undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgeorgia_peach3y ago0 comments

2% of a key revenue figure for a company with a $28B market cap is one hell of a correction. I don't think Levine actually believes Twitter has a snowball's chance in hell of getting specific performance. Can you point to a section in this opinion piece where he states no financial interest in this drama? I think that is conspicuous by its absence.

0 comments

mlyle3y ago

It's likely this was disclosed to Musk before he entered into the definitive agreement, so it is mooted. (If this was a reason, you'd think they'd have argued it in the termination letter).

And even if so, I don't think 2% of a user count is a "material adverse change" by the merger agreement.

georgia_peachOP3y ago

Those are all sound legalisms, which would be big wins for Twitter if they were serious about taking this into a courtroom, but they aren't. That would air out several closets they'd rather keep shut.

mlyle3y ago

There's a $19B difference between Twitter's market cap and the agreed deal proceeds.

Twitter has to pursue receiving that-- either in consummation of the deal or adequate recompense. If their board doesn't, they'll be sued into oblivion by their own shareholders. It's do-or-die.

That doesn't mean, though, if they were offered a couple billion less for Twitter and were sure that Musk would then close... that they might not blink, rather than wobble $19B+ on a court case.

The problem is, a $2B discount on Twitter doesn't improve Musk's financial condition much or make the deal materially less stupid for him.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsgeorgia_peach3y ago0 comments

0 comments

mlyle3y ago

It's likely this was disclosed to Musk before he entered into the definitive agreement, so it is mooted. (If this was a reason, you'd think they'd have argued it in the termination letter).

And even if so, I don't think 2% of a user count is a "material adverse change" by the merger agreement.

georgia_peachOP3y ago

mlyle3y ago

There's a $19B difference between Twitter's market cap and the agreed deal proceeds.

Twitter has to pursue receiving that-- either in consummation of the deal or adequate recompense. If their board doesn't, they'll be sued into oblivion by their own shareholders. It's do-or-die.

That doesn't mean, though, if they were offered a couple billion less for Twitter and were sure that Musk would then close... that they might not blink, rather than wobble $19B+ on a court case.

The problem is, a $2B discount on Twitter doesn't improve Musk's financial condition much or make the deal materially less stupid for him.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse