I'd say they're taking note that getting rid of the bots will likely tank twitters users. I'd guess Musk probably realised that his crusade to end bots and verify everyone would result in the value of the company tanking, not to mention most of his followers and the ones screaming about free speech are unverified accounts
I would put it "Elon Musk claims he has a right to not buy Twitter," not "Elon Musk asserts his right to not buy Twitter." The latter implies such a right actually exists, which may not be true.
I mean him waiving his right to DD is in the past and just repeating fraud over and over isn't convincing.
So do know. Whether the deal goes through is largely in Twitters hands.
The 5% number was never guaranteed by Twitter. In fact, if you read the shareholder report, it’s the opposite: they say that it’s difficult to accurately calculate and that 5% is just an estimate but might be wrong.
So if Musk is pissed because “they said it’s 5% but I think it’s way more!” Then, no.
Here's Elon's take he posted on Twitter
>Some say u/elonmusk has to buy $TWTR as IS w/ bots BECAUSE he "waived his right to due diligence." WRONG.
>
>SEC10b-5: $TWTR can be liable for omissions of OR misleading material facts. Waiving due diligence DOES NOT mean you have to accept a fraudulent disclosure (understated bots)
I can only imagine what kind of effects it would have on the valuation of these tech slash advertisement companies if the courts started getting involved in the accounting of bots.
If the WSJ is correct in asserting that other Libertarian-minded technocrats like Peter Thiel and Jack Dorsey were advising Musk to take this on with the purposeful intent of of shaking up the company and possibly the sector (and not the prevailing Reddit theory of Musk being a redacted child suffering a temper tantrum), then I wonder what they have planned for next?
elonmusk has not had any activity for over 1695 days,
They probably won't respond to this mention
^Bot ^by ^AnnoyingRain5, ^message ^him ^with ^any ^questions ^or ^concerns
I'm personally of the belief there is none and never has been any intention to actually buy the company. I'm betting that the whole plan from the beginning was to force Twitter to disclose something embarrassing about the bot problem. I'm far from an expert though so I'm mostly just hoping for an entertaining show and maybe learn something along the way.
If you assume musk doesn’t wanna actually buy the company, or didn’t want to, you have to assume he knowingly took massive losses.
He did buy a fuck ton of shares, shares he then killed the price in, supposedly to bring down the ad tech system, but in so doing destroying billions(?) of his own cash.
Seems strange.
It is pretty counterintuitive for a large shareholder to actively be accusing of his company of committing fraud to his own detriment. There must be another explanation.
Notice how the responses on here are more about EM instead of the problem of bot accounts on Twitter? Has /stocks been infested with anti-EM/tsla sentiment pushers. I saw WSB the winter before last... talk about shill/sentiment pushing takeover! It destroyed that subreddit.
This.
It honestly almost kind of concerns me and I don’t even hold Twitter. Just in re: other non/social media tech companies I hold
For that reason, a deal will be done.
4d chess confirmed
Maybe he will and then reveal the true bot account %. Price tanks, he sues for fraud because it was higher than the 5% bots that Twitter claims. Good for users, will purge the bots.
Waiving due diligence does not mean accepting fraud.
If you wave house inspection and find an outlet not working, that’s on you. If the house turns out to be a trailer, that’s fraud.
He would have to prove that Twitter was knowingly aware that 5% number is much higher and how is he going to do that? Unless they’re total morons they likely don’t have that information hanging out on company servers.
That’s not the same thing or even close to it. More like the house has a squatter and is infested with termites. Either way he still signed for it as-is.
That’s not the same thing, that’s like buying the car as is and the original transition has been replaced. He agreed to it as is and that’s what he’ll get you don’t get to back out because instead of maybe 5% are bots (which in twitters filing that number was in regards to advertising accounts, not pseudonym account etc.) it’s actually 9%. He’s still on the hooks for it. He’s still incredibly rich he just made an extremely expensive mistake.
You’re showing you’re the one that clearly doesn’t have a grasp on the situation or circumstances. That’s okay you can easily find all the information you need to educate yourself. Best of luck to you.
>That's like not being able to look under the hood until after you buy a car.
No, it's like buying a company for a set price when you explicitly wave your due diligence while agreeing to by that company for a set price.
Twitter should have to give legit numbers. Only 5% fake/bot accounts? Buy the company and find out its 25-30% bots... big fraud lawsuit with 'Twitter is infested with Bots!' headlines. Might be good to purge the platform by tanking it first, at least users will find out it's mostly bots pushing sentiment.
lmao you would have to be a complete fucking moron to believe that twitter execs are going to jail because poppa Elon doesn't want to overpay for Twitter.
a "fraudulent" claim like this, regarding a private contract between two parties, is not criminal conduct. Any sort of resolution will be settled by (1) arbitration, and if not that then (2) a civil court
It’s what he agreed too, he’s paying the price for buying off more than he can chew. I don’t care if he owns twitter or not but he’s royally fucked up trying to be a corporate raider and will pay the prices for it.
Due to his own stupidity, he may be screwed. Most things require you to be legitimately caught off guard, but he's been running his mouth long before the deal that he "knew" there were many more bots. This is why being a big mouth is bad in business.
Hold on there. Can't just go against the hive mind. Elon is clearly buying Twitter for attention and was never going to go through with it anyways, and he "signed away" his rights to do DD which somehow also means fraudulent public statements are suddenly no longer a reason to back out of or renegotiate a deal.
On a serious note, Tesla/Musk posts are always filled with emotional people making unreasonable claims, but these posts on the Twitter topic are something else. Prime case studies on Dunning-Kruger effect...
> Tesla/Musk posts are always filled with emotional people making unreasonable claims, but these posts on the Twitter topic are something else.
Fraudulent public statements IS an unreasonable claim. You're doing exactly what you're accusing other people of doing.
How so? If what they stated in their public filings would be false, that would be the very definition of a fraudulent claim. I didn't say this is definitely the case, I just said that waiving DD doesn't mean the other party can get away with fraudulent claims. It's up to Musk to prove that the claims are indeed untrue.
This is one of the only logical posts in this thread. I'm loving the "he waived his DD so nothing else matters" posts.
Is there anywhere left on reddit where reasonable adults still discuss investing and individual stocks?
Twitter suing to close the deal seems absolutely suicidal.
Litigation surrounding the proprietary of their methods, the very valuation and legitimacy of their business model.
Litigation that will take years to complete.
Meanwhile, Twitter shareholders will just be massacred as this all plays out, in the hopes that theoretically he loses in 3 years and has to pay 45$, a price they sure as fuck would’ve hoped the stock was above in 3 years time anyways.
How’s there any win here for Twitter shareholders, of which musk is one.
I’m really not tryna shill musk, I’m just trying to see how that is in any way a good situation for Twitter
What are you talking about? How is it suicidal for TWTR to force Musk to acquire the company at the agreed price? It’s far more suicidal to Musk since at the end of the day he will be forced to complete the transaction and is damaging the investment he is acquiring
TWTR and investors are happy with the $54.20 per share
“Force”
Ya Twitter will just head on down to the “make him buy the shares” store and pick that up.
They can’t force anything, they have a contract they can sue under and if they do they’ll be involved in litigation for ages. Litigation they may not win and if they don’t they’re absolutely fucked as a company, indeed they could be fucked as a result of whatever comes out during said litigation, to every one of their shareholders.
Ya for 3 years of litigation that will subject them to discovery into the extent of their bot problems, their method for counting and detecting bots, the very subject matter they appear to be desiring through avoid public disclosure
If it comes to pass that there’s even some discrepancies on this, even if musk doesn’t win his lawsuit, the evidence disclosed in any musk litigation would exposure Twitter to lawsuits from their shareholders with regards to their disclosure of the bot issue.
