Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Edge-]

That was fast, did you realy watch the clip? Yes or no?

Nope, just stating that this has been my position from the get-go as soon as it was announced that there was a deal being written. This isn't a legal argument about the contract because I haven't seen the contract and don't really care what's in it. Its content is irrelevant to my contention that Musk never had any real desire to purchase Twitter to begin with.

- - - Updated - - -

Uhhhhhh https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022...y-iss-roundup/

Docked at the ISS last month. Whoops.

Kinda sorta. They had their first successful test after years of problems, which is good. But it's far from ready for actual use with people. That being said, it's still a far more expensive option than SpaceX is and honestly, using SpaceX continues to be the best decision right now given that they already have a program up and running and have the costs in the gutter.

There are other options for sending things into space, but for most manned missions SpaceX and Dragon is going to remain the cheapest/most reliable option right now.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

That was fast, did you realy watch the clip? Yes or no?

I watched the video...and it doesn't address anything that Edge is talking about. What it discusses is that Musk may still have legit ways of backing out of the deal that will give him cover from potential lawsuits.

[Edge-]

My point is that Musk’s company isn’t the only one capable of space flight. If you take those engineers and send them to another company, run by a less horrible person, the US is still in the astronaut business. The spaceliner is a debacle, but pretending only Elon is capable of this shit when we’ve been sending people to space for decades is just silly.

Sure, but it's the cheapest and one of the best options given how quick their turnarounds are. You can go with other providers for things like satellites, but you still have limited options for sending actual astronauts to the ISS unless you're looking to give Roscosmos some more business.

If you take all those people and send them to another company congrats, they now have to rebuild the same rockets in a way that doesn't violate all the patents held by SpaceX and build the production facilities necessary for their construction/rehabbing between launches, which is no small task.

I'm not attributing this success to Musk proper, He hired the right people, and they're the ones absolutely responsible for SpaceX's huge successes.

Right now SpaceX is the only US company capable of this, for better or worse. NASA's program ended decades ago and we've been hitching rides via Russia until recently. None of the other competitors are remotely as capable or ready as SpaceX is in terms of being able to even deliver basic cargo pods to the ISS, much less people. Blue Origin has sent some people into space and that's great and all, but their bids for government contracts so far have been pretty hilarious.

[Forogil]

I watched the video...and it doesn't address anything that Edge is talking about. What it discusses is that Musk may still have legit ways of backing out of the deal that will give him cover from potential lawsuits.

By a non-lawyer mocking "armchair lawyers", looking at his comment section I see that he has a Musk-bias.

Let's compare with the previous statement from https://www.axios.com/2022/05/14/the...witter-endgame
The bottom line: "A breakup fee (=1 billion dollars) is not an option to walk away," says University of Virginia law professor Mitu Gulati. "Specific performance promises are very enforceable. Particularly in Delaware.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

My point is that Musk’s company isn’t the only one capable of space flight. If you take those engineers and send them to another company, run by a less horrible person, the US is still in the astronaut business. The spaceliner is a debacle, but pretending only Elon is capable of this shit when we’ve been sending people to space for decades is just silly.

The problem is finding a company run by a less horrible person. Looking at the list of potential candidates...all i can see are options that would be, best case, a lateral move.

- - - Updated - - -

By a non-lawyer mocking "armchair lawyers", looking at his comment section I see that he has a Musk-bias.

Let's compare with the previous statement from https://www.axios.com/2022/05/14/the...witter-endgame
The bottom line: "A breakup fee (=1 billion dollars) is not an option to walk away," says University of Virginia law professor Mitu Gulati. "Specific performance promises are very enforceable. Particularly in Delaware.

Well, what all that really comes down to is, if it comes to that, an argument about who breached the contract first. And that's just a matter for the actual lawyers.

But yeah, dude definitely seemed to have a pro-Musk Bias.

[cubby]

@cubby currently is such a silly qualifier since we’d use other companies and/or agencies if SpaceX wasn’t a thing. Pretending Musk is the savior of space travel when he’s just the CEO of the company we contracted to be that provider is like pretending Trump won 2020. It ignores reality entirely. Without SpaceX we’d simply have a different company doing the same job. They might not be doing it exactly the same, but we’d still be in the astronaut business.

Did I say "savior"? You need to start reading what you respond to big guy. I love that you pretend I said something, then respond to that, ignoring (again) reality. Let us know when you come back to earth for the actual conversation taking place. We'll wait.

- - - Updated - - -

Uhhhhhh https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022...y-iss-roundup/

Docked at the ISS last month. Whoops.

Someone didn't read their own source. Tell us again how many people were on that flight?

Whoops indeed.

[cubby]

Not official yet, but very much seems like he's continuing to lay the groundwork for his narrative on why he pulled out because, "I was just trolling the FEC and never actually expected Twitter to accept my offer." doesn't sound very good, and would probably result in another settlement with the FEC where they wag their finger at him and tell him to stop manipulating the markets...again.

That guy just continues to fuck it up with the SEC. It will be interesting to see how this ends up playing out.

- - - Updated - - -

You said the US wouldn’t be in the astronaut business if it weren’t for musk. That would make him the savior of that business we were already in for decades before he took his parents money made from blood diamonds and paid some guy to make an online payment platform where he could charge people additional fees to use their cards. Keep fanboying over a piece of shit though.

So you admit I didn't say it - you just drew some random conclusion and then associated it with me.

Thanks for clarifying that you were wrong. We can move on now.

[Edge-]

You said the US wouldn’t be in the astronaut business if it weren’t for musk.

Currently, this is 100% correct.

That would make him the savior

Your choice of word.

- - - Updated - - -

That guy just continues to fuck it up with the SEC. It will be interesting to see how this ends up playing out.

More minor fines if they can actually nail him on something, which he'll pay and then cry about and troll them again, and the cycle will repeat because the SEC has no balls or teeth and Musk can just pay the few hundred thousand dollar fine each time. That's nothing for him.

[cubby]

More minor fines if they can actually nail him on something, which he'll pay and then cry about and troll them again, and the cycle will repeat because the SEC has no balls or teeth and Musk can just pay the few hundred thousand dollar fine each time. That's nothing for him.

It wouldn't surprise me if he's using the Twitter stock manipulation for his own personal gain and never actually intended to buy it. That clause he thinks is an "Exit" button doesn't seem to have the teeth he thinks it does.

[cubby]

No, you definitely did. Either he saved the astronaut industry, and is thus a savior, or we’d still be in it without him.

Please quote for me where I said "savior". Or we'll expect your apology for lying.

All I said was something factually true. Your the one running away with ignoring facts and reality. Let us know how that works out for you.

[Draco-Onis]

It wouldn't surprise me if he's using the Twitter stock manipulation for his own personal gain and never actually intended to buy it. That clause he thinks is an "Exit" button doesn't seem to have the teeth he thinks it does.

That might have been how he started but I think his ego and need for attention made him do a serious bid now it's too late to back out easily.

[Edge-]

It’s an accurate word as per the definition.

I guess technically, but it comes with a lot of baggage with it and Cubby is telling you that's not what he meant in any way. That's how you read it, and for some reason you're refusing to accept that your interpretation of his words isn't exactly accurate.

And it’s basically 3 months we’d not have a vessel to send astronauts on. Without SpaceX it’s entirely possible the remote controlled starliner would be in service by now.

This...seems to ignore the years of technical problems that Boeing has had with the Starliner, which would have existed with or without SpaceX. This is getting very off-topic now, but sometimes you have to know when you were wrong about something and just take the L. It happens, we're all wrong about shit from time to time and we learn from it.

[Edge-]

We were hitching rides with russia up until they decided to invade Ukraine.

Actually we stopped sending astronauts up via Roscosmos in 2020 and transitioned over to SpaceX.

Again, sometimes you should just take the L and move on.

[cubby]

That might have been how he started but I think his ego and need for attention made him do a serious bid now it's too late to back out easily.

I'm not sure why he's even trying to back out at this point - to actually own and control twitter. Huge (and bigly) platform for...whatever his crazy little mind wants.

