Twitter likely to take idiots offer to buy them for $43 billion

[Jimmy Higgins]

Twitter stock price has dropped considerably, so of course Musk wants to weasel out, but that's likely just so he can make another, lower offer.

$34 a share now. Musk is still trying to sell his red herring sashimi. Hope the price drops below where he bought the 10% of Twitter shares.

Out of spite, I hope the price drops and Musk is forced by the courts to abide by his earlier offer. That would be a $44 billion pie in his face.

But I don't think it matters in the long run. He'll buy twitter eventually either way.

I doubt it. The company isn't worth jack. They barely make money to begin with. It is doubtful he could ever break even. Give him it for $25 billion, still not a wise idea to buy a poorly monetized social media company that is long in the tooth. Of course, no one will say yes to selling their shares for that price either. Musk wants out. He was on a polar high and had the delusions that come with such things.

I don't think he's out to make money with Twitter. He's got an agenda.

No, he had a Polar High. Once that subsided, we stopped hearing about his social media justice crusade and more about better monetization of an old social media platform that exists solely because it is free to use.

Someone may have also informed him that Trump isn't allowed to use Twitter in lieu of Social Truth, due to the contracts for Social Truth.

 

[RVonse]

I doubt it. The company isn't worth jack. They barely make money to begin with.

It is still the monopoly of choice with brand loyalty. When anyone anywhere ever talks about social media, Facebook and Twitter are what everyone knows of. Their names are securely established in the marketplace.

The broken management might still be fixable given the right circumstances.

But what this company is really worth is anyone's guess though. Especially since all tech stocks in market are drastically down (for other reasons) right now.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I doubt it. The company isn't worth jack. They barely make money to begin with.

It is still the monopoly of choice with brand loyalty. When anyone anywhere ever talks about social media, Facebook and Twitter are what everyone knows of. Their names are securely established in the marketplace.

The broken management might still be fixable given the right circumstances.

Except it isn't management, it is the entire system. Monetizing Twitter isn't particularly easy.

But what this company is really worth is anyone's guess though. Especially since all tech stocks in market are drastically down (for other reasons) right now.

Old social media companies are never worth what newer ones are. That is why Facebook needs to keep buying up the new companies to keep its own value growing, because Facebook itself... well... it is a dinosaur used by older people.

 

[Jayjay]

Twitter stock price has dropped considerably, so of course Musk wants to weasel out, but that's likely just so he can make another, lower offer.

$34 a share now. Musk is still trying to sell his red herring sashimi. Hope the price drops below where he bought the 10% of Twitter shares.

Out of spite, I hope the price drops and Musk is forced by the courts to abide by his earlier offer. That would be a $44 billion pie in his face.

But I don't think it matters in the long run. He'll buy twitter eventually either way.

I doubt it. The company isn't worth jack. They barely make money to begin with. It is doubtful he could ever break even. Give him it for $25 billion, still not a wise idea to buy a poorly monetized social media company that is long in the tooth. Of course, no one will say yes to selling their shares for that price either. Musk wants out. He was on a polar high and had the delusions that come with such things.

I don't think he's out to make money with Twitter. He's got an agenda.

No, he had a Polar High. Once that subsided, we stopped hearing about his social media justice crusade and more about better monetization of an old social media platform that exists solely because it is free to use.

Because the twitter stock dropped like a rock. I think that's a much more plausible reason for him wanting to back out of the offer, than some arm-chair diagnosis of subsiding "polar high".

He still wants twitter, he just doesn't want to pay as much.

 

[Elixir]

He still wants twitter, he just doesn't want to pay as much.

Hey, for the right price, I'll buy it! I'm sure brother Elon is of like mind.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't think he's out to make money with Twitter. He's got an agenda.

No, he had a Polar High. Once that subsided, we stopped hearing about his social media justice crusade and more about better monetization of an old social media platform that exists solely because it is free to use.

Because the twitter stock dropped like a rock. I think that's a much more plausible reason for him wanting to back out of the offer, than some arm-chair diagnosis of subsiding "polar high".

He still wants twitter, he just doesn't want to pay as much.

He offered 50% higher than the stock price originally. He said that Twitter should take his offer because it was so high! He'd solve the bot problem and save democracy! Four months ago the shares were around where they are now. The price it was last week was about where it was when he made the offer at $54.20.

