5 ms·

This would have made sense if he delegated the responsibility of running it to third-parties and completely severed ties with the company. He didn't do that, wh

by csomar 3y ago

This would have made sense if he delegated the responsibility of running it to third-parties and completely severed ties with the company. He didn't do that, which given the colossal amounts involved will get him into litigation. And if you think he is smart, think again. He tried to "smartly" get off the deal but the other party was smarter. He is clearly not the smartest man in the room.

mcphage 3y ago
> He tried to "smartly" get off the deal but the other party was smarter. Well, the other party sold their company to Elon Musk to run into the ground, so smarter isn't quite the word I'd use for them, either.
- kaba0 3y ago
  They sold their company at a very good price, much higher than its actual worth. That’s hardly a dumb business decision. They will also have a good track record on management, given how much better twitter were under their control.
  - mcphage 3y ago
    > They sold their company at a very good price, much higher than its actual worth. Yeah, I get that, but in doing so destroyed a thing that lots of people found value in. So yeah, they made more money than the thing was worth, great business decision, but I'm not willing to award "this nice thing is worth more as scrap than it is on its own right now" as being called "smart".
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - stevenwliao 3y ago
      If someone wanted to buy your house for three times its market value and their grand plan was to turn it into lumber, would the smart move be to decline?
      - mcphage 3y ago
        Probably, yeah. For starters, my family likes our house, and we're not really looking to move right now. Like, I'd end up with more money (which is good!) but an angry wife (which is not!).
        kaba0 3y ago
        Depending on the people involved, a company can be much less personal.
      - mcphage 3y ago
        As a followup to my previous comment—we've lived in this house for over 13 years, and own it outright. If we had lived here only a few years, and had no real equity in the house, that would probably change the equation considerably.
- csomar 3y ago
  They are investors and emotionally detached from the company. I don't think they care about what happens to the company after they hand it over.
easyThrowaway 3y ago
He's probably way less smart than he believes himself to be. But he's already tried in the past to get out of problems by throwing a a curveball to the issue. Boring Company / Hyperloop existed mainly to stop California from building their own high speed rail, and The Tesla Truck existed mainly to rebuild hype around the Tesla brand at the time, and it's probably never going to go into production. Both were "built to fail". Once he realized that he couldn't get out of buying Twitter, I believe he's trying to apply the same script to make sure the loss is way smaller than 44 billion dollars.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > The Tesla Truck existed mainly to rebuild hype around the Tesla brand at the time, and it's probably never going to go into production. Both were "built to fail". Regardless of whether "truck" here refers to the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck, for which you can place an order) or the Semi (https://www.tesla.com/semi https://www.tesla.com/semi), are you really suggesting it is just fake and there's nobody working on these vehicles? I will throw in the new Roadster (https://www.tesla.com/roadster https://www.tesla.com/roadster) for good measure too.
  - easyThrowaway 3y ago
    Yep, I was talking about the Cybertruck! thanks for the correction! Also, I wouldn't call it fake outright. Something more along the lines of the Lamborghini Huracán Sterrato[1] or the Porsche 911 Dakar[2] - which are like... yep, they're real cars, but it's more of a limited run branding exercise than an actual vehicles range. [1]https://www.lamborghini.com/it-en/modelli/huracan/huracan-sterrato https://www.lamborghini.com/it-en/modelli/huracan/huracan-st... [2]https://www.porsche.com/international/models/911/911-dakar/911-dakar/ https://www.porsche.com/international/models/911/911-dakar/9...

by csomar 3y ago

mcphage 3y ago

> He tried to "smartly" get off the deal but the other party was smarter. Well, the other party sold their company to Elon Musk to run into the ground, so smarter isn't quite the word I'd use for them, either.

kaba0 3y ago
They sold their company at a very good price, much higher than its actual worth. That’s hardly a dumb business decision. They will also have a good track record on management, given how much better twitter were under their control.
- mcphage 3y ago
  > They sold their company at a very good price, much higher than its actual worth. Yeah, I get that, but in doing so destroyed a thing that lots of people found value in. So yeah, they made more money than the thing was worth, great business decision, but I'm not willing to award "this nice thing is worth more as scrap than it is on its own right now" as being called "smart".
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - stevenwliao 3y ago
    If someone wanted to buy your house for three times its market value and their grand plan was to turn it into lumber, would the smart move be to decline?
    - mcphage 3y ago
      Probably, yeah. For starters, my family likes our house, and we're not really looking to move right now. Like, I'd end up with more money (which is good!) but an angry wife (which is not!).
      - kaba0 3y ago
        Depending on the people involved, a company can be much less personal.
    - mcphage 3y ago
      As a followup to my previous comment—we've lived in this house for over 13 years, and own it outright. If we had lived here only a few years, and had no real equity in the house, that would probably change the equation considerably.
csomar 3y ago
They are investors and emotionally detached from the company. I don't think they care about what happens to the company after they hand it over.

easyThrowaway 3y ago

He's probably way less smart than he believes himself to be. But he's already tried in the past to get out of problems by throwing a a curveball to the issue. Boring Company / Hyperloop existed mainly to stop California from building their own high speed rail, and The Tesla Truck existed mainly to rebuild hype around the Tesla brand at the time, and it's probably never going to go into production. Both were "built to fail". Once he realized that he couldn't get out of buying Twitter, I believe he's trying to apply the same script to make sure the loss is way smaller than 44 billion dollars.

andsoitis 3y ago
> The Tesla Truck existed mainly to rebuild hype around the Tesla brand at the time, and it's probably never going to go into production. Both were "built to fail". Regardless of whether "truck" here refers to the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck, for which you can place an order) or the Semi (https://www.tesla.com/semi https://www.tesla.com/semi), are you really suggesting it is just fake and there's nobody working on these vehicles? I will throw in the new Roadster (https://www.tesla.com/roadster https://www.tesla.com/roadster) for good measure too.
- easyThrowaway 3y ago
  Yep, I was talking about the Cybertruck! thanks for the correction! Also, I wouldn't call it fake outright. Something more along the lines of the Lamborghini Huracán Sterrato[1] or the Porsche 911 Dakar[2] - which are like... yep, they're real cars, but it's more of a limited run branding exercise than an actual vehicles range. [1]https://www.lamborghini.com/it-en/modelli/huracan/huracan-sterrato https://www.lamborghini.com/it-en/modelli/huracan/huracan-st... [2]https://www.porsche.com/international/models/911/911-dakar/911-dakar/ https://www.porsche.com/international/models/911/911-dakar/9...