Topic: This just in: Elon Musk Twitter deal is imminent
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #106,803
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later[^] [v] #1,200,123
This is going to change everything. This is going to be a pivotal moment in the history books. Elon will cement himself as a great man of our time when he overturns Trump's Twitter ban.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 24 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,124
Trump has said he wouldn't post there again but I bet he will. It's just too good to pass up.
MegaMaga!!
MegaMaga!!
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,138
really, there are still a lot of ways the deal could fall through...
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY double-posted this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,140
also funny... people want to feel like elon is on the hook for a bad deal, but by securing so much funding from outside investors his personal contribution to the deal equals out to him buying Twitter at it's pre-offer 4/20/22 market value 😂🤣
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY triple-posted this 3 years ago, 15 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,141
it's what he originally wanted 😂🤣🤣🤣
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 33 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,143
@1,200,140 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
Everybody underestimates Elon's intelligence. His every move is rational and calculated, this deal has gone exactly how he wanted it to.
Everybody underestimates Elon's intelligence. His every move is rational and calculated, this deal has gone exactly how he wanted it to.
Monkey Pox joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 27 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,147
@1,200,140 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
> also funny... people want to feel like elon is on the hook for a bad deal, but by securing so much funding from outside investors his personal contribution to the deal equals out to him buying Twitter at it's pre-offer 4/20/22 market value 😂🤣
So he’s buying Twitter and “it’s” being Twitter’s initial offer? So he’s getting ripped off then
> also funny... people want to feel like elon is on the hook for a bad deal, but by securing so much funding from outside investors his personal contribution to the deal equals out to him buying Twitter at it's pre-offer 4/20/22 market value 😂🤣
So he’s buying Twitter and “it’s” being Twitter’s initial offer? So he’s getting ripped off then
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,148
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,153
@1,200,147 (Monkey Pox)
No I think it just means that like before the deal twitter stock was valued at $X per share, Elon offered to buy at more than that, and factoring in outside funding, the total money that Elon is putting up is equal to the original $X per share. Which is...fine? But those outside funders aren't giving Elon money because he is so wonderful and smart and handsome and fun. They are presumably going to want something in exchange for the funding, probably some amount of equity packaged with some other stuff, so it's still not a great deal. Buying most of twitter, which has basically never been profitable in its entire existence, at market value seems...underwhelming.
No I think it just means that like before the deal twitter stock was valued at $X per share, Elon offered to buy at more than that, and factoring in outside funding, the total money that Elon is putting up is equal to the original $X per share. Which is...fine? But those outside funders aren't giving Elon money because he is so wonderful and smart and handsome and fun. They are presumably going to want something in exchange for the funding, probably some amount of equity packaged with some other stuff, so it's still not a great deal. Buying most of twitter, which has basically never been profitable in its entire existence, at market value seems...underwhelming.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,155
@1,200,140 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
> but by securing so much funding from outside investors his personal contribution to the deal equals out to him buying Twitter at it's pre-offer 4/20/22 market value 😂🤣
I haven't really analyzed the deal in any depth but I imagine those outside investors are going to want something in return for their investment - either an ownership stake in Twitter or interest on their money, a say in how the company is run, or some combination of these things. Basically if there's outside investors he really doesn't own it free and clear.
So I would consider the actual purchase price to be Elon's contribution plus whatever he has to do to get these outside investors to fuck off and leave him alone.
I can't say whether the deal was good or bad or whether he should have paid more or less or bought it sooner or later. I'll let Elon and his accountants and lawyers figure that out amongst themselves. I don't care either way honestly.
> but by securing so much funding from outside investors his personal contribution to the deal equals out to him buying Twitter at it's pre-offer 4/20/22 market value 😂🤣
I haven't really analyzed the deal in any depth but I imagine those outside investors are going to want something in return for their investment - either an ownership stake in Twitter or interest on their money, a say in how the company is run, or some combination of these things. Basically if there's outside investors he really doesn't own it free and clear.
So I would consider the actual purchase price to be Elon's contribution plus whatever he has to do to get these outside investors to fuck off and leave him alone.
I can't say whether the deal was good or bad or whether he should have paid more or less or bought it sooner or later. I'll let Elon and his accountants and lawyers figure that out amongst themselves. I don't care either way honestly.
