Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cubefox 1062 days ago
> My theory is that he is desperate. He was forced to buy it.

Yeah, and now people are deriding him for that, which makes no sense. As far as I know, he made an offer, had to publicly announce it beforehand (due to law), then the stock market tanked, making the Twitter purchase nearly unaffordable for him. Then Twitter was loaded with massive debt. Very bad luck. But people hate him so they are satisfied with any misfortune he may have.

3 comments

Uh no.

He purchased a huge amount of twitter stock, and simultaneously made the public offer at like 4x twitters current stock value. Twitter pumped on the news, which was exactly Musks plan.

The stock market crash did not all of a sudden make twitter worth next to nothing on the offer. Musk was attempting to pump and dump the stock, and it backfired on him.

Even at the “rainbows and unicorns” drug induced tech stock valuations we’ve been seeing lately, twitter wasn’t worth 1/3 what musk offered to buy it at.

The stock market tanking has literally nothing to do with why this was a bad deal.

When you’re a public company and some coked off his ass idiot billionaire offers you 3x your companies current already highly inflated value, you are essentially forced by the shareholders to sell.

> He purchased a huge amount of twitter stock, and simultaneously made the public offer at like 4x twitters current stock value.

That's a lie. See

https://images.app.goo.gl/see6HtsjsuSZMioP9

> Yeah, and now people are deriding him for that

People have been mocking him for the price, the no-due-diligence clause, and other aspects of the contract since they became public. While later movement of the stock market may have made it even worse for him, it was a ridiculous deal, on its face, at the time negotiated (and even worse for Musk as a buyer given his public comments about Twitter.)

How was it a ridiculous deal at the time? He paid what the company was worth just a few months before. I think it is normal for acquisitions to be higher than the current stock price. Initially it wasn't even clear whether the deal would go through. Had his offer been significantly lower, he may have not succeeded.

https://images.app.goo.gl/see6HtsjsuSZMioP9

I think he's cultivated that negative reaction himself; he just can't help himself. Once upon a time, his reputation was primarily as the action man heavily driving forward key industries. There might've been a few "he's just the figurehead, others do the work despite him" sorts on here, but mostly sentiment on a tech site would've been favourable. Hell, years back, I thought he had a decent claim on Person of the Year.

He's really gone out of his way since to polarise the public, for limited benefit.

> I think he's cultivated that negative reaction himself;

No, my point was that all the derision was undeserved and you didn't provide evidence to the contrary. Journalists just hate him.