that Elon spent months trash talking the deal) TWTR shareholders are going to be throwing parties all around the country with a big windfall. I know a bunch of online people who also put option plays on this.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    Betting on being able to sell Twitter shares for 54.20 was, and is, one of the safest bets on the stock markets this year.
- maccard 4y ago
  > I'm saying this is a deal where everyone is going to lose. I don't agree - I think there's a win for the Twitter shareholders, for example. There's also a win for precedent here, where a billionaire can't just say "j/k no I don't want it" because they've realised it's a bad idea. > Like, who is coming out of this deal happy? It doesn't really matter who is happy IMO. I'm not one for revenge justice, but nobody needs to be happy if one person makes a series of incredibly dumb decisions, signs multiple legally binding contracts along the way, and then changes their mind after the fact due to information that they claimed was the reason they were undertaking the deal in the first place.

gilrain 4y ago

Is Musk really incompetent enough that he can’t be responsible for contracts he signs? Does he need a legal guardian?

coldpie 4y ago
Honestly? Maybe. Unimaginably high wealth genuinely seems to be a risk factor for severe mental illness.

multiplegeorges 4y ago

He can still pay the $1B to back out, can't he? But that would involve ego damage, so maybe not.

ceejayoz 4y ago
I thought this too, initially (as did a wide swath of the news media covering it at the time). He can not. The $1B is for a different scenario; he doesn't have the option to back out of the deal voluntarily. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-away-from-twitter-deal-by-paying-1-billion.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-awa... > A reverse breakup fee paid from a buyer to a target applies when there is an outside reason a deal can’t close, such as regulatory intermediation or third-party financing concerns.
YawningAngel 4y ago
No, he can't. He's on the hook for 1B if the deal falls through but he has no right to cancel
pliny 4y ago
Given where the markets are today, Twitter is a ~$30B write down for him once the deal closes, so if he could pay $1B to make it go away he would have done so already.

jjulius 4y ago

He signed the contract, I'd say he agreed to put himself in the position to be forced.

bena 4y ago
Totally, I'm just saying I don't think anyone leaves this deal happy. Maybe the people getting the money, but that's it.