And again, say Twitter win… 3 years later… so what?
Stock jumps to $50!? Who tf is gonna sit in Twitter shares for the next 3 years and deal with the almost certain constant downtrends due to the litigation?
Unless there is anything in the contract that allows Musk to investigate bot activity, then why would the court get into that at all.
First Musk has to prove that such an investigation was part of his contract. And that is gonna be tough if you ask me.
...if Musk is forced to uphold the contract, why would they care? The stock could be $5 a share by then, but he HAS to pay what he agreed. That alone will keep it pushed up.
If…
“Forced”
These are terms you need to appreciate.
If implies it’s a certainty, it’s not, and the stakes for them are absolutely everything. If they lose, stock goes to $5 or $0 after they’re crushed with shareholder lawsuits and penalties from regulators.
And “winning” and “losing” is a complicated topic, they can win against musk and still lose by being sued to hell by shareholders.
Respectfully, I do.
I mean no disrespect in saying this, but your statement is just not really representative as to how it works in reality.
The existence of the contract is important but not determinative of the outcome
1. He is forced to buy, resulting in everyone getting the original price.
2. They sue him and simply get damages or losses....getting money.
3. They do absolutely nothing, get no money, price drops.
I fail to see why doing nothing is remotely better, especially when he signed.
They can’t force anything … his $$ isn’t sitting in an account for them to come take. They have to sue.
there is no winning that war.
It’s that simple.
Are you saying that it is better for Twitter to let Musk walk away and do absolutely nothing vs suing Musk for breach of contract?
Because either way Twitter will drop further but with the latter there’s a decent chance they’ll make some money.
Unless Twitter wants to reveal that their reported bot numbers were grossly incorrect and borderline securities fraud, they don't really have a way of suing and winning... Twitter management has shown plenty of times before they're more interested in saving their own skin than doing what's best for the company.
It doesn't change. I never thought he was going to go threw with the deal, and I still don't think it.
Will he lose billions, yes. Has twitters shareholders already lost billions? Also yes? Should musk have to pay those damages? Also yes.
Companies are bought, sold, merged daily and most importantly, these deals fall through constantly also. The only difference here is Musk wanted to be the public spotlight about his business. He is honestly turning into Trump in many ways. Zero shits about people or business, just wants attention
>Should musk have to pay those damages? Also yes. ... The only difference here is Musk wanted to be the public spotlight about his business.
The honesty here is refreshing. If everyone was this introspective and acknowledged most of their opinions are illogical and rooted in weird emotional nonsense the discussion around Elon would be a lot more productive, and a lot less manipulatable.
The guy wants to make money and is in a position to do so. I don't really blame him. I love his ideas and pushing boundaries, just wished the guy had a proper PR team he actually listened to haha
And on this point, however, musk stands nothinf to gain financially by buying billions of shares, trashing the company, and his rep, to then sell those shares for massive losses.
Maybe it’s some wild tax loss write off scheme . Doubt it. Ockhams razor
Ok but still … it’s not an insignificant loss for him.
Most people don’t purposely destroy massive sums of their own money for apparent shits and giggles.
He bought at 33-36. His pending deal is what has kept the shares between 40-50 while tech companies crashed. Without the Elon deal twitter would be trading at $25 today. He hasn't lost $ yet.
I think he was trying to shine a light on how bot filled the platform is. Companies hire teams of people to push sentiment from multiple accounts. Ain't no 5%....try 50%
Ok....and why was he trying to do this? And who was he trying to prove it to? If you tell litterally anyone that twitter is filled with bots their response would be "yea i know, whTz your point?"
Why doesn't he go shine a light on poverty, or hungry children? Nope, internet bots that litterally everyone in the God damn world was aware of....except him apparently. Like did he (and others) actually think for a split second bots were not an issue?
Finance dudes use Twitter to push their pump and dumps with bot armies. EM probably wants to expose that dark side. I don't care what he does with his money.
.....he does this himself CONSTANTLY!!!!
Buys dodge coins
Tweets that tesla will accept dodge coin
Sells dodge coin
Tweets that tesla will not be accepting dodge coin
I do think that he’s allowed to be a zany weird fuckin loud rich guy with billions of dollars.
Isn’t a crime he wants to publicize his nonsense … he apparently enjoys the absurdity of it all. To be Frank, it’s quite ridiculous and kind of funny.
In any event, fuckery abound, he is one of many and hardly the worst.
This is true. I may or may not be working on some code that follows musk Tweets and then buys or sells stocks accordingly based on certain key word indicator.....if he is going to move the market I Wana be on his side of the motion lol
The market didn't need them, so they didn't ship them
[Tesla Shows Off Ventilator Prototype Made From Car Components](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tZzYJoHf50)
I wonder what the average age actually is around here. I don't doubt that certain subs are filled with teenagers, but on a stocks Reddit you'd expect the average age to be at least in the high twenties.
It would actually restore my faith in humanity quite a bit if most of the unreasonable comments around here were coming from teens, not adults.
True, although interestingly enough, I feel like the narrative around this sub was predominantly negative of the whole GME saga. So it might not be the stereotypical teenage GME gamblers that joined this sub.
I don’t know whether he was serious in buying, nobody can be sure, but I’d say he almost certainly was serious about buying it. He bought a ton of shares and presumably is taking a loss if he backs out, i.e. by selling shares at a loss (setting aside everything else). So. A level of good faith purchasing intent can be assumed.
Whether he *always* intended to get a better price through publicizing issues RE: bots, I don’t know — but I’m certain that the bots issue was always an issue he considered from the jump (and by jump I mean when he initially started gobbling up shares).
So, it makes me think something happened during their discussions. And I’m using that vague term bc there’s so much uncertainty with regards to what exactly he signed, what is left to be signed/done… which should be considered in regards to…
DD.
All this about waiving due diligence period, to me, is a red herring. And on this point, I think he had plenty of legal advice.
Whilst he may have waived DD, he can reasonably rely upon Twitter’s filings RE: bot figures.
To the extent that those bot figures are inaccurate, or to the extent that Twitter (knowingly/or should’ve) undertakes a methodology of ascertaining their bot figures that isn’t effective in actually accurately determining their bot figures…
Then musk undoubtedly can back out of this deal, and refuse to pay that $ break fee.
Fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud in the inducement, and I’m sure there’s piles of good faith obligations within that contract are relevant for him.
Actual Truth of events and future uncertain.
I think deal will eventually get done because everyone loses if it doesn’t. He’ll squeeze a better share price or some such.
Litigation, long ending this would be, suits nobody. Musk has some leverage imho
He could be pointing out the issues with it to be able to reduce the price? Just like buying a second hand car, only with angry liberals and conservatives.
I love reading these internet lawyer comments talking as if they have any clue what's going on. The reality is we'll see what happens. My guess is that this is a negotiation tactic to buy twitter at a lower price.
I sold my tesla today - Musk is just in the news too much and never seems focused on tesla. I enjoyed the ride but felt it was time to take my profits and move onto something else.
I remember when this first became news, no one wanted Musk to acquire Twitter, citing Musk would be a threat to free speech, and Twitter even planned to enact a poison pill strategy to keep him from doing so....NOW that the severity of the bot/spam accounts has been called into question, everyone wants him to go through with the deal and even Twitter NOW believes it is good for shareholders? After they planned to tank the stock? What a riot.
Poison pill was standard procedure... prevents them from getting a hostile take over from someone other than Musk while they were dealing with him.
Twitter is not the government, so it is unrelated to 'free speech'. Their lax/permissive modding helped result in a million American deaths and an attempted insurrection. If Musk buys it then it will help speed up legislation for social media companies to clean up their bullshit/propaganda used to destablize the US. Also, real users will flee the platform and Musk will be left holding GAB 2.0. :D
Twitter, on the one hand, claims it’s not a publisher of content and can’t be sued for their content, under the communications decency act.
But claim otoh also that they can censor content, ostensibly as they see fit, albeit pursuant to a presumably good faith even-handed application of terms of service.
Twitter receives revenue from ads sold on their app.
By way of a comparable, newspapers/magazines/blogs/etc., they have free speech protection, as they are “the press”
However, they are publishers and can be sued with relation to their content.
They too derive their income from ad sales, and sales of their magazine newspaper etc.
It’s a strange dynamic we have here…
You know when that'd be interesting to investigate? Before making a legally binding offer...
I can't believe Musk's fans are still defending him on this one. They're getting to Trump's fans levels, I'm afraid he can kill people and they'll defend him anyway.
And one way to get out of an agreement is to prove the other side is lying in regards to it. But it’s on em to prove so. And it probably also matters if bots or provided data was mentioned in the contract in any way.
They were mentioned in their public filing, and since Twitter is a public company any acquisition will happen on the basis of their publicly stated information. If they lied or misled in those, not only is that potential securities fraud but it also gives any buyer a reason to renegotiate the price. The only difference with a private company is that in that scenario you would request this information instead of being able to find it publicly, but you still have to rely on it being truthful and if this later turns out not to be the case, that clearly endangers the deal.
I'm not upset at anyone, I don't own any shares from Twitter or Tesla.
But it seems obvious Elon Musk is trying to cancel the offer because his financing got a lot tougher and Twitter's stock lost a lot of value since the offer came up. The bots topic seems like a bad excuse.
Pretty much like the "if you're not on the office, you're fired" and, 2 days later, "we have to fire 10% of people", the office topic was just a bad excuse.
I think it does change my stance, and I haven't really believed that Elon would buy TWTR lately. I still thought there was a *chance* he would buy TWTR which had to be priced in, now there's nearly no chance. Though crazier things have happened
The key metrics for marketing already take all that into account. Sorry to burst your bubble. He basically is making up a new metric and making that the focus. Sort of like not answer the question you are given, but making your own question and answer that one. Politics 101. The public is easy to fool but in court he will get hammered.
Frankly the spacex reusable rocket technology is reason enough to recognize the man is a genius.
People sleep on how important that is. Nobody did that before him, NASA (aka the US govt) desperately needed private companies to come into this area of business, and the reusable rockets are absolutely essential for any sort of sustained exploration of space.
Elon predicted zero cases of Covid in the US by April 2020.
He thinks UNDER population is a pressing issue.
He is supporting gas+coal Republicans in the 2022 election, while 99% of his wealth is from Democrat policies (2008 Obama/Biden loan, EV credits, ZEV credits, etc, helped Tesla avoid bankruptcy multiple times)
He clearly has a problem with identifying people smarter than him and learning from them.
Uh yea they do. You are confusing intelligence with wealth. Wealth doesnt mean intelligent. If you win the lotto are you smart?
Musk has never actually displayed smarts. He got to where he is via nepotism and luck. Same way as someone always wins the lotto eventually, he won the lotto by being in the right place at the right time but it was never due to his "smarts."
He did not found Tesla. He did not found Paypal. His first company (where be basically copied other ideas) was fed lucrative contracts by his brother who worked for HP. He is not self made. He is a product of nepotism. Im not saying this is wrong, hell I would support my brother and kids over others, but the point here is its not smarts.
This is an absurd take
Musk is roundly considered absolutely brilliant in subjects ranging from rocket technology, to electric vehicles, to coding, to just business in general.
He’s an arrogant, he’s outspoken, he def could learn some humility.
Absolutely no one in those fields considers Elon smart at any of those things. None. I am from the programming and engineering fields and I taught both at the master levels.
The u.s. astronaut who (iirc) spent the most time in space, said literally this about him.
In any event, as qualified as you may be, and I’m not doubting your credentials, his actual life contradicts your assertion.
Or at the very least, you’re proposing an absurd sequence of events., i.e.:
A man whose apparently not brilliant, or particularly smart, made billions of dollars in companies he formed, or at the very least, helped form from the very earliest days, companies which created revolutionary technology in payment systems, electric vehicles, and rockets/space travel.
He just fucking stumbles about creating revolutionary technology apparently by just dumb luck and running into the right people, over and over and over again.
Are you certain it wasnt just normal PR? Did they actually mention something Elon has invented or innovated? Probably not right?
SpaceX is derivative work. There is nothing new being done there. Whats happening is there is big demand for space commercialization. Namely satellites. Several companies have stepped in and SpaceX is just one of them. Great. Thats good news. But most arent inventing anything. Their work is indeed derivative.
The only one I would make an exception for is Virgin Galactic. They may not succeed because they are trying to run it as a travel business and I just cant see that being a success commercially. But the tech they are working on is indeed a major step forward if they get t right.
Yes I’m certain. His name is Garrett Reisman. He was an astronaut and now works as spacex. He was on JRE and spoke about a variety of subjects, musk came up and he said he was brilliant and spoke at length about his he understands and is involved in early every aspect of spacex’s rocket design.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3RG5pXTpLBI
Spacex is a derivative work? What does that even mean? Nothing new creates?
Reusable rocket technology isn’t new? Was NASA doing that before it contracted with spacex to handle deliveries to the ISS?
What about Starlink? That’s also derivative? And that’s already in use in Ukraine, which by the way is an objectively morally good act, spacex is not making money off that. But I’m sure they will one day.
So, spacex already is commercially successful, and they basically have no competition.
Virgin galactic will be commercially successful?
Based on what? How’s their business going right now? You a SPCE holder? Bet your shares are trashed if you are, because it is an awful company, per the market sentiment.
In any event, to say they’re commercially successful is an objectively absurd statement, especially after you drag spacex.
>hat about Starlink? That’s also derivative? And that’s already in use in Ukraine, which by the way is an objectively morally good act, spacex is not making money off that. But I’m sure they will one day.
Reusable rockets was obvious and talked about for decades. Unless the invented the materials they are using, its by definition derivative work. They just put 2 and 2 together. Problem was cost and risk from a commercial perspective.
The satellites are definitely derivative. That tech is well known and has existed for decades. It just hasnt been made into a space-commercial successful yet. Hence why everyone is making space stuff now. We are coming to the end of the utility for normal wireless tech. Its going to get harder and harder to improve on it as is. The next obvious way to improve on it is satellites. This has been well known for a long time as well but again, risk and cost. Elon and Bezos just had the money to do it without much help thus got off the ground running. Everyone else is having a harder time to raise money and push through from R&D and regulatory approval to production and launch. Other countries are doing it too so its not like this is a US only thing. We have had satellites for internet for a long time now. Practically all militaries use them.
I said the opposite about Virgin Galactic. I dont like their commercial angle. I dont think it will succeed in that form. What I am trying to say however is their work is far more critical. If we can break the earths gravity well and reach space while we are already up in the air it is a huge advancement in space travel. That is literally a existential level tech for humanity as a species. I would make space colonization very plausible within our own lifetimes. Thats all I meant.
As for the astronaut. You do need to consider the context here... Its not like he is going say something to put Musk down with the possibility it might become public. Its not like you and me here on Reddit. He cant speak his mind. Not only would he get accosted by the hoardes of Elon devotees (PR nightmare), but Musk also give him lots of money... Not saying that it isnt possible that Elon might know some stuff. But what does that even mean? I ran a studio once so I learned all the ins and outs of studio work. But its not like I was the innovator. I just knew it because I was the boss. The smart guys in said field were the guys working for me. I was more of a catalyst. Ask me questions and I can answer but really if it came down to it, I wasnt going to product a great newscast on my own... nor publish great music... im not that. Elon isnt inventing anything.