[Draco-Onis]

I'm not sure why he's even trying to back out at this point - to actually own and control twitter. Huge (and bigly) platform for...whatever his crazy little mind wants.

Because even billionaires are subject to impulse buying, he didn't bother doing due diligence he was obviously not thinking straight or listening to his advisers.

[Edge-]

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06...ter-fake-bots/

Shit, Elon's got backup from the Texas AG, who has been under indictment for 7 years and is facing multiple whistleblower complaints from his own office.

The perfect person to support Musk.

[cubby]

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06...ter-fake-bots/

Shit, Elon's got backup from the Texas AG, who has been under indictment for 7 years and is facing multiple whistleblower complaints from his own office.

The perfect person to support Musk.

Is he actually sliding towards the insane GQP or just an where ever opportunity presents itself?

- - - Updated - - -

You negated everything said before it with that penultimate sentence, sadly.

Thinking Musk is the only reason just diminishes every single other person that literally brought his vision to life.

No one else did it. He did. Both of those statements are true.

Love him or hate him - he crushed it with SpaceX, period. He's apparently a total asshole and world-wide troll, but facts are facts. You pretending you don't understand how companies work just "negate[s] everything said before".

[Edge-]

Is he actually sliding towards the insane GQP or just an where ever opportunity presents itself?

Doubt Musk did anything. Since he decided his strategy of pushing back against the allegations he offered a stewardess a horse if she'd give him a handy was to call himself a Republican, and because he was trolling about Freeze Peach, not to mention that one time he was on Joe Rogan (we pretend he didn't host SNL since SNL is bad and full of libs), he's become a conservative superstar. He was even simping in the comments sections of a bunch of conservative influences for that guaranteed attention.

So between that and some of the friction between him and the current administration in the White House, he's become the Republican party's favorite person. Paxton is just another simp.

[cubby]

Doubt Musk did anything. Since he decided his strategy of pushing back against the allegations he offered a stewardess a horse if she'd give him a handy was to call himself a Republican, and because he was trolling about Freeze Peach, not to mention that one time he was on Joe Rogan (we pretend he didn't host SNL since SNL is bad and full of libs), he's become a conservative superstar. He was even simping in the comments sections of a bunch of conservative influences for that guaranteed attention.

So between that and some of the friction between him and the current administration in the White House, he's become the Republican party's favorite person. Paxton is just another simp.

With all that and the rest going on, I'm still wondering why he wouldn't want to own Twitter, despite the cost issue. It's one of the biggest communication platforms in the world, and his private ownership of it could be used for serious monetary gain.

- - - Updated - - -

Because even billionaires are subject to impulse buying, he didn't bother doing due diligence he was obviously not thinking straight or listening to his advisers.

What I was getting at more specifically was that even if he did this impulsively, there isn't much downside to owning the world's premiere communication device. Even if you accidentally overpay.

[Edge-]

With all that and the rest going on, I'm still wondering why he wouldn't want to own Twitter, despite the cost issue. It's one of the biggest communication platforms in the world, and his private ownership of it could be used for serious monetary gain.

Because it's kinda a garbage social network without a ton of growth prospects that can't realistically compete with the likes of Facebook on a serious level, or even TikTok that's since surpassed Twitter in global users IIRC. Because despite its often outsized influence as a communications/news platform its not highly monetizable and Twitter is still desperately trying to find way to improve the monetization of their users outside of just ad-delivery. Because Twitter comes with a lot of baggage associated with it already. Because Musk never actually wanted to own a social media platform, and that owning it wouldn't benefit his own interests in a meaningful way compared to remaining on it shitposting as a normal user. Because there are a lot of technical and legal/social challenges with the platform that Musk has largely expressed no interest in dealing with. Especially given that he's been talking about it as "freeze peach" platform which comes with huge legal hurdles and challenges associated with it, if he's earnest.

But again, I don't think he actually wants to own Twitter or believes there's real opportunity for notable revenue growth for the platform. He's just looking to get as much attention as he can before a skeleton in his closet comes out and makes him a social pariah.

Which I guess isn't him offering to buy a stewardess on a private jet a horse in exchange for a handy, at least not yet.