4 ms·
Probably not. He borrowed 1/4 of the money from banks secured by Twitters value. Intentionally destroying that value may leave him open to personal liability. J
by HWR_14 3y ago
Probably not. He borrowed 1/4 of the money from banks secured by Twitters value. Intentionally destroying that value may leave him open to personal liability. Just like if you have a mortgage but decide one day to bulldoze your house. Your bank can totally come after you if you do that and stop paying them.
- gumballindie 3y agoOnce he fails they’ll say he was too big to fail. Corporate socialism will bail him out one way or another. Us, the taxpaying plebe, will cover the bank’s losses with increased mortgage rates and the government’s losses with increased taxes.
- tmpX7dMeXU 3y agoThat analogy isn’t at all apt, for the same reason that white-collar criminals are much more likely to get away with it. There is just way more grey area, way more reasonable doubt, in burning Twitter to the ground vs bulldozing your house. Your honour, I didn’t mean to hold up that liquor store. It was merely incompetence. I was just trying to act on my legal obligation to my shareholders.
- HWR_14 3y agoGrey area, sure. He legit thought a rebrand was a great idea! But shuttering the company would be a clear cut example of him intentionally sinking the company.