May 26, 20223 yr 5 hours ago, vikas83 said: I've posted the language a few times. It's from the 10-K. It says that TWTR estimated the bots at 5%, but then says the estimate is highly subjective and could be much higher. So...Musk has nothing. One more time: Quote For example, there are a number of false or spam accounts in existence on our platform. We have performed an internal review of a sample of accounts and estimate that the average of false or spam accounts during the fourth quarter of 2021 represented fewer than 5% of our mDAU during the quarter. The false or spam accounts for a period represents the average of false or spam accounts in the samples during each monthly analysis period during the quarter. In making this determination, we applied significant judgment, so our estimation of false or spam accounts may not accurately represent the actual number of such accounts, and the actual number of false or spam accounts could be higher than we have estimated. You added the words "highly subjective" and "much higher" when referring to the Twitter estimate of bots. The language you then quote said the number of false of spam accounts "could be higher than we have estimated." Big difference. But who's kidding who - all part of the dance to see if Musk can squeeze out a better price in a down market.
May 27, 20223 yr 19 hours ago, Mike31mt said: Nice wordsmithing there, what a disingenuous clown you are. From 'when Trump lost"....you mean when you and your politicians completely destroyed our economy to "flatten the curve" (for years on end)? What kind of **** defends the Biden economy?? Youre a moron Its a fact that the markets have historically done better under democratic presidents. feel free to look it up. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/07/23/historical-stock-market-returns-under-every-us-president/?sh=1211f20afaaf
June 6, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, pisceschica said: I haven’t been following this closely but didn’t he waive a due diligence clause? So I will try and keep this short and simple. He did waive the diligence clause, so his prior claims about the 5% are worthless. So he's changed now to saying TWTR is violating the agreement by refusing to provide information he is "reasonably" requesting. They have a covenant to respond to his reasonable information requests, particularly related to his efforts to obtain financing. So he isn't saying that he was misled (anymore)...now he's saying they won't provide the info he needs to arrange financing. If it goes to court, the questions will be (i) are his requests reasonable and (ii) did Twitter provide adequate answers? His prior statements about the 5% really call into question his new claims here.
June 6, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, Paul852 said: Something tells me Elon didn't expect Twitter to accept that offer. Wasn't it a lowball offer? I seem to recall someone saying twitter was worth like 60-70 a few months before the offer
June 6, 20223 yr 17 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: Wasn't it a lowball offer? I seem to recall someone saying twitter was worth like 60-70 a few months before the offer Yep. Well, we all thought it was a lowball offer but apparently Twitter knew better. Maybe Elon isn't always the smartest guy in the room after all
June 6, 20223 yr soooo...when do all the Trumpbots cancel their newly reopened twitter accounts? LOL! TOO MUCH!!!
June 6, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, vikas83 said: So I will try and keep this short and simple. He did waive the diligence clause, so his prior claims about the 5% are worthless. So he's changed now to saying TWTR is violating the agreement by refusing to provide information he is "reasonably" requesting. They have a covenant to respond to his reasonable information requests, particularly related to his efforts to obtain financing. So he isn't saying that he was misled (anymore)...now he's saying they won't provide the info he needs to arrange financing. If it goes to court, the questions will be (i) are his requests reasonable and (ii) did Twitter provide adequate answers? His prior statements about the 5% really call into question his new claims here. Shouldn’t he have requested this information before the offer? If I remember correctly he said one of his goals was to get rid of bots. So if this was a core issue why ask now?
June 6, 20223 yr 11 minutes ago, pisceschica said: Shouldn’t he have requested this information before the offer? If I remember correctly he said one of his goals was to get rid of bots. So if this was a core issue why ask now? He said bots were a huge problem and now he's throwing a stink if they account for more than 5% of all users? That makes no sense.
June 6, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Paul852 said: He said bots were a huge problem and now he's throwing a stink if they account for more than 5% of all users? That makes no sense. So cleaning up 5% of bots is fine by him but 6% is too much?
June 6, 20223 yr 59 minutes ago, barho said: soooo...when do all the Trumpbots cancel their newly reopened twitter accounts? LOL! TOO MUCH!!!
June 7, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, pisceschica said: Shouldn’t he have requested this information before the offer? If I remember correctly he said one of his goals was to get rid of bots. So if this was a core issue why ask now? Yes, but he waived that. Continuing information covenants are typical, especially in order to facilitate financing. Between signing and closing, every merger agreement requires the target to supply information in response to reasonable requests.
