4 ms·
Does Elon Musk own Twitter, or does a group of bankers orchestrated by him jointly own it with him?
by jjtheblunt 4y ago
Does Elon Musk own Twitter, or does a group of bankers orchestrated by him jointly own it with him?
- danjoredd 4y agoMusk himself owns it. He is now the CEO of the place
- whatshisface 4y agoMusk might own it, but musk's lenders now own a sizable piece of him.
- crhulls 4y agoHe might be the majority shareholder, but there is a known syndicate of coinvestors so he does not own it all himself - much of this is public information.
- mazurnification 4y agoSource? Surprisingly hard to find in quick search - drowned by fluff articles.
- danjoredd 4y agoSeems I was wrong about him being CEO. Still, he owns the place helped in part to the bank lenders he will need to repay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter,_Inc. He got rid of the last CEO and will presumably either take the position himself or put his own guy in the chair
- cutenewt 4y agoI hope he buys Google next. Search really sucks.
- paxys 4y agoMusk has majority ownership of Twitter.
- HWR_14 4y agoMusk owns 80-90% of Twitter. A few high-profile investors own the other 10-20%. The group of bankers have a huge lien on the company ($13 billion) but assuming that they are paid on time have no equity.
- uoaei 4y agoThe distinction between "having a lien" and "owning the company" is a false dichotomy. "Owning the company" and "controlling the company" are different, though.
- boyka 4y agoWhat if the shareholders do not agree to sell their shares? How does he justify his current power over Twitter? Did he buy his 80-90% outside of the free float market?
- HWR_14 4y ago> What if the shareholders do not agree to sell their shares? That's not an option. They all have to sell their shares. It was a corporate decision. In fact their was another vote that meant Musk couldn't accumulate more than 15% on the open market.
- HWR_14 4y ago> The distinction between "having a lien" and "owning the company" is a false dichotomy. It's 100% not. It's secured debt, that's it. If Twitter becomes worth $17 billion, they get - $15 billion. If Twitter becomes worth $170 billion, they get - $15 billion. To say nothing of if Musk misses a payment, are they really going to foreclose? Or would they renegotiate?
- SamBam 4y agoDisagree. They have nothing until Musk needs to pay them back, and if Musk pays then back they have nothing.
- skissane 4y agoI think Twitter is owned by a holding company controlled by Musk. I think he had at least two holding companies, “X Holdings I” and “X Holdings II”, with the later a subsidiary of the former, and the acquisition was legally a merger between Twitter and the subsidiary. That’s a quite typical way to legally structure acquisitions. I’m not sure exactly how the coinvestors fit in the picture, but I expect they (or more likely their own holding companies) own minority stakes in the parent holding company. The debt is probably the parent company’s also, although Musk may have personally guaranteed much of it. Also, probably even the parent holding company is not directly owned by Musk. Probably owned by one or more trusts he controls.