zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
So this is how Twitter goes out: not with a bang but with a seemingly endless stream of stories about the little ways Elon is ruining the service each day.

Just staggers me that Elon could have just… not done any of this. And yet here we are. He’s had to sell billions in Tesla stock to finance this ongoing mayhem, this is surely going to be up there as one of the greatest examples of hubris in modern business.

>>afavou+n6
Even if he felt he could do all this as far as bans and etc goes.

Why do it by saddling the company with so much debt that it seems financially so difficult to survive?

Just from a business standpoint it doesn’t make sense.

>>duxup+M6
As best I’ve been able to discern it, Musk said he was going to buy Twitter for a way overvalued sum ($44bn) as a troll? But ended up getting in so deep that he found himself with a legal obligation to buy the thing for an absurd price.

It’s the explanation that makes the most sense to me: obscenely rich man is very used to doing whatever the hell he wants with no repercussions, particularly when shitposting on Twitter (see: SEC) and there was no-one around to tell him to stop.

>>afavou+H7
What kinds of fines would he have been facing for pulling the ejection lever? How much has he lost on this deal by taking it?

>>hinkle+Li
he would have been sued by twitter for the full price, and would have had to pay.

>>johnny+9k
So what you're saying is that he's been treating his lawyers the same way he's now treating Twitter.

I doubt very much anyone let him walk into a trap that bad. He had to have been kicking and screaming the entire way.