So a drop in share price ISN'T the problem. The problem is he got manic or a polar high and just winged a crazy idea that was going to cost him a lot of cash he didn't have, and requiring a good deal of financing. All the while the assets he was using like a bank, began to drop because he was using them like a bank. He settled down, and his advisors likely told him what he probably was already starting to see himself on the come down, that this was ridiculously stupid.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't think he's out to make money with Twitter. He's got an agenda.

No, he had a Polar High. Once that subsided, we stopped hearing about his social media justice crusade and more about better monetization of an old social media platform that exists solely because it is free to use.

Because the twitter stock dropped like a rock. I think that's a much more plausible reason for him wanting to back out of the offer, than some arm-chair diagnosis of subsiding "polar high".

He still wants twitter, he just doesn't want to pay as much.

He offered 50% higher than the stock price originally.

38%. Twitter stock closed at about 39 on April 1st, before Musk said he bought 9% stake in it. That sent the stock price over $50, and Musk made his offer on April 14th. So it wasn't that big of a premium on top of what the actual price was on the day when the offer was made.

Now it trades at $33 or so, and that's with the knowledge that some rich aspie wants to buy the company.

He said that Twitter should take his offer because it was so high! He'd solve the bot problem and save democracy! Four months ago the shares were around where they are now. The price it was last week was about where it was when he made the offer at $54.20.

So a drop in share price ISN'T the problem. The problem is he got manic or a polar high and just winged a crazy idea that was going to cost him a lot of cash he didn't have, and requiring a good deal of financing. All the while the assets he was using like a bank, began to drop because he was using them like a bank. He settled down, and his advisors likely told him what he probably was already starting to see himself on the come down, that this was ridiculously stupid.

There were two weeks between him buying a 9% stake in the company and making the offer for the rest. That should have been enough time for him to reconsider, if it really was just a "polar high".

Besides, Must has himself said that he could make another offer:

Also at the All In Summit, Musk gave the strongest hint yet that he would like to pay less for Twitter than the $44 billion offer he made last month.

He said a viable deal at a lower price would not be out of the question, according to the report by Bloomberg, which said it viewed a livestream video of the conference posted by a Twitter user.

 

[Gospel]

Good ole Elon. Still serves as a good reminder to not throw tax cuts at the rich without tying them to incentives. I mean this guy? Tax break? Oh please. Give your workers a raise and we'll give you a tax break that matches what you've actually done for workers.

Edit: to get back on topic. I still think he wants twitter for its servers. The cuts play a role in him being able to afford to throw that kind of money in the trash. I mean Twitter.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, Trump says you can't trust Elon Musk.


And twenty minutes later, 50% of Trump supporters are likely against Elon Musk.

 

[ZiprHead]

And twenty minutes later, 50% of Trump supporters are likely against Elon Musk.

Well, I doubt there were many Tesla drivers in that crowd.

 

[ZiprHead]

Lifestyles Of The Rich And Famous.

 

[Jarhyn]

Well, Trump says you can't trust Elon Musk.


And twenty minutes later, 50% of Trump supporters are likely against Elon Musk.

Dueling dumdass dictators warring on which wannabe will win more morons?

 

[Patooka]

It is still the monopoly of choice with brand loyalty. When anyone anywhere ever talks about social media, Facebook and Twitter are what everyone knows of. Their names are securely established in the marketplace.

It's not as much of a monopoly as you are asserting. Fewer and fewer people are using Twitter and Facebook to find anything meaningful. They are using it to find drama. It's morphine for the brain and as such the people who receive their "news" from such places are, and always will be, irrelevant. There is an increasing trend of politicians announcing policy on Telegram, which I'm not sure how to feel about.

 

[Jarhyn]

It is still the monopoly of choice with brand loyalty. When anyone anywhere ever talks about social media, Facebook and Twitter are what everyone knows of. Their names are securely established in the marketplace.

It's not as much of a monopoly as you are asserting. Fewer and fewer people are using Twitter and Facebook to find anything meaningful. They are using it to find drama. It's morphine for the brain and as such the people who receive their "news" from such places are, and always will be, irrelevant. There is an increasing trend of politicians announcing policy on Telegram, which I'm not sure how to feel about.

Well, telegram is at least way better than WhatsApp.

And say what you will, you can still make logs and pictures of the screen if you see someone announce something repugnant.