Meta !Sober//iZs double-posted this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,156
@1,200,148 (E)
Oh thank God we have an actual mergers and acquisitions expert.
Tell us what Elon should have done, and why you are smarter than the world's richest man in
Oh thank God we have an actual mergers and acquisitions expert.
Tell us what Elon should have done, and why you are smarter than the world's richest man in
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 44 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,157
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
> why you are smarter than the world's richest man in
I had a Father's Day celebration with my father and oldest son.
He can't buy that experience.
> why you are smarter than the world's richest man in
I had a Father's Day celebration with my father and oldest son.
He can't buy that experience.
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY replied with this 3 years ago, 36 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,158
@1,200,153 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
@1,200,155 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
right, i don't think it's as super exciting as a lot of people have made it out to be.
he would still have to contend with his private investors, but would outright own twitter. the attempted "poison pill", which twitter's board hoped would prevent a takeover, has failed and elon's holding company will own 100% if the deal does happen.
hopefully he can do something good with the company, the site or the technology ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@1,200,155 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
right, i don't think it's as super exciting as a lot of people have made it out to be.
he would still have to contend with his private investors, but would outright own twitter. the attempted "poison pill", which twitter's board hoped would prevent a takeover, has failed and elon's holding company will own 100% if the deal does happen.
hopefully he can do something good with the company, the site or the technology ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY double-posted this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,159
he has floated the idea of using the corporate HQ as a homeless shelter... so there's that, at least
Erik !AltRitexT6 joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,160
@previous (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
That's hilarious, all the lefty arseholes who work at Twitter would be forced to agree or they would seem intolerant
That's hilarious, all the lefty arseholes who work at Twitter would be forced to agree or they would seem intolerant
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,161
@1,200,158 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
He probably can't. Social media is impossible to successfully monetize. Twitter can be fun but ultimately isn't doing anything so incredible that a competitor can't eat its lunch in 5-10 years.
@1,200,159 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
He floats a lot of ideas, but helping the underpriviliged is not a passion of his so, let's file this one under --performative dumb shit said to own the libs-- unlikely.
He probably can't. Social media is impossible to successfully monetize. Twitter can be fun but ultimately isn't doing anything so incredible that a competitor can't eat its lunch in 5-10 years.
@1,200,159 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
He floats a lot of ideas, but helping the underpriviliged is not a passion of his so, let's file this one under --performative dumb shit said to own the libs-- unlikely.
(Edited 33 seconds later.)
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,170
@OP
Who gives a shit. Who gives a fuck.
Who gives a shit. Who gives a fuck.
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,186
@1,200,161 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> but helping the underpriviliged is not a passion of his so
do you know him? anyway, everything about his statements and stated missions points to him truly caring for humanity.
one of his companies is about to flip the economy on it's head, bringing us into an age of true abundance, so there may not even be a "the underprivileged" in 15 years.
> but helping the underpriviliged is not a passion of his so
do you know him? anyway, everything about his statements and stated missions points to him truly caring for humanity.
one of his companies is about to flip the economy on it's head, bringing us into an age of true abundance, so there may not even be a "the underprivileged" in 15 years.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,187
Brie is right yet again. Elon is going to be Jesus 2.0. He has zero personality flaws and only does good things.
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY replied with this 3 years ago, 59 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,188
@1,200,160 (Erik !AltRitexT6)
it's actually a decent idea, nimby-ism stops literally any other attempt to build a shelter... but twitter HQ is already built!
it's actually a decent idea, nimby-ism stops literally any other attempt to build a shelter... but twitter HQ is already built!
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY double-posted this 3 years ago, 45 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,189
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 42 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,190
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,191
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY replied with this 3 years ago, 25 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,192
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 30 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,193
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 41 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,195
Apartment you Bozos haven't been following the news releases from early on. None of the above comments are germane as to what has transpired in the situation not going smoothly.
There were issues where the organization as a whole where not being transparent, possibly in an effort to cause him to reconsider his plans. It really had nothing to do with any of the conjecture mentioned above.
There were issues where the organization as a whole where not being transparent, possibly in an effort to cause him to reconsider his plans. It really had nothing to do with any of the conjecture mentioned above.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,197
Monkey Pox replied with this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,198
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,200
@1,200,158 (chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY)
> right, i don't think it's as super exciting as a lot of people have made it out to be.
>
> he would still have to contend with his private investors, but would outright own twitter.
If I've read the financing offer correctly, what happened is Elon started a new LLC holding company to buy Twitter and a bunch of banks signed onto it with 6.5 billion in loans to said LLC, 3 billion of which are secured by shares in said holding company so if he defaults then ownership goes to the banks. I wouldn't describe this as "outright own" since he has to make payments on it and if doesn't do so, he will no longer own at least part of it.
If I correctly understand the security part of the deal, this could end up with up to 65% of the voting shares and 100% of the non-voting shares in the LLC going to the banks if he defaults. Why the world's richest man needs to get a loan to buy a company that's maybe 1/5th or so of his net worth is beyond me. I guess he can't sell that much Tesla stock at one time? I imagine if he offloaded a huge chunk of his Tesla ownership that would tank the share price which in turn would tank his net worth?
> the attempted "poison pill", which twitter's board hoped would prevent a takeover, has failed and elon's holding company will own 100% if the deal does happen.
>
> hopefully he can do something good with the company, the site or the technology ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think his tenure as Twitter CEO will be very much like the Trump administration - big promises, lots of excitement/screaming about it from Elon fanboys/haters, lots of memes and showmanship, but nothing really changes. Freedom of speech (in the Voltaire sense not the First Amendment sense) will continue to be sharply curtailed. The site will continue to be full of ads and spam.
For me I think if Elon really had some amazing radical plan to revolutionize social networking he would just launch his own brand new social network and start from scratch without all the baggage and history of Twitter. If his ideas work, then Twitter will become the AOL of the 2020s and be forgotten. He could probably also do this for a hell of a lot less than $44,000,000,000
If he changes Twitter too much then people will get pissed off because it's different than how it used to be. Someone will clone the UI and rules of pre-Elon Twitter and there's a risk of a mass migration like Digg to Reddit. I don't like Twitter but a lot of people seem addicted/obsessed with it and won't like any radical changes.
Part of me thinks he did this hoping the deal would fall through so he could get his face on TV for another hype cycle at negligible cost.
> right, i don't think it's as super exciting as a lot of people have made it out to be.
>
> he would still have to contend with his private investors, but would outright own twitter.
If I've read the financing offer correctly, what happened is Elon started a new LLC holding company to buy Twitter and a bunch of banks signed onto it with 6.5 billion in loans to said LLC, 3 billion of which are secured by shares in said holding company so if he defaults then ownership goes to the banks. I wouldn't describe this as "outright own" since he has to make payments on it and if doesn't do so, he will no longer own at least part of it.
If I correctly understand the security part of the deal, this could end up with up to 65% of the voting shares and 100% of the non-voting shares in the LLC going to the banks if he defaults. Why the world's richest man needs to get a loan to buy a company that's maybe 1/5th or so of his net worth is beyond me. I guess he can't sell that much Tesla stock at one time? I imagine if he offloaded a huge chunk of his Tesla ownership that would tank the share price which in turn would tank his net worth?
> the attempted "poison pill", which twitter's board hoped would prevent a takeover, has failed and elon's holding company will own 100% if the deal does happen.
>
> hopefully he can do something good with the company, the site or the technology ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think his tenure as Twitter CEO will be very much like the Trump administration - big promises, lots of excitement/screaming about it from Elon fanboys/haters, lots of memes and showmanship, but nothing really changes. Freedom of speech (in the Voltaire sense not the First Amendment sense) will continue to be sharply curtailed. The site will continue to be full of ads and spam.
For me I think if Elon really had some amazing radical plan to revolutionize social networking he would just launch his own brand new social network and start from scratch without all the baggage and history of Twitter. If his ideas work, then Twitter will become the AOL of the 2020s and be forgotten. He could probably also do this for a hell of a lot less than $44,000,000,000
If he changes Twitter too much then people will get pissed off because it's different than how it used to be. Someone will clone the UI and rules of pre-Elon Twitter and there's a risk of a mass migration like Digg to Reddit. I don't like Twitter but a lot of people seem addicted/obsessed with it and won't like any radical changes.
Part of me thinks he did this hoping the deal would fall through so he could get his face on TV for another hype cycle at negligible cost.
chickennnnnn replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,201
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
i think he said that buying twitter would accelerate his social media plans by 5 years... so yeah, what you wrote totally tracks
i think he said that buying twitter would accelerate his social media plans by 5 years... so yeah, what you wrote totally tracks
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 24 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,202
@previous (chickennnnnn)
Is the $44 billion worth skipping 5 years? He better have something damn good to justify spending that much to get it ready now instead of 2027-ish.
Is the $44 billion worth skipping 5 years? He better have something damn good to justify spending that much to get it ready now instead of 2027-ish.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 52 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,213
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,214
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,215
@previous (A)
Swamp's as swampy and filthy as it ever was. Trump simply failed at meaningfully transforming America. I don't think he was necessarily bad, I voted for him and personally quite like Trump and count myself a Trump supporter, but I don't think it was any different than President Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or Marco Rubio would have been.
Swamp's as swampy and filthy as it ever was. Trump simply failed at meaningfully transforming America. I don't think he was necessarily bad, I voted for him and personally quite like Trump and count myself a Trump supporter, but I don't think it was any different than President Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or Marco Rubio would have been.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 23 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,220
chickennnnnn replied with this 3 years ago, 15 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,224
Green !StaYqkzUPc joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 22 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,351
Lol. Apparently Twitter has refused Elon Musk's deal to buy Twitter after taking him to court for refusing to buy Twitter.
chickennnnnn replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,354
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 34 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,357
> he made an offer to buy the platform and then decided to back out after the company allegedly did not provide him with the information he requested about bot accounts.
I never understood this part. I'm guessing Twitter already bans bot accounts and any bot accounts that continue to exist have somehow evaded detection, which means Twitter obviously doesn't know about them. Sort of rounding up all 400-odd million active users and sitting them down for a Turing test I don't know how you could possibly answer the question "How many bot accounts are on Twitter?"
I never understood this part. I'm guessing Twitter already bans bot accounts and any bot accounts that continue to exist have somehow evaded detection, which means Twitter obviously doesn't know about them. Sort of rounding up all 400-odd million active users and sitting them down for a Turing test I don't know how you could possibly answer the question "How many bot accounts are on Twitter?"
chickennnnnn replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,360
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
no they like the bots, they know about the bots, and count the bots in a secret metric, and then also have a metric including real life human users. most of the posts are by bots
no they like the bots, they know about the bots, and count the bots in a secret metric, and then also have a metric including real life human users. most of the posts are by bots
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,361
@1,200,357 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
A shocking amount of the posts there are
by bots
A shocking amount of the posts there are
by bots
(Edited 49 seconds later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,362
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 3 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,364
@1,200,360 (chickennnnnn)
Very interesting. I'd like to see real numbers or at least a rough estimate (I mean he should know them). As usual I can't seem to find Zatko's actual complaint filed with the FTC and SEC (which I'd be much more interested in than some faggots at NPR/WaPo/CNN/etc blogging about it), just a bunch of news stories repeating the same stuff about it but none of them link to the actual fucking thing they are talking about. I hate that shit way more than media bias. Be biased all you want but let me actually read the primary sources for myself and then I'll decide if I want commentary.
Very interesting. I'd like to see real numbers or at least a rough estimate (I mean he should know them). As usual I can't seem to find Zatko's actual complaint filed with the FTC and SEC (which I'd be much more interested in than some faggots at NPR/WaPo/CNN/etc blogging about it), just a bunch of news stories repeating the same stuff about it but none of them link to the actual fucking thing they are talking about. I hate that shit way more than media bias. Be biased all you want but let me actually read the primary sources for myself and then I'll decide if I want commentary.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 15 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,386
chickennn !YbHeIMI.GY replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,391
@1,200,364 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
here's the disclosure all those articles are discussing: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22186782/whistleblower_disclosure.pdf
here's the disclosure all those articles are discussing: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22186782/whistleblower_disclosure.pdf