You just did it to me on this thread. Maybe go for a walk or something if you're a grown adult going through someone's posts spamming reacts.
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
You just did it to me on this thread. Maybe go for a walk or something if you're a grown adult going through someone's posts spamming reacts.
Tesla shares are down by 25%. Musk doesn't care, because he started the dip by selling off a huge chunk to fund his Twitter bid, but shareholders must be feeling pretty ripped off by now. Their shares have lost a quarter of their value because Musk wanted to pursue a vanity project.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
Yeah spot on, honestly. It seems like some kind of disenfranchisement if that is even a word. I'm not sure what though.Makes great reading tho innit. Watching grown men have these ridiculous arguments over something that will never affect them in any way whatsoever is fantastic, they could charge for this kind of thing.
It does beg the question though of how comfy their lives must be if this is the kind of thing they decide to get angry about
Tesla shares went from being worth $100 at the start of 2020 to being currently worth $752, but yeah won't somebody think of the Tesla shareholders
I'm just seeing that it looks like the contract Musk signed was even worse than a billion walkaway fee, apparently it's got a very specific clause that basically says he personally is liable for the full amount under some conditions (IE he's agreed to the full purchase regardless under some conditions, not just paying damages for wasting their time and affecting their stock prices). It doesn't look like he had a very good contract lawyer on his side as apparently whilst this is a "standard" legal clause for certain purchases, it's not one that's usually used in deals this size.
Basically he may have signed a contract that you'd expect if say you were ordering custom made parts for a car company and the supplier wanted to be really sure they didn't get left with the parts and out of pocket for their manufacture, as opposed to the sort of contract that is more normal for buying a multi billion dollar company.
No wonder twitter ended up agreeing to the contract, it looks like it's a no lose scenario for their shareholders.
Basically he may have signed a contract that you'd expect if say you were ordering custom made parts for a car company and the supplier wanted to be really sure they didn't get left with the parts and out of pocket for their manufacture, as opposed to the sort of contract that is more normal for buying a multi billion dollar company.
No wonder twitter ended up agreeing to the contract, it looks like it's a no lose scenario for their shareholders.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,316
Look the reason I do laugh emoji at your posts one because they are comical and to save me time having to constantly reply to your pointless and nonsensical posts.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
How come you don't post your house refurb in H&G? We love that stuff
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,415
- Location
- Surrey
I get your point, but don't brush off those who were concerned the direction Musk would take twitter, in particular with trump, and then now he's a clear "righty", what that might do to empower those in the right to be even worse than they have been.
Jan 6th didn't happen by accident, and trump using twitter to get his message out was partly the reason.
People can take joy now Musk isn't buying twitter, and they will be justified.
Just as those who are disappointed can be rightly justified too, as now twitter won't return trump to the platform so how will they know the latest subject they are supposed to be moaning about. How will they know if today they need to be spouting news about Obama, hillary, or hunter?
Everyone has their reasons to argue about this.
When did free speech become a right wing issue?
When I was growing up it was the left wanting free speech.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
No because he literally said no due diligence required in the agreement. It's like he got paralegal familiar with selling .. not companies
As dlockers says, he appears to have refused the offer to the standard pre contract stage due diligence, agreeing to go with the figures Twitter had told the US financial regulators. Twitter aren't stupid enough to give the US government false figures, but they may have used a method of working it out that Musk doesn't like but is perfectly sound and legal and Musk didn't understand because he's not a lawyer.
Wording in contracts is very important, and it looks like either Musk or his lawyers didn't understand some of what they were agreeing to* or the lawyers did, but Musk overruled them.
If Twitter says to the financial/shares regulator in the US "We have an estimated 5% active accounts that are bots" that might mean one thing to Musk ("active, hey that's accounts that post!"*) or it might mean another thing to Twitter (active = logs in, navigates around twitter in any way*).
It's like the deal Musk appears to have signed where it's looking worse for him personally than originally reported, as he may be on the hook personally for either buying the company at the agreed price or paying damages that are basically the difference between Twitters current market value and what Musk had said he would do. All due to the wording used in the contract, wording that is normally only used when you are offering to buy a specific item or say real estate.