 

[Emily Lake]

Dueling dumdass dictators warring on which wannabe will win more morons?

Accolades for excellent alliteration!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't think he's out to make money with Twitter. He's got an agenda.

No, he had a Polar High. Once that subsided, we stopped hearing about his social media justice crusade and more about better monetization of an old social media platform that exists solely because it is free to use.

Because the twitter stock dropped like a rock. I think that's a much more plausible reason for him wanting to back out of the offer, than some arm-chair diagnosis of subsiding "polar high".

He still wants twitter, he just doesn't want to pay as much.

He offered 50% higher than the stock price originally.

38%.

Correct.

Twitter stock closed at about 39 on April 1st, before Musk said he bought 9% stake in it. That sent the stock price over $50, and Musk made his offer on April 14th. So it wasn't that big of a premium on top of what the actual price was on the day when the offer was made.

Now it trades at $33 or so, and that's with the knowledge that some rich aspie wants to buy the company.

But the price didn't really ever hold north of $50 for long. At best it was upper $40's which meant the money was skeptical that Musk would actually finish the purchase.

He said that Twitter should take his offer because it was so high! He'd solve the bot problem and save democracy! Four months ago the shares were around where they are now. The price it was last week was about where it was when he made the offer at $54.20.

So a drop in share price ISN'T the problem. The problem is he got manic or a polar high and just winged a crazy idea that was going to cost him a lot of cash he didn't have, and requiring a good deal of financing. All the while the assets he was using like a bank, began to drop because he was using them like a bank. He settled down, and his advisors likely told him what he probably was already starting to see himself on the come down, that this was ridiculously stupid.

There were two weeks between him buying a 9% stake in the company and making the offer for the rest. That should have been enough time for him to reconsider, if it really was just a "polar high".

Polar highs can last a while. Especially when one has the assets to support them.

He offered way too much and was on about democracy and free speech. His attitude changed at some point, and it became about monetization and the bot issue being worse than he was "led" to believe. He came down, saw what was very apparent from the get do. He doesn't want Twitter now. While he is obscenely wealthy, he actually can't afford it.

 

[Swammerdami]

I don't follow this sotry much, but saw an interesting article listing the 8 (or was it 10?) ways this might play out. One option is to negotiate a new price but with a higher non-compliance penalty. (As is, Musk is on the hook for a "mere" billion.)

. . . Four months ago the shares were around where they are now. The price it was last week was about where it was when he made the offer at $54.20.

Is this a "new dollar vs old dollar" thing? The whole stock market is down including Facebook, Tesla, but NOT Twitter. Twitter's stock price is still being propped up somewhat by Musk's offer. Thus Twitter shares can be viewed as overpriced compared with early 2022, despite the price being the same.

 

[ZiprHead]

PDF of the lawsuit.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[ZiprHead]

What the Twitter whistleblower could mean for Elon Musk's takeover deal | CNN Business

Elon Musk's monthslong effort to buy — and then to get out of buying — Twitter has been marked by a range of unexpected twists. Now, a stunning whistleblower disclosure from the company's former security lead Peiter Zatko is almost certain to become the latest complication.

www.cnn.com

New YorkCNN Business —
Elon Musk’s monthslong effort to buy — and then to get out of buying — Twitter has been marked by a range of unexpected twists. Now, a stunning whistleblower disclosure from the company’s former security lead Peiter Zatko is almost certain to become the latest complication.

As part of a wide-ranging, nearly 200-page disclosure sent last month to US lawmakers and regulators, which was exclusively reported by CNN and the Washington Post Tuesday, Zatko alleges that Twitter (TWTR) has neither the incentive nor the resources to properly measure the full scope of bots on its platform. He also alleges that Twitter (TWTR) suffers from a range of other security vulnerabilities that it has for years failed to fix. (Twitter (TWTR) has broadly defended itself and criticized Zatko’s allegations as “riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies.”)

Musk, who initially said he wanted to “defeat the spam bots” after buying Twitter, later raised alarms that the company might be significantly under-reporting the number of spam and fake accounts, although he had little apparent evidence beyond his own experience on the platform to support the claim. He has made the issue central to the legal fight over the $44 billion acquisition, even as Twitter argues Musk is simply attempting to get out of a deal for which he now has buyer’s remorse amid a market downturn.