June 7, 20223 yr 9 hours ago, vikas83 said: Yes, but he waived that. Continuing information covenants are typical, especially in order to facilitate financing. Between signing and closing, every merger agreement requires the target to supply information in response to reasonable requests. This back and forth over the bot percentage has to be about the monetization plan that Musk pitched his backers.
June 7, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, BBE said: This back and forth over the bot percentage has to be about the monetization plan that Musk pitched his backers. You're giving him too much credit. Musk is the dog who caught the car here. His bid went from looking cheap to stupid expensive thanks to the puke in social media stocks.
June 7, 20223 yr Just now, vikas83 said: You're giving him too much credit. Musk is the dog who caught the car here. His bid went from looking cheap to stupid expensive thanks to the puke in social media stocks. True. Just thinking that he must have some adults in the room of his backers.
June 7, 20223 yr He comes off like the wacky eccentric billionaire who thought he could buy something just because he wanted to but didn't put thought into it.
June 8, 20223 yr 15 hours ago, vikas83 said: You're giving him too much credit. Musk is the dog who caught the car here. His bid went from looking cheap to stupid expensive thanks to the puke in social media stocks. Simple as that.
June 8, 20223 yr I see that as Twitter calling Musk's bluff. I don't think they have any problem trying to produce more accurate data, Musk is just trying to renegotiate the deal on the fly.
June 8, 20223 yr Just now, JohnSnowsHair said: I see that as Twitter calling Musk's bluff. I don't think they have any problem trying to produce more accurate data, Musk is just trying to renegotiate the deal on the fly. It has nothing to do with the quality of the data or the 5% number. They've agreed to basically deluge him with data about all the accounts. Musk's lawyers know that his original claims on the 5% bots issue was a loser since (i) he waived diligence, (ii) the wording in the 10-K was heavily qualified and (iii) you can't claim its a material adverse change when you claimed to be buying TWTR because it had a ton of bots. So they went with the violation of the ongoing covenant to share info (in their view). So TWTR says OK, we'll give you EVERYTHING. Now try and argue this in court. Potential bonus -- Musk is so careless he may tweet about the info they provide, allowing TWTR to sue him for breach of the NDA. This isn't directed at you, but seeing people with no clue how any of this works tweet and talk about it is infuriating.
June 8, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: It has nothing to do with the quality of the data or the 5% number. They've agreed to basically deluge him with data about all the accounts. Musk's lawyers know that his original claims on the 5% bots issue was a loser since (i) he waived diligence, (ii) the wording in the 10-K was heavily qualified and (iii) you can't claim its a material adverse change when you claimed to be buying TWTR because it had a ton of bots. So they went with the violation of the ongoing covenant to share info (in their view). So TWTR says OK, we'll give you EVERYTHING. Now try and argue this in court. Potential bonus -- Musk is so careless he may tweet about the info they provide, allowing TWTR to sue him for breach of the NDA. This isn't directed at you, but seeing people with no clue how any of this works tweet and talk about it is infuriating. Much better way of saying it. Bottom line is that it seems to me that Musk (who I in general am a fan of, or at minimum have no ill will towards) is trying to weasel his way out of this deal on whatever technicality he can get retweets (ironically) on, but social media isn't a court of law. As you say, he waived due diligence. If he had concerns about the 5% number he had every opportunity to make a case for it - but now it's too late. Also, generally speaking if someone posts from Zerohedge I automatically assume they're an idiot. Am I alone it that?
June 8, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Much better way of saying it. Bottom line is that it seems to me that Musk (who I in general am a fan of, or at minimum have no ill will towards) is trying to weasel his way out of this deal on whatever technicality he can get retweets (ironically) on, but social media isn't a court of law. As you say, he waived due diligence. If he had concerns about the 5% number he had every opportunity to make a case for it - but now it's too late. Also, generally speaking if someone posts from Zerohedge I automatically assume they're an idiot. Am I alone it that? Zerohedge has some decent stuff, some bananas stuff. But it's gotten materially worse over the years.
June 8, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Zerohedge has some decent stuff, some bananas stuff. But it's gotten materially worse over the years. problem is their decent stuff doesn't get shared, only their batish insane stuff. so they chase the batish insane stories because .. they get clicks. people are stupid.
Create an account or sign in to comment