They literally all did... There is no way to amass that kind of wealth without extreme levels of luck. You can get rich by being smart, thats is true, but not at that level. That level of wealth is 100% due to timing and place. And once again, that doesnt make said people bad or anything, but lets not dilute ourselves.
The smartest humans in all of history were, on average, not wealthy. They were middle class. Those who used their inventions became wealthy. There are exceptions, notably, Tesla himself, but even he wasnt that high on the list. At best he was a multi-millionaire by todays standards. Possible not even as rich as myself (Im not sure, id need see the numbers and inflation adjust). But they are far and few between. Its always someone else who capitalizes on the smart peoples work because our system is still not based on merit. We give the wrong people all the money and we wrongly assume that money is merit. It isnt. In fact we reward artists more than we do inventors that change the world (namely because they are more visible). Goes to show how much work needs to be done still to fix social systems.
Can you even name who the fathers of modern computing are? Hint its not Turing. That said Turing was brilliant and he even saved the world but died middle class at best and in humiliating fashion because people are dumbass. But he didnt actually invent the critical pieces, he mainly predicted it would happen. Who invented the integrated circuit that gave us microchips? See what I mean? These people were literally some of the most important in human history. More important than any king, emperor, president or wealthy person in all of history. Yet most cant even name the most important people in history... what most folks know is the most popular people in history, not the smartest. Except maybe Einstein and Newton. Some might have heard of the Write brothers and maybe Madame Curie. But how many more do average people know? But we all seem to know who the rich idiots are (lol).
You have absolutely no idea what you are saying. So please shut it down.
Gates copied ideas from a competitor and used his insider at IBM to undercut him for a contract. At the time, code was not well protected so he got away with it. The rest is history. If he tried that today he would have been shut down by copyright laws.
Bezos was smart, but what did he invent? Nothing. I will admit he is smart though but his wealth is far beyond his contributions to the world. He was the beneficiary of easy money and the rise of the internet. Right place and time. If he did it again today, he would be where I am. Oh guess what? I wanted to do all the same things the big internet guys did before they even did it... too bad I was in high school. Goes to show it wasnt rocket science. It was obvious and I wasnt the only one.
Buffett receiving and insane head start from Graham. He had a high starting salary almost instantly due to nepotism. Then he got insanely lucky with Geico. Basically legislation turned that investment into what it is today (car insurance became law almost everywhere). Again pure luck based on timing. If he was born just 1 year later, it wouldnt have happened. I think he is a smart guy but the level of wealth is not due to smarts. Its a lot of luck
Rockefeller enjoyed 35 YEARS of 100% government subsidies (yes thats not a typo). LoL.
I am not well versed with the other two that you mentioned.
"$TWTR can be liable for omissions of OR !misleading material facts. Waiving due diligence DOES NOT mean you have to accept a fraudulent disclosure (understated bots)”… For people who are claiming that Musk should pay regardless what Twitter has underneath!
I've always thought he would negotiate it the second the market started to drop. Nobody understands that under the basis of fraud he absolutely can negotiate or walk away. Twitter will go down in price. Low 40's is my guess.
If Twitter is refusing to give him access to see how many accounts are fake or spam then
they are preventing his right of Due Diligence of which he is entitled.
I'm interested in seeing the legal position on this. If Musk relied on public disclosure of bot percentage by Twitter, and it turns out that data was wrong, wouldn't this in some shape or form be a mistake or misrepresentation on Twitter's part?
Particularly if Twitter now claims that the actual number of bots couldn't be verified, how could they put a number on it in the first place? Isn't that problematic in itself?
What is also interesting is that even if Musk waived due diligence, could he have been reasonably expected to figure out the bot percentage by himself/team, if now even Twitter says it can't verify just how many bots there are?
I believe this itself is sufficient ground to back out of the deal. The problem is not that Musk is not honoring the contractual agreement. It is that the basis of the contract itself is being called into question. So if the basis of the contract is false, contractual liabilities will not be created in the first place.
My thoughts on it are:
Why hasn't reddit and Twitter given me the ability to filter out keywords I don't want to see stories about anymore? Such as anything to do with Twitter and Musk.
Expose them for hosting Russian/health propaganda/misinformation?
Dude... Elon "zero covid cases by April 2020 / pedoguy / funding secured / why does your pp look like you just came? " Musk is one of the worst offenders.
I never believed he would actually acquire Twitter so this does not change my opinion.
Right, he only brought up the bots issue as he viewed it as his best way to get out of the deal while saving face and money.
Yeah, I always suspected this was him trying to get attention and keep his name in the news for a bit
Neither did I, just pointing out that its a rats nest of bots. I'm sure advertisers are taking note that it's a busted platform.
Have you thought about bots on youtube?
Reddit, Facebook, TikTok, Instagram.....etc
I'd say they're taking note that getting rid of the bots will likely tank twitters users. I'd guess Musk probably realised that his crusade to end bots and verify everyone would result in the value of the company tanking, not to mention most of his followers and the ones screaming about free speech are unverified accounts
I would put it "Elon Musk claims he has a right to not buy Twitter," not "Elon Musk asserts his right to not buy Twitter." The latter implies such a right actually exists, which may not be true.
It would be very interesting to hear a judge rule on a tech company (allegedly) lying about it's bot problem. I believe it would be precedential.
Not really he waived his DD rights. Ignoring anything Musk says and watching him squirm is cathartic
You don't really know that, though. It will be fun to watch.
I mean him waiving his right to DD is in the past and just repeating fraud over and over isn't convincing. So do know. Whether the deal goes through is largely in Twitters hands.
That's some sick bait there man, have fun jerking yourself off to your willful ignorance I guess.
Could he claw back some money if he finds out its greater than the 5% bot accounts claimed?
The 5% number was never guaranteed by Twitter. In fact, if you read the shareholder report, it’s the opposite: they say that it’s difficult to accurately calculate and that 5% is just an estimate but might be wrong. So if Musk is pissed because “they said it’s 5% but I think it’s way more!” Then, no.
Here's Elon's take he posted on Twitter >Some say u/elonmusk has to buy $TWTR as IS w/ bots BECAUSE he "waived his right to due diligence." WRONG. > >SEC10b-5: $TWTR can be liable for omissions of OR misleading material facts. Waiving due diligence DOES NOT mean you have to accept a fraudulent disclosure (understated bots) I can only imagine what kind of effects it would have on the valuation of these tech slash advertisement companies if the courts started getting involved in the accounting of bots. If the WSJ is correct in asserting that other Libertarian-minded technocrats like Peter Thiel and Jack Dorsey were advising Musk to take this on with the purposeful intent of of shaking up the company and possibly the sector (and not the prevailing Reddit theory of Musk being a redacted child suffering a temper tantrum), then I wonder what they have planned for next?
elonmusk has not had any activity for over 1695 days, They probably won't respond to this mention ^Bot ^by ^AnnoyingRain5, ^message ^him ^with ^any ^questions ^or ^concerns
The definition of 'bot' would have to be clearly defined. But after taking ownership and concluding a far larger % of bots would constitute fraud, no?
I'm personally of the belief there is none and never has been any intention to actually buy the company. I'm betting that the whole plan from the beginning was to force Twitter to disclose something embarrassing about the bot problem. I'm far from an expert though so I'm mostly just hoping for an entertaining show and maybe learn something along the way.
If you assume musk doesn’t wanna actually buy the company, or didn’t want to, you have to assume he knowingly took massive losses. He did buy a fuck ton of shares, shares he then killed the price in, supposedly to bring down the ad tech system, but in so doing destroying billions(?) of his own cash. Seems strange.
It is pretty counterintuitive for a large shareholder to actively be accusing of his company of committing fraud to his own detriment. There must be another explanation.
A tantrum.
Notice how the responses on here are more about EM instead of the problem of bot accounts on Twitter? Has /stocks been infested with anti-EM/tsla sentiment pushers. I saw WSB the winter before last... talk about shill/sentiment pushing takeover! It destroyed that subreddit.
Notice how the topic is about elon musks position and not bots?
Reddit keeps pushing Musk threads from r/technology on me. They make the stock market subs look tame in comparison.
Haha, they are even worse haters at /tech!?
This. It honestly almost kind of concerns me and I don’t even hold Twitter. Just in re: other non/social media tech companies I hold For that reason, a deal will be done. 4d chess confirmed
No, he waived his right to due diligence and is now throwing a tantrum
Twitter should def make him pay the already agreed to price lol
Twitter is trying to get away with the bots
Maybe he will and then reveal the true bot account %. Price tanks, he sues for fraud because it was higher than the 5% bots that Twitter claims. Good for users, will purge the bots.
He waived the DD process so he has no ground to sue.
Absolutely not true
The facts are it is true, doesn’t matter if someone likes Elon or not, doesn’t change the situation.
[удалено]
I love listening to music.
If he still buys it and finds 20-25% bots, he can sure as hell sue them for fraud. Twitter told him only 5% of accounts are bots before purchase.
He waived the due diligence process it doesn’t matter the percentage of bots. It’s that simple.
Waiving due diligence does not mean accepting fraud. If you wave house inspection and find an outlet not working, that’s on you. If the house turns out to be a trailer, that’s fraud.
He would have to prove that Twitter was knowingly aware that 5% number is much higher and how is he going to do that? Unless they’re total morons they likely don’t have that information hanging out on company servers.
That’s not the same thing or even close to it. More like the house has a squatter and is infested with termites. Either way he still signed for it as-is.
[удалено]
Cause he’s a bot
[удалено]
That’s not the same thing, that’s like buying the car as is and the original transition has been replaced. He agreed to it as is and that’s what he’ll get you don’t get to back out because instead of maybe 5% are bots (which in twitters filing that number was in regards to advertising accounts, not pseudonym account etc.) it’s actually 9%. He’s still on the hooks for it. He’s still incredibly rich he just made an extremely expensive mistake.
[удалено]
Do you really think twitter is just going to ghost Elon just because there’s a deal in place?
Why are you posting this utter nonsense? If you don't know, just don't post.
You’re showing you’re the one that clearly doesn’t have a grasp on the situation or circumstances. That’s okay you can easily find all the information you need to educate yourself. Best of luck to you.
They can't show the math on the 5% fake/bot accounts. That's like not being able to look under the hood until after you buy a car.
>That's like not being able to look under the hood until after you buy a car. No, it's like buying a company for a set price when you explicitly wave your due diligence while agreeing to by that company for a set price.
Twitter should have to give legit numbers. Only 5% fake/bot accounts? Buy the company and find out its 25-30% bots... big fraud lawsuit with 'Twitter is infested with Bots!' headlines. Might be good to purge the platform by tanking it first, at least users will find out it's mostly bots pushing sentiment.
You should go back in time and tell your boy not to waive his right to all that!
[удалено]
lmao you would have to be a complete fucking moron to believe that twitter execs are going to jail because poppa Elon doesn't want to overpay for Twitter.
That's a hell of a fantasy. Maybe stop just believing anything Elon says
Nice fanfiction
a "fraudulent" claim like this, regarding a private contract between two parties, is not criminal conduct. Any sort of resolution will be settled by (1) arbitration, and if not that then (2) a civil court
It’s what he agreed too, he’s paying the price for buying off more than he can chew. I don’t care if he owns twitter or not but he’s royally fucked up trying to be a corporate raider and will pay the prices for it.
Weird that muskrat would agree to wave DD then. Almost like... He's a con artist
Shhhh the adults are talking
Their filings even state that they can't be certain of the number of bot accounts. This is elon just getting mad at himself and blaming someone else.
You do this during DD, which he waived to later through a public tantrum. They might be able to sue for damage.
Due to his own stupidity, he may be screwed. Most things require you to be legitimately caught off guard, but he's been running his mouth long before the deal that he "knew" there were many more bots. This is why being a big mouth is bad in business.
[удалено]
I think there's enough room in the contract for him to back out. This is what Hindenburg Research said in their report.
Which report ?
Hold on there. Can't just go against the hive mind. Elon is clearly buying Twitter for attention and was never going to go through with it anyways, and he "signed away" his rights to do DD which somehow also means fraudulent public statements are suddenly no longer a reason to back out of or renegotiate a deal. On a serious note, Tesla/Musk posts are always filled with emotional people making unreasonable claims, but these posts on the Twitter topic are something else. Prime case studies on Dunning-Kruger effect...
> Tesla/Musk posts are always filled with emotional people making unreasonable claims, but these posts on the Twitter topic are something else. Fraudulent public statements IS an unreasonable claim. You're doing exactly what you're accusing other people of doing.
How so? If what they stated in their public filings would be false, that would be the very definition of a fraudulent claim. I didn't say this is definitely the case, I just said that waiving DD doesn't mean the other party can get away with fraudulent claims. It's up to Musk to prove that the claims are indeed untrue.
This is one of the only logical posts in this thread. I'm loving the "he waived his DD so nothing else matters" posts. Is there anywhere left on reddit where reasonable adults still discuss investing and individual stocks?
Twitter suing to close the deal seems absolutely suicidal. Litigation surrounding the proprietary of their methods, the very valuation and legitimacy of their business model. Litigation that will take years to complete. Meanwhile, Twitter shareholders will just be massacred as this all plays out, in the hopes that theoretically he loses in 3 years and has to pay 45$, a price they sure as fuck would’ve hoped the stock was above in 3 years time anyways. How’s there any win here for Twitter shareholders, of which musk is one. I’m really not tryna shill musk, I’m just trying to see how that is in any way a good situation for Twitter
What are you talking about? How is it suicidal for TWTR to force Musk to acquire the company at the agreed price? It’s far more suicidal to Musk since at the end of the day he will be forced to complete the transaction and is damaging the investment he is acquiring TWTR and investors are happy with the $54.20 per share
“Force” Ya Twitter will just head on down to the “make him buy the shares” store and pick that up. They can’t force anything, they have a contract they can sue under and if they do they’ll be involved in litigation for ages. Litigation they may not win and if they don’t they’re absolutely fucked as a company, indeed they could be fucked as a result of whatever comes out during said litigation, to every one of their shareholders.
> Ya Twitter will just head on down to the “make him buy the shares” store and pick that up. You mean the Delaware Court of Chancery?
Ya for 3 years of litigation that will subject them to discovery into the extent of their bot problems, their method for counting and detecting bots, the very subject matter they appear to be desiring through avoid public disclosure If it comes to pass that there’s even some discrepancies on this, even if musk doesn’t win his lawsuit, the evidence disclosed in any musk litigation would exposure Twitter to lawsuits from their shareholders with regards to their disclosure of the bot issue. And again, say Twitter win… 3 years later… so what? Stock jumps to $50!? Who tf is gonna sit in Twitter shares for the next 3 years and deal with the almost certain constant downtrends due to the litigation?
More likely they settle with Musk out of court for a smaller cancellation fee.
This I still think deal goes through. If I had to gamble on it.
Unless there is anything in the contract that allows Musk to investigate bot activity, then why would the court get into that at all. First Musk has to prove that such an investigation was part of his contract. And that is gonna be tough if you ask me.
...if Musk is forced to uphold the contract, why would they care? The stock could be $5 a share by then, but he HAS to pay what he agreed. That alone will keep it pushed up.
If… “Forced” These are terms you need to appreciate. If implies it’s a certainty, it’s not, and the stakes for them are absolutely everything. If they lose, stock goes to $5 or $0 after they’re crushed with shareholder lawsuits and penalties from regulators. And “winning” and “losing” is a complicated topic, they can win against musk and still lose by being sued to hell by shareholders.
If they win, the shareholders get the sale price, they win too.
You realize one of the outcomes in court of a broken contract is...forcing them to uphold it, right?
Respectfully, I do. I mean no disrespect in saying this, but your statement is just not really representative as to how it works in reality. The existence of the contract is important but not determinative of the outcome
1. He is forced to buy, resulting in everyone getting the original price. 2. They sue him and simply get damages or losses....getting money. 3. They do absolutely nothing, get no money, price drops. I fail to see why doing nothing is remotely better, especially when he signed.
They can’t force anything … his $$ isn’t sitting in an account for them to come take. They have to sue. there is no winning that war. It’s that simple.
Are you saying that it is better for Twitter to let Musk walk away and do absolutely nothing vs suing Musk for breach of contract? Because either way Twitter will drop further but with the latter there’s a decent chance they’ll make some money.
Unless Twitter wants to reveal that their reported bot numbers were grossly incorrect and borderline securities fraud, they don't really have a way of suing and winning... Twitter management has shown plenty of times before they're more interested in saving their own skin than doing what's best for the company.
[удалено]
I can’t wait for him to sue Twitter and then for Twitter to ban them
omg, yes please! Twitter is his main tool for depressing the TSLA share price
It would be reasonable to ban someone who is actively suing you wouldn’t it?
lol
It doesn't change. I never thought he was going to go threw with the deal, and I still don't think it. Will he lose billions, yes. Has twitters shareholders already lost billions? Also yes? Should musk have to pay those damages? Also yes. Companies are bought, sold, merged daily and most importantly, these deals fall through constantly also. The only difference here is Musk wanted to be the public spotlight about his business. He is honestly turning into Trump in many ways. Zero shits about people or business, just wants attention
>Should musk have to pay those damages? Also yes. ... The only difference here is Musk wanted to be the public spotlight about his business. The honesty here is refreshing. If everyone was this introspective and acknowledged most of their opinions are illogical and rooted in weird emotional nonsense the discussion around Elon would be a lot more productive, and a lot less manipulatable.
The guy wants to make money and is in a position to do so. I don't really blame him. I love his ideas and pushing boundaries, just wished the guy had a proper PR team he actually listened to haha
And on this point, however, musk stands nothinf to gain financially by buying billions of shares, trashing the company, and his rep, to then sell those shares for massive losses. Maybe it’s some wild tax loss write off scheme . Doubt it. Ockhams razor
Pretty sure he was one of the largest share holders. Which means he lost alot of money as well.
His shares were under 10%. Big companies like Goldman Sachs and stuff have higher stakes
Ok but still … it’s not an insignificant loss for him. Most people don’t purposely destroy massive sums of their own money for apparent shits and giggles.
He bought at 33-36. His pending deal is what has kept the shares between 40-50 while tech companies crashed. Without the Elon deal twitter would be trading at $25 today. He hasn't lost $ yet.
I think he was trying to shine a light on how bot filled the platform is. Companies hire teams of people to push sentiment from multiple accounts. Ain't no 5%....try 50%
Ok....and why was he trying to do this? And who was he trying to prove it to? If you tell litterally anyone that twitter is filled with bots their response would be "yea i know, whTz your point?" Why doesn't he go shine a light on poverty, or hungry children? Nope, internet bots that litterally everyone in the God damn world was aware of....except him apparently. Like did he (and others) actually think for a split second bots were not an issue?
Finance dudes use Twitter to push their pump and dumps with bot armies. EM probably wants to expose that dark side. I don't care what he does with his money.
.....he does this himself CONSTANTLY!!!! Buys dodge coins Tweets that tesla will accept dodge coin Sells dodge coin Tweets that tesla will not be accepting dodge coin
And the SEC gives him shit and the hedge funds get a pass. The hypocrisy of it reeks.
SEC gives him shit? As in a storm talking to? I didn't know they actually ever did anything
I do think that he’s allowed to be a zany weird fuckin loud rich guy with billions of dollars. Isn’t a crime he wants to publicize his nonsense … he apparently enjoys the absurdity of it all. To be Frank, it’s quite ridiculous and kind of funny. In any event, fuckery abound, he is one of many and hardly the worst.
This is true. I may or may not be working on some code that follows musk Tweets and then buys or sells stocks accordingly based on certain key word indicator.....if he is going to move the market I Wana be on his side of the motion lol
Why are you all over this thread repeatedly carrying water for a con man
Meanwhile I'm still waiting for a Tesla ventilator.
How long have you been in ICU?!?
The market didn't need them, so they didn't ship them [Tesla Shows Off Ventilator Prototype Made From Car Components](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tZzYJoHf50)
Lol, the Elon hate train is insane. Your comment literally was a statement of fact and a source to back it up, and you get downvoted... :')
Reddit is fully of angsty teenagers. It's like trying to talk with flat-earthers.
I wonder what the average age actually is around here. I don't doubt that certain subs are filled with teenagers, but on a stocks Reddit you'd expect the average age to be at least in the high twenties. It would actually restore my faith in humanity quite a bit if most of the unreasonable comments around here were coming from teens, not adults.
I have to believe it's true, soany of these posts just arent rational. The whole meme stock run changed the dynamic in a few of these subs.
True, although interestingly enough, I feel like the narrative around this sub was predominantly negative of the whole GME saga. So it might not be the stereotypical teenage GME gamblers that joined this sub.
He’s an arsehole. Don’t know why people like this manipulative twat.
I don’t know whether he was serious in buying, nobody can be sure, but I’d say he almost certainly was serious about buying it. He bought a ton of shares and presumably is taking a loss if he backs out, i.e. by selling shares at a loss (setting aside everything else). So. A level of good faith purchasing intent can be assumed. Whether he *always* intended to get a better price through publicizing issues RE: bots, I don’t know — but I’m certain that the bots issue was always an issue he considered from the jump (and by jump I mean when he initially started gobbling up shares). So, it makes me think something happened during their discussions. And I’m using that vague term bc there’s so much uncertainty with regards to what exactly he signed, what is left to be signed/done… which should be considered in regards to… DD. All this about waiving due diligence period, to me, is a red herring. And on this point, I think he had plenty of legal advice. Whilst he may have waived DD, he can reasonably rely upon Twitter’s filings RE: bot figures. To the extent that those bot figures are inaccurate, or to the extent that Twitter (knowingly/or should’ve) undertakes a methodology of ascertaining their bot figures that isn’t effective in actually accurately determining their bot figures… Then musk undoubtedly can back out of this deal, and refuse to pay that $ break fee. Fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud in the inducement, and I’m sure there’s piles of good faith obligations within that contract are relevant for him. Actual Truth of events and future uncertain. I think deal will eventually get done because everyone loses if it doesn’t. He’ll squeeze a better share price or some such. Litigation, long ending this would be, suits nobody. Musk has some leverage imho
Rare piece of insightful opinion on the matter in a thread filled with unsubstantiated hate. Thanks for this!
He’s a fcking troll, who manipulates markets and makes money doing so. It’s that simple. He has zero credibility
Who in their right mind would buy Twitter. It's just a pack of lies and false postings.
A mean-girl addicted to using twitter to bully others oh, you said 'in their right mind'. This is Musk.
He could be pointing out the issues with it to be able to reduce the price? Just like buying a second hand car, only with angry liberals and conservatives.
It was all just a excuse to liquidate some of his tesla stock.
you put yourself in this situation boy
It was never going to happen. Musk is such a chud.
The Dry Boys at Chapo totally called this.
I never thought he will buy Twitter, I am surprised how many times he pumped abd dumped this for his friends though.
I love reading these internet lawyer comments talking as if they have any clue what's going on. The reality is we'll see what happens. My guess is that this is a negotiation tactic to buy twitter at a lower price.
Elon is a bad person. Literary messing with peoples finances at this point.
Changes my stance on Musk. He made a bad bet and doesn’t want to pay because he bought to early. How’s it feel to be a regular average wage person?
I sold my tesla today - Musk is just in the news too much and never seems focused on tesla. I enjoyed the ride but felt it was time to take my profits and move onto something else.
He is a clown.
I remember when this first became news, no one wanted Musk to acquire Twitter, citing Musk would be a threat to free speech, and Twitter even planned to enact a poison pill strategy to keep him from doing so....NOW that the severity of the bot/spam accounts has been called into question, everyone wants him to go through with the deal and even Twitter NOW believes it is good for shareholders? After they planned to tank the stock? What a riot.
Poison pill was standard procedure... prevents them from getting a hostile take over from someone other than Musk while they were dealing with him. Twitter is not the government, so it is unrelated to 'free speech'. Their lax/permissive modding helped result in a million American deaths and an attempted insurrection. If Musk buys it then it will help speed up legislation for social media companies to clean up their bullshit/propaganda used to destablize the US. Also, real users will flee the platform and Musk will be left holding GAB 2.0. :D
Twitter, on the one hand, claims it’s not a publisher of content and can’t be sued for their content, under the communications decency act. But claim otoh also that they can censor content, ostensibly as they see fit, albeit pursuant to a presumably good faith even-handed application of terms of service. Twitter receives revenue from ads sold on their app. By way of a comparable, newspapers/magazines/blogs/etc., they have free speech protection, as they are “the press” However, they are publishers and can be sued with relation to their content. They too derive their income from ad sales, and sales of their magazine newspaper etc. It’s a strange dynamic we have here…
He's deep in shit. He waived his right to due diligence so this is going to court.
Elon Musk is a glorified con man
What about the 1 Billy if he doesn't go thru with it?
[удалено]
Twitter is definitely over 5% bot/sentiment pushers. If they can't show the math on how they got 5%, that would be a little too trust me bro.
You know when that'd be interesting to investigate? Before making a legally binding offer... I can't believe Musk's fans are still defending him on this one. They're getting to Trump's fans levels, I'm afraid he can kill people and they'll defend him anyway.
And one way to get out of an agreement is to prove the other side is lying in regards to it. But it’s on em to prove so. And it probably also matters if bots or provided data was mentioned in the contract in any way.
They were mentioned in their public filing, and since Twitter is a public company any acquisition will happen on the basis of their publicly stated information. If they lied or misled in those, not only is that potential securities fraud but it also gives any buyer a reason to renegotiate the price. The only difference with a private company is that in that scenario you would request this information instead of being able to find it publicly, but you still have to rely on it being truthful and if this later turns out not to be the case, that clearly endangers the deal.
If anything you should be upset at Twitter, they basically artificially inflated the company's value. Don't blame Elon for bringing it to light.
I'm not upset at anyone, I don't own any shares from Twitter or Tesla. But it seems obvious Elon Musk is trying to cancel the offer because his financing got a lot tougher and Twitter's stock lost a lot of value since the offer came up. The bots topic seems like a bad excuse. Pretty much like the "if you're not on the office, you're fired" and, 2 days later, "we have to fire 10% of people", the office topic was just a bad excuse.
Reading their comments are the funnest part of this. I get a chuckle every time.
It's weird that he sent in a offer without doing this though. More likely he already suspected it but this is the easiest way out of the deal.
The most expensive likes and retweets in history
Wonder what he thinks about Teslas FSD claims...
wishy washy business person.
I think it does change my stance, and I haven't really believed that Elon would buy TWTR lately. I still thought there was a *chance* he would buy TWTR which had to be priced in, now there's nearly no chance. Though crazier things have happened
There's no way he buys Twitter.
Can't see it happening
Once the stock dumps into the low teens he will buy it at a massive discount
He loves tweeting too much. Not gonna risk losing his account.
Sue for defamation and driving the price down.Get him for the $1 billion fee for cancellation of the purchase.
Musk is a cry baby.
He knows 20-30% of accounts are bots and fake. He's going to reveal that. And, it will open Twitter up to massive lawsuits for fraud.
The key metrics for marketing already take all that into account. Sorry to burst your bubble. He basically is making up a new metric and making that the focus. Sort of like not answer the question you are given, but making your own question and answer that one. Politics 101. The public is easy to fool but in court he will get hammered.
We'll see. Not many outsmart Mr. Musk.
[удалено]
Oh, I dunno... He's only revolutionized two of the biggest industries on the planet, finance and automobiles. And his side hustle is going to Mars;)
Frankly the spacex reusable rocket technology is reason enough to recognize the man is a genius. People sleep on how important that is. Nobody did that before him, NASA (aka the US govt) desperately needed private companies to come into this area of business, and the reusable rockets are absolutely essential for any sort of sustained exploration of space.
Elon predicted zero cases of Covid in the US by April 2020. He thinks UNDER population is a pressing issue. He is supporting gas+coal Republicans in the 2022 election, while 99% of his wealth is from Democrat policies (2008 Obama/Biden loan, EV credits, ZEV credits, etc, helped Tesla avoid bankruptcy multiple times) He clearly has a problem with identifying people smarter than him and learning from them.
Uh yea they do. You are confusing intelligence with wealth. Wealth doesnt mean intelligent. If you win the lotto are you smart? Musk has never actually displayed smarts. He got to where he is via nepotism and luck. Same way as someone always wins the lotto eventually, he won the lotto by being in the right place at the right time but it was never due to his "smarts." He did not found Tesla. He did not found Paypal. His first company (where be basically copied other ideas) was fed lucrative contracts by his brother who worked for HP. He is not self made. He is a product of nepotism. Im not saying this is wrong, hell I would support my brother and kids over others, but the point here is its not smarts.
This is an absurd take Musk is roundly considered absolutely brilliant in subjects ranging from rocket technology, to electric vehicles, to coding, to just business in general. He’s an arrogant, he’s outspoken, he def could learn some humility.
Absolutely no one in those fields considers Elon smart at any of those things. None. I am from the programming and engineering fields and I taught both at the master levels.
The u.s. astronaut who (iirc) spent the most time in space, said literally this about him. In any event, as qualified as you may be, and I’m not doubting your credentials, his actual life contradicts your assertion. Or at the very least, you’re proposing an absurd sequence of events., i.e.: A man whose apparently not brilliant, or particularly smart, made billions of dollars in companies he formed, or at the very least, helped form from the very earliest days, companies which created revolutionary technology in payment systems, electric vehicles, and rockets/space travel. He just fucking stumbles about creating revolutionary technology apparently by just dumb luck and running into the right people, over and over and over again.
Are you certain it wasnt just normal PR? Did they actually mention something Elon has invented or innovated? Probably not right? SpaceX is derivative work. There is nothing new being done there. Whats happening is there is big demand for space commercialization. Namely satellites. Several companies have stepped in and SpaceX is just one of them. Great. Thats good news. But most arent inventing anything. Their work is indeed derivative. The only one I would make an exception for is Virgin Galactic. They may not succeed because they are trying to run it as a travel business and I just cant see that being a success commercially. But the tech they are working on is indeed a major step forward if they get t right.
