Twitter Board Unanimously Recommends That Shareholders OK Elon Musk Takeover

He proved there were more fake accounts than they admitted prior which means the value shrank due to the fake accounts.

 

Just another silver spoon jerk who plays.

 

A smart guy who has done great things

 

He didn't prove anything. He asked the Twitter board questions and they would have answered those questions - all of that should be in private. He published the fact he was asking the questions but not any clear reasons or any of the answers they gave (probably because he would be contractually prohibited from doing so).

 

I would imagen them Senorita's felt the same way on the train. right?

 

He absolutely proved it which is why the value went down. And twitter isn’t even denying it lol.

 

He didn't prove anything, he asked a question. If he'd asked the question privately (as he was contractually obliged to do), it wouldn't have had any impact at all. What dropped the share value was Musk tweeting that he was putting the deal on hold because of (he claimed) his doubts on this point. It even recovered somewhat when he followed up saying he was still committed to the deal.

Twitter obviously isn't going to discuss any of the details publicly (and is probably also contractually prohibited anyway).

Musk even asked the wrong question (possibly intentionally) in that tweet since there is a significant distinction between the percentage of all uses and the percentage of "monetizable daily active users", which is what Twitter had always reported in it's filings.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-says-44-billion-twitter-deal-hold-2022-05-13/

 

He proved it beyond question, he even has the findings presented and twitter acknowledged it publicly. You are wrong. Objectively lol. You didn’t pay any attention.

 

He's not done anything not done before.

 

Not true, yet that’s also not an argument he isn’t doing great things either, way to move the goal post hahaha. I accept your surrender.

 

Be sure to give his ass a good smooching tonight.

 

No need, I’ll just continue as I am, showing proper respect to someone who deserves it.

 

I provided a source for my points, you've provided nothing to back up your claims. I don't even know what you think he has proven since he has only asked open questions (he's made some wild assertions and speculation but no specific claims).

As of a couple of weeks back, Musk and Twitter were still resolving the dispute over whether they should be providing the data he was demanding to answer his question (since that requirement was intended to support the transition, not belated due-diligence). Even if he has now received it, there is no way he's had enough time to have it properly analysed yet.

 

You provided opinions of journalists to support your claim, and that isn’t significant at all. He specifically had it proven by engineers, it’s beyond question and twitter openly recognized it which dropped the price.

 

I provided links to journalists quoting both Musk and Twitter. It certainly isn't flawless but it's still infinitely more than you've offered to back up your claims.

One last time; What exactly are you saying has been proven and do you have anything to support that assertion?

Please don't hold back on the technical details. The only reason this caught my interest is because I'm a programmer and have worked in this field in the past.

 

You provide links to journalists opinions, you aren’t at all linking to the proof you think you are.

 

Maybe the board is focused on shareholder value more than a political agenda as they are obligated to do.

 

You're free to ignore what I linked if you don't like it, you still haven't answered my question or even tried to provided any source of your own.

 

I definitely did ignore the link to “evidence “ that isn’t proven by what you linked.

 

~ As of today Musk has ascertained that approximately 25% of Twitter is comprised of fake accounts . Purchase price renegotiation is in order ...

​

 

I've given up on Moolk. Do you have any source to back up this statement? I'm seriously interested but couldn't find anything about it anywhere.

 

~ Musk is the new Trump media darling. He is everywhere on news feeds. The problem is he tells the truth and believes in free speech.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1099..., Musk,Twitter's SEC filings being accurate."

 

You said "as of today" Musk "ascertained" there were "25% fake accounts" but you linked an article from May referencing a Tweet speculating that 20% could be fake. That is essentially the same news I linked previously, just from a different source.

The simple fact is that nothing here has been proven (certainly not in the public domain) but nor is there a single simple question. There are different ways to identify and define a "fake" account and different measures between the simple total number of accounts that Musk keeps quoting and the "monetizable daily active users" that Twitter states in their filings.

The fundamental problem for Musk is that this is the kind of due diligence he should have done before making the formal offer, certainly before signing up to proceed. It isn't as if the issue of fake/bot accounts was new or the 5% figure Twitter has stated for several year secret. He could have asked for clarification as part of that initial negotiation or, if that wasn't to his satisfaction, could have required some kind of formal condition to the deal. He fundamental concern could well be right (at least to some extent), but his way of addressing that is flawed (unless, of course, he is just trying to artificially depress the selling price).

 

~ Why ? Musk needed to establish a price and an agreement first. Obviously Twitter is hesitant on disclosure — contrary to what they state. The more he investigates the more questions come up. Due diligence is a two-way street with no room for fraud.
Musk is no fool. He knows what he's doing . However I believe he is incorrect about the future of " sustainable" energy and battery technology.

 

I found THIS. It seems to be kinda serious, or at least using some kinda methology. They say nearly 20% of Twitter are fakebots.