At this point, it is questionable whether he wants the company.
We will see if the deal goes through.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
At this point, it is questionable whether he wants the company.
We will see if the deal goes through.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think he's mocking them on the way out. That’s his kind of vybe.
To me, it looks like he has the leverage.
We will see how this all works out. I dont see how the Board has much of a leg to stand on.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
It's fascinating because he does have the public trust with him and none trusts Twitter, not anymore. They lost everything when they banned Trump and Dorsey left. We can see that playing out now, Musk is the single reason why Twitter is not down 70-80% from last year. But this knowledge was only the catalyst, the reason for the conflict was the backlash vs him and the non-cooperative stance of the Twitter Leadership in the early weeks of the transition. Now he's dedicated to showing them their place, and rightfully so.
I cant speak to how much Musk is trusted as compared to the others involved. Dorsey isnt exactly pure as snow as we in the cryptocurrency world know.
However, Twitter's stock is basically flat for the past decade. That is terrible performance and the Board should be condemned for that.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
It could all be a ploy for Musk to buy Twitter at a discount. Legal battles can take years, so we may be occupied with more pressing matters by the time it's all settled out of court or decided by a judge.
Since it's not over, this leaves open a scenario I proposed weeks ago: Musk buys Twitter only to shut it down.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Interesting theory.
Why would he do that? What is the incentive to drop the money, even if discounted, and then close it down?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
At the time I proposed that theory-- during the first few days of this mess-- it was 150% speculation, total gut feeling.
Why would Elon Musk want to buy Twitter only to shut it down?
People have bought the rights to certain (normally "unflattering") content to make sure it never saw the light of day; this was the main motivation I sensed.
He was acting an enforcer of the accepted mores on Big Tech culture: an example needed to be made and Twitter wasn't as profitable as the other companies. In this scenario, Elon Musk would be seen by Big Tech as a hero or ally.
He was acting as a one-man gang to clear out the toxins infecting Twitter in order to heal it, or (failing that) to replace it with his own social media offering. In this scenario-- which was unfolding before our eyes-- he was seen as a heel or villain.
Pure capriciousness-- "just because"; mercurial people are unpredictable, and more so when they are considered "eccentric".
Financially speaking, none of this makes sense. However, certain things have a value beyond money. For now, things will be handled by the lawyers.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think it is safe to say that money is not the primary motivation for Musk. However, $44 billion is a lot to toss away even for him.
Now this could end up as a much lower price and maybe worth it to him to give up 10%-15% of his net worth.
Hard to tell what he is up to.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
This scenario is the one most likely to be realized. Even billionaires can appreciate buying something at garage sale prices.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Garage or garbage?
With the performance of Twitter over the years, more likely the latter, at least from a profit standpoint.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I was never a fan of Twitter, so "garbage" is just as well. I meant "garage sale" in the sense of flea market.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta