[t_mann]

Sounds like a very unpleasant experience, sorry to hear. But I'm not sure it's a good precedent for this case, for two reasons:

a) You were happy to settle, which sounds understandable. But when the stakes are $44bn and most actors on Twitter's side are but agents for Twitter shareholders, their chief concern will be not breaking their fiduciary duties if they accept anything less than the maximum amount they could get. It's a bit hard to imagine how the legal bills for seeing this through could stack up to even .1% of the purchase price ($440m), and that's nowhere close to the discount that Musk will be looking for (with good reason imho, btw).

b) In your case the other party might have gotten away with dodging a court order to pay (or at least made it appear like that). That's pretty much unfathomable if you are literally the richest man on earth and live in the US.

[Terretta]

> chief concern will be not breaking their fiduciary duties

Let’s not forget the all the blather from Twitter board and leadership how their fiduciary duty was to not sell to Musk at this price.

Cramer even claimed the board would be personally liable for accepting the deal.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/14/cramer-twitters-board-has-no...

[mrtnmcc]

Cramer's advice is a decent guide if you always take the opposite opinion.

[sharker8]

The Anti Cramer portfolio is not a sufficient contrarian approach, because the Cramer portfolio also underperforms similar to a random walk. Put another way, the opposite of a random walk is another random walk.

[mrtnmcc]

Might be able to make an argument based on Regression Towards the Mean and the fact Cramer picks are "extremes".

[coliveira]

Yes, following that guy it is understandable why he would never be a hedge fund manager for a long time. When it comes to investing he is stupid as a brick.

[belter]

Hedge Fund Managers are also not the brightest flowers:

"The SP 500 Index Out-performed Hedge Funds over the Last 10 Years. And It Wasn’t Even Close": https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-sp-500-index-out-performe...

"How Smart Are the Smart Guys? A Unique View from Hedge Fund Stock Holdings" [PDF]: https://jgriffin.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/smart.pdf

"...Hedge funds exhibit no ability to time sectors or pick better stock styles. Surprisingly, we find only weak evidence of differential ability between hedge funds. Overall, our study raises serious questions about the perceived superior skill of hedge fund managers..."

[seanp2k2]

The hedge funds themselves get rich through fees. The investors get robbed. Not sure why anyone still believes in hedge funds.

[bush-bby]

But that’s not the benefit of putting your money in a hedge fund at all, the benefit is hedging against losses, so that you don’t have to worry about losing money when everyone else is.

[dahfizz]

It's literally called a hedge fund, not sure why people would assume they are after the highest & riskiest returns.

[MrMan]

he was a really good hedge fund manager though

[tyrfing]

> Let’s not forget the all the blather from Twitter board and leadership how their fiduciary duty was to not sell to Musk at this price.

Is there a source for this? I certainly didn't see it. They considered rejecting the offer, and quickly passed a poison pill provision, but that was about preventing buying the company on the open market instead of making a deal like this. The offer was initially only a very short note, and Twitter decided to sell within 3 days of financing being lined up.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000119312...

[Hendrikto]

> It's a bit hard to imagine how the legal bills for seeing this through could stack up to even .1% of the purchase price ($440m)

That is 1%, not .1%

[t_mann]

You're right, my bad.

[londons_explore]

> dodging a court order to pay

I'm pretty surprised musk seems to have put himself personally on the line, rather than putting 'musk acquisition project llc' as the party making the offer.

If it was the latter, then everything could be arranged so there was no money in that company to pay for any lawsuits. As the worlds richest man, dividing up your liability like that into many LLC's would seem like a very important thing to do.

[dragonwriter]

> As the worlds richest man, dividing up your liability like that into many LLC's would seem like a very important thing to do

Unfortunately for Musk, when an LLC is used as a proxy for the single member without real separation, the LL part stops working as anything but (on a matter this size) a small additional speedbump rather than a shield, at the same time, it's even nominal separation makes it harder to make deals than if your hoards of assets were behind them.

[watwut]

> In your case the other party might have gotten away with dodging a court order to pay (or at least made it appear like that). That's pretty much unfathomable if you are literally the richest man on earth and live in the US.

It is other way around. It is way easier for rich person to get away from dodging courts then poor one. Just the fact that rich person can pay fights and layers longer, and fact that rich has it easier to retaliate so everyone is more careful not to step on their toes or do mistake.