Musk Proposes to Buy Twitter for Original Price of $54.20 a Share

[Ponderer]

Nope. In case you haven't noticed I'm arguing that Elon bought the company based on solid consideration - his challenges post-merger aren't a mystery and commenting on those challenges is not knowing better - just commentary and discussion. You're trying to polarise this into a pro or anti-Elon position which its not.

Omfg. What a load of nonsense

You hypocrite.
According to you, Emjay's post is a load of nonsense, but yours is not.
Rules for thee, but not for me.
Your hypocrisy is astounding.

 

[Pegasus]

Like I said - enough already with your flexing.
We get it - you're a financial genius that knows better than Elon.

Incorrect again.

My claim is that I know better than Tweedledum and Tweedledummer.

 

[Emjay]

Some interesting points here.

 

[Ponderer]

Maybe in your argument you can mention that profits and dividends are taxed. So that money goes to communists.

So to avoid giving money to communists, the company retains those earnings to reinvest in the business so it grows and they get a bigger market share.

If a right wing shareholder wants profit they can sell the shares and pay hopefully only CGT.

You favour Communism/Socialism over Capitalism?

 

[Pegasus]

You hypocrite.
According to you, Emjay's post is a load of nonsense, but yours's is not.
Rules for thee, but not for me.
Your hypocrisy is astounding.

Sure so explain how his post is nonsense.

 

[ShaunSA]

Incorrect again.

My claim is that I know better than Tweedledum and Tweedledummer.

You know nothing Peggy

 

[Emjay]

@Pegasus

Just wondering when do you believe a company should start turning a profit instead of trying to avoid taxes (ahem, sorry, instead of building market share or reinvesting in the business)?

I am basically asking you when should an investor start expecting a return on his investment?

5 years? 10 years? 20 years?

 

[quovadis]

You hypocrite.
According to you, Emjay's post is a load of nonsense, but yours's is not.
Rules for thee, but not for me.
Your hypocrisy is astounding.

My reasoning is sound based on the financial statements. If you want to believe that Musk over-leveraged and arguably overpaid to merge with a company that was a disaster and on the brink of failure perhaps that says more about you than me.

 

[Emjay]

My reasoning is sound based on the financial statements. If you want to believe that Musk over-leveraged and arguably overpaid to merge with a company that was a disaster and on the brink of failure perhaps that says more about you than me.

Musk admitted he overpaid. In his own words...

*facepalm*

Elon Musk’s $44 billion Twitter purchase is ‘one of the most overpaid tech acquisitions in history,’ Wedbush’s Dan Ives says

“Musk buying Twitter remains a major head-scratcher,” Wedbush’s Dan Ives wrote on Thursday, adding that he believes the firm’s fair value is $19 billion less than what Musk paid.

fortune.com

Elon Musk admits he’s ‘obviously overpaying’ for Twitter but ‘still excited’ for $44B deal

The mogul’s comments came during a Tesla earnings call that was held as his attorneys hammer out a final settlement with Twitter.

nypost.com

Tesla CEO Elon Musk admitted on Wednesday that he is “obviously overpaying” for Twitter — but the billionaire said he’s nonetheless “excited” to own the social media site.

As for your question of over leveraging, we will not know that as we don't understand the underlying model that was built for the finance. Everything else is speculation imo. Unless someone has seen some info that gives more insight into the funding model?

 

[Ponderer]

My reasoning is sound based on the financial statements. If you want to believe that Musk over-leveraged and arguably overpaid to merge with a company that was a disaster and on the brink of failure perhaps that says more about you than me.

What is your reasoning as to why Elon bought Twitter?

Also.
What merger are you talking about?

 

[quovadis]

Musk admitted he overpaid. In his own words...

Are you aware that there were shareholders at the time who didn't think that? It's thus arguable.

 

[Ponderer]

Some interesting points here.

Very good video.

 

[Ponderer]

Are you aware that there were shareholders at the time who didn't think that? It's thus arguable.

What has that got to do with the price of eggs?

 

[quovadis]

What is your reasoning as to why Elon bought Twitter?

The reasoning I'm referring to was regarding the financials. As for the reasoning of why Elon bought Twitter - to unlock it's potential.

What merger are you talking about?

The entire deal was a merger.

 

[quovadis]

What has that got to do with the price of eggs?

Read the thread. I said it was arguable and Emjay wanted to show that Musk knew he overpaid. Why don't you go ask Emjay. Apparently it's a facepalm?

 

[Emjay]

Are you aware that there were shareholders at the time who didn't think that? It's thus arguable.

Now we shouldn't believe Musk? See, when you appeal to authority, you shouldn't then go and undermine him on the very same page.

What an absolute clown show.

 

[quovadis]

As for your question of over leveraging, we will not know that as we don't understand the underlying model that was built for the finance. Everything else is speculation imo. Unless someone has seen some info that gives more insight into the funding model?

That someone is the SEC. It's in the filings. $6.5bn is leveraged - the rest is split between secured and insecured bonds.

 

[quovadis]

Now we shouldn't believe Musk? See, when you appeal to authority, you shouldn't then go and undermine him on the very same page.

What an absolute clown show.

I'm not sure what your point is. If I say that he arguably overpaid and Musk overpaid that's irrelevant. Read the sentence again. I'll add notes.

If you (PONDERER) want to believe that Musk over-leveraged and arguably overpaid to merge with a company that (according to Emjays theory which) was a disaster and on the brink of failure (UNSUSTAINABLE) perhaps that says more about you (PONDERER) than me (QUOVADIS).

The nitpicking ARGUABLE is not even relevant.

 

[Emjay]

The nitpicking ARGUABLE is not even relevant.

A little self awareness from your end would have been great.

 

[quovadis]

A little self awareness from your end would have been great.

Noted.