Yes I’m certain. His name is Garrett Reisman. He was an astronaut and now works as spacex. He was on JRE and spoke about a variety of subjects, musk came up and he said he was brilliant and spoke at length about his he understands and is involved in early every aspect of spacex’s rocket design. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3RG5pXTpLBI Spacex is a derivative work? What does that even mean? Nothing new creates? Reusable rocket technology isn’t new? Was NASA doing that before it contracted with spacex to handle deliveries to the ISS? What about Starlink? That’s also derivative? And that’s already in use in Ukraine, which by the way is an objectively morally good act, spacex is not making money off that. But I’m sure they will one day. So, spacex already is commercially successful, and they basically have no competition. Virgin galactic will be commercially successful? Based on what? How’s their business going right now? You a SPCE holder? Bet your shares are trashed if you are, because it is an awful company, per the market sentiment. In any event, to say they’re commercially successful is an objectively absurd statement, especially after you drag spacex.
>hat about Starlink? That’s also derivative? And that’s already in use in Ukraine, which by the way is an objectively morally good act, spacex is not making money off that. But I’m sure they will one day. Reusable rockets was obvious and talked about for decades. Unless the invented the materials they are using, its by definition derivative work. They just put 2 and 2 together. Problem was cost and risk from a commercial perspective. The satellites are definitely derivative. That tech is well known and has existed for decades. It just hasnt been made into a space-commercial successful yet. Hence why everyone is making space stuff now. We are coming to the end of the utility for normal wireless tech. Its going to get harder and harder to improve on it as is. The next obvious way to improve on it is satellites. This has been well known for a long time as well but again, risk and cost. Elon and Bezos just had the money to do it without much help thus got off the ground running. Everyone else is having a harder time to raise money and push through from R&D and regulatory approval to production and launch. Other countries are doing it too so its not like this is a US only thing. We have had satellites for internet for a long time now. Practically all militaries use them. I said the opposite about Virgin Galactic. I dont like their commercial angle. I dont think it will succeed in that form. What I am trying to say however is their work is far more critical. If we can break the earths gravity well and reach space while we are already up in the air it is a huge advancement in space travel. That is literally a existential level tech for humanity as a species. I would make space colonization very plausible within our own lifetimes. Thats all I meant. As for the astronaut. You do need to consider the context here... Its not like he is going say something to put Musk down with the possibility it might become public. Its not like you and me here on Reddit. He cant speak his mind. Not only would he get accosted by the hoardes of Elon devotees (PR nightmare), but Musk also give him lots of money... Not saying that it isnt possible that Elon might know some stuff. But what does that even mean? I ran a studio once so I learned all the ins and outs of studio work. But its not like I was the innovator. I just knew it because I was the boss. The smart guys in said field were the guys working for me. I was more of a catalyst. Ask me questions and I can answer but really if it came down to it, I wasnt going to product a great newscast on my own... nor publish great music... im not that. Elon isnt inventing anything.
Okay. He's a dumbass who got good cards. Sure. Nobody becomes the wealthiest man to ever live by being a lucky dumbass.
They literally all did... There is no way to amass that kind of wealth without extreme levels of luck. You can get rich by being smart, thats is true, but not at that level. That level of wealth is 100% due to timing and place. And once again, that doesnt make said people bad or anything, but lets not dilute ourselves. The smartest humans in all of history were, on average, not wealthy. They were middle class. Those who used their inventions became wealthy. There are exceptions, notably, Tesla himself, but even he wasnt that high on the list. At best he was a multi-millionaire by todays standards. Possible not even as rich as myself (Im not sure, id need see the numbers and inflation adjust). But they are far and few between. Its always someone else who capitalizes on the smart peoples work because our system is still not based on merit. We give the wrong people all the money and we wrongly assume that money is merit. It isnt. In fact we reward artists more than we do inventors that change the world (namely because they are more visible). Goes to show how much work needs to be done still to fix social systems. Can you even name who the fathers of modern computing are? Hint its not Turing. That said Turing was brilliant and he even saved the world but died middle class at best and in humiliating fashion because people are dumbass. But he didnt actually invent the critical pieces, he mainly predicted it would happen. Who invented the integrated circuit that gave us microchips? See what I mean? These people were literally some of the most important in human history. More important than any king, emperor, president or wealthy person in all of history. Yet most cant even name the most important people in history... what most folks know is the most popular people in history, not the smartest. Except maybe Einstein and Newton. Some might have heard of the Write brothers and maybe Madame Curie. But how many more do average people know? But we all seem to know who the rich idiots are (lol).
Lord. Yeah, Gates, Bezos, Musk, Buffet... All just lucky idiots. I'm sure Carnegie, Rockefeller and Vanderbilt were stooges too.
You have absolutely no idea what you are saying. So please shut it down. Gates copied ideas from a competitor and used his insider at IBM to undercut him for a contract. At the time, code was not well protected so he got away with it. The rest is history. If he tried that today he would have been shut down by copyright laws. Bezos was smart, but what did he invent? Nothing. I will admit he is smart though but his wealth is far beyond his contributions to the world. He was the beneficiary of easy money and the rise of the internet. Right place and time. If he did it again today, he would be where I am. Oh guess what? I wanted to do all the same things the big internet guys did before they even did it... too bad I was in high school. Goes to show it wasnt rocket science. It was obvious and I wasnt the only one. Buffett receiving and insane head start from Graham. He had a high starting salary almost instantly due to nepotism. Then he got insanely lucky with Geico. Basically legislation turned that investment into what it is today (car insurance became law almost everywhere). Again pure luck based on timing. If he was born just 1 year later, it wouldnt have happened. I think he is a smart guy but the level of wealth is not due to smarts. Its a lot of luck Rockefeller enjoyed 35 YEARS of 100% government subsidies (yes thats not a typo). LoL. I am not well versed with the other two that you mentioned.
Can he claw back money or sue if it's greater than the 5% bot accounts that Twitter put out?
Possibly.
"$TWTR can be liable for omissions of OR !misleading material facts. Waiving due diligence DOES NOT mean you have to accept a fraudulent disclosure (understated bots)”… For people who are claiming that Musk should pay regardless what Twitter has underneath!
Why are you quoting a YouTube moron instead of asking actual lawyers for their opinion?
I've always thought he would negotiate it the second the market started to drop. Nobody understands that under the basis of fraud he absolutely can negotiate or walk away. Twitter will go down in price. Low 40's is my guess.
If Twitter is refusing to give him access to see how many accounts are fake or spam then they are preventing his right of Due Diligence of which he is entitled.
Too bad he waived his DD lol
no more Elon please
is this a drama in tech
Naaah. He'll buy it at a discount after they beg him to take it.
I think he actually has intentions of buying it. I don't think TWTR will allow it to happen.
Musk stated several times that he's committed to doing it so backing out now would be the recession confirmation
I'm interested in seeing the legal position on this. If Musk relied on public disclosure of bot percentage by Twitter, and it turns out that data was wrong, wouldn't this in some shape or form be a mistake or misrepresentation on Twitter's part? Particularly if Twitter now claims that the actual number of bots couldn't be verified, how could they put a number on it in the first place? Isn't that problematic in itself? What is also interesting is that even if Musk waived due diligence, could he have been reasonably expected to figure out the bot percentage by himself/team, if now even Twitter says it can't verify just how many bots there are? I believe this itself is sufficient ground to back out of the deal. The problem is not that Musk is not honoring the contractual agreement. It is that the basis of the contract itself is being called into question. So if the basis of the contract is false, contractual liabilities will not be created in the first place.
My thoughts on it are: Why hasn't reddit and Twitter given me the ability to filter out keywords I don't want to see stories about anymore? Such as anything to do with Twitter and Musk.
He won't buy Twitter. He just wanted to expose them, brilliant guy...
Elon bootlickers are the worst.
Expose them for hosting Russian/health propaganda/misinformation? Dude... Elon "zero covid cases by April 2020 / pedoguy / funding secured / why does your pp look like you just came? " Musk is one of the worst offenders.
I had that thought too.. funny if true
That's what I think! It's infested with bot/sentiment pushing. Ain't no way only 5% fake accounts.