[edit]
It also looks like Musk agreed to any case being held in a specific court without realising what that court specialises in and what it can mean for him if he tries to walk away, as apparently the one he agreed to is known for being fast (in legal terms) so he can't hold things up for years (it's known for pushing through in weeks/months), and holding people/companies to the contracts and enforcing the sorts of terms and conditions that were in this specific contract.
It once again suggests either Musk's lawyers weren't necessarily great, or the overruled them thinking he knew better/could wiggle out of it if he wanted.
*The sort of lawyers you want doing a large complex tech company sale are extremely specialised and even then they'll often hire in outside assistance/experts which takes time and Musk didn't seem to want to wait. It's the same reason you have general criminal lawyers, motoring offence lawyers, violent crime lawyers and then lawyers who specialise in murder cases.
**Even the forum software here from memory has several different metrics that can be used for "activity" ranging from total unique visitors per day (including "guests"), to "registered" accounts that visit, to registered accounts that post, and then the timeframe in which they've visited (daily, week, month etc).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,316
Well someone is happy...
Trump celebrates Elon Musk pulling out of $44b deal to buy Twitter
Donald Trump has gloated about Elon Musk ending his efforts to buy Twitter, writing: 'THE TWITTER DEAL IS DEAD, LONG LIVE THEwww.dailymail.co.uk
I was seeing something earlier about the numbers Musk is after, apparently it looks like he wants data on how many bot accounts there are done daily from before he signed the deal.
Twitter apparently likely don't have those figures in any form they can pull up retrospectively as they do the numbers for their quarterly FEC filings and probably not more frequently as it's time consuming to analyse (and the people doing that work are also doing things like trying to work out what content is most profitable to promote, or working with law enforcement to track down illegal activity etc).
Which goes with what some people have been saying about the definitions of "active user" and "bot" are important, as if Twitter is basing their FEC filings on numbers done quarterly it means that their definition of an "active" user is likely to be someone who does something over the period of weeks, in which case the number of "bots" may be the same but the overall number of "active users" may be wildly different dependent if you go by daily activity (and type of activity) vs weekly, monthly, or quarterly.
Twitter apparently likely don't have those figures in any form they can pull up retrospectively as they do the numbers for their quarterly FEC filings and probably not more frequently as it's time consuming to analyse (and the people doing that work are also doing things like trying to work out what content is most profitable to promote, or working with law enforcement to track down illegal activity etc).
Which goes with what some people have been saying about the definitions of "active user" and "bot" are important, as if Twitter is basing their FEC filings on numbers done quarterly it means that their definition of an "active" user is likely to be someone who does something over the period of weeks, in which case the number of "bots" may be the same but the overall number of "active users" may be wildly different dependent if you go by daily activity (and type of activity) vs weekly, monthly, or quarterly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
People should be able to sue Truth social media for false advertising. Trump being involved and the "truth" is frankly an insult to anyone with an IQ over 50. Its should be "Alternative Truth" like their alternative facts.
Which is why Twitter provided plenty of details, and they provide the advisers and investors with details, and they have lawyer paid $2000 per hour that ratify such details. The only weakness hear is from Musk who failed to provide a schred of evidence while Twitter explained in detail their methodology and results.
You know when you're down the pub with your mates, you've had a few, life is good and you say you're going to do something stupid.
You and I, you might wake up and think, 'Damn, I'm gonna have to do a sky dive'
When you're Elon and begin to believe your own publicity, that sort of thing ends up being 'I'm going to buy Twitter'.
Unfortunately he is proving to be very specifically clever.
You and I, you might wake up and think, 'Damn, I'm gonna have to do a sky dive'
When you're Elon and begin to believe your own publicity, that sort of thing ends up being 'I'm going to buy Twitter'.
Unfortunately he is proving to be very specifically clever.
The right want the freedom to spread lies, hatred and racism without consequences.
The left desire the freedom to criticize the government without consequence but respect the requirement that freedom of speech has a responsibility.
Being a good human is about being fair and accepting that stories that aren't supporting your narrative that is true should also be heard.
I've not heard much condemnation of social media companies for censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story for example.
A lot of people these days are happy to stamp on the truth if its inconvenient for them.
- Status