Twitter reportedly set to accept Musk's offer [Twitter accepts deal]

[RockSolid1106]

Summary

What seemed to be a highly improbable deal might be happening. Twitter is nearing a deal to sell itself to Elon Musk. An agreement could be announced as soon as today.

EDIT: Twitter has accepted the deal for $44 Billion. [Source 3]

 

Quotes

Quote

Twitter’s board was negotiating with Mr. Musk into the early hours of Monday over his unsolicited bid to buy the company, after he began lining up $46.5 billion in financing for the offer last week.

 

The discussions followed a Twitter board meeting on Sunday morning to discuss Mr. Musk’s offer

 

An agreement is not yet final and may still fall apart, but what had initially seemed to be a highly improbable deal appeared to be nearing an endgame. The situation involving Twitter and Mr. Musk remains fluid and fast-moving, the people with knowledge of the situation said.

 

My thoughts

Of course, it will be interesting to see the changes that Twitter gets when acquired by Elon Musk. I don't use twitter much, if at all, but the meme guy owning a social media platform is interesting to me.

 

Sources

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/24/technology/twitter-board-elon-musk.html

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/04/25/business/economy-news-stocks-inflation/twitter-is-close-to-a-deal-with-elon-musk

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-61222470

Edited April 26, 2022 by RockSolid1106
Added that the deal is now accepted by Twitter

[Guest]

I really hope he makes it better

Spoiler

Spoiler

As if that's gonna happen lol

 

 

[WhitetailAni]

Twitter is now a paid upgrade for Tesla cars!!

[Shreyas1]

4 minutes ago, FakeKGB said:

Twitter is now a paid upgrade for Tesla cars!!

In completely unrelated news, Tesla car accidents have shot up by 500%

 

./s

[Error 52]

That's it. It's time to move to Mastodon and get harassed off it after a week because I was too dismissive of She-Ra's asexual representation.

 

Maybe soon Mastodon will actually overtake the band on the Google results

 

 

[cloneman]

Linus will peddle back his general opinion on this. He may have questions on Musk as an individual, but he misses the point. Musk owning twitter is an order of magnitude better than the status quo of that platform, which right now is a competition between the big circlejerk of blue checkmarks and a hot mess of disorderly dissenting voices...

This is a move that needs to be made on the chessboard to see what will pan out next. We can't go on with big tech censoring everything. Weather Musk personally profits from this, I couldn't care less; all billionaires manipulate markets. You're living in fantasy land if you expect a platform to improve without some dirty money changing hands. The chance of twitter improving by itself is 0%. If with Musk in it , that becomes 5%, then it's a good move.

Between this and that laughing fit Linus had last month when someone asked him a weird question about Joe Rogan... he has way too much snark about  politics and it's a bad look for the Wan show. Needs a separate channel to talk politics. Maybe one that's more casual and less high-energy -- his rants are appropriate to make fun of tech companies that do silly things, but he doesn't have the breath of knowledge required to be snarky on political issues.

[TetraSky]

So instead of just making his own social media platform with his own vision for it, he preferred spending $45 BILLION to buy one that already exist... Cue censorship of people talking bad about Tesla, his other companies and himself.

[GhostRoadieBL]

This could be the easiest pump/dump Musk has done since doge.

After catching heat for tweets manipulating markets, what's stopping him from making the offer, bumping up his share $value and just dumping it so twitter's price drops? It's the kind of vindictive thing that makes sense for someone slighted with near unlimited funding.

[wanderingfool2]

Well it's like what I said in the other thread.  I'm all for him being a partial owner, but I don't like the concept of it being a private company owned solely by him.

 

If it was a public company, even if he was like 90% majority owner he still wouldn't be able to make positions that would benefit only himself.  With that said I'm hoping that he sticks to his word in regards to free speech...actually what would benefit is if after purchase he declares it a town square (I forget the correct term).  That would actually force him to abide by the free speech stuff.  Right now they have always argued that they are a private entity and twitter is not considered a public space...so if he openly declares that then I'd imagine he wouldn't be able to argue private entity in court.

 

Time will tell really.  With all this said as well, the co-founder of twitter's tweet really is what I sort of alluded to as well.  They are ultimately dysfunctional and couldn't get anything done properly.  There are for lack of a better term for it...too many cooks in the kitchen.  So maybe under a single leadership things might actually change.

[SolarNova]

Social media platforms like Twitter currently situate themselves in a grey area for the most part.

They act and moderate like a publisher, but insist they are a platform, thus benefiting legally from immunity on what is on their 'platform'.

 

There really was only 2 way these social media platforms were ever going to be 'fixed'.

 

1) Pressure from government by adjusting existing policy to better distinguish between 'Publisher' and 'Platform', Thus effectively forcing Twitter to either take legal responsibility on what is posted on their site whilst maintaining private control (censorship) on whats posted, or relinquish censorship control and only remove illegal content.

 

2) Twitter changes ownership or has a change of management , resulting in changing policy. Hopefully resulting either a more neutral and fair moderation of content, or moderation only in-line with legal requirements.

 

Should Musk push forward with the concept of a 'town square' approach, one would hope he would officially treat Twitter as a platform by only moderating in line with the actual Law (like a town square), and not moral ,social, religious, or political opinions/beliefs.

 

Should this purchase go through, we shall inevitably find out.

[Doobeedoo]

The site will be purged?

[GrandFatMan]

Apparantly I have to continue in here. It's been confirmed. No longer in discussion

[Eaglerino]

2 hours ago, TetraSky said:

So instead of just making his own social media platform with his own vision for it, he preferred spending $45 BILLION to buy one that already exist... Cue censorship of people talking bad about Tesla, his other companies and himself.

How many people have made competitor platforms, and how many do you use? The infrastructure and minds behind Twitter only exist at Twitter, and it would take years or an equal amount of money to create a real competitor. If you want to be taken seriously it makes way more sense to buy Twitter.

 

I don't think Elon is anybody's friend but if he actually opens Twitter up to free speech (as should be required in a nation with free speech as a fundamental human right) then it's about time. Twitter's been needing new ownership for a long while anyway, and jack was such a limp wristed flip flop

[poochyena]

Consider joining Pillowfort.social. Its not run by egotistical billionaires

 

2 hours ago, cloneman said:

Musk owning twitter is an order of magnitude better than the status quo of that platform, which right now is a competition between the big circlejerk of blue checkmarks and a hot mess of disorderly dissenting voices...

Musk is literally the biggest perpetrator of that exact thing. wtf

47 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

They act and moderate like a publisher

No they do not. They do not publish anything more than this or any other social media site does.

47 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

1) Pressure from government by adjusting existing policy to better distinguish between 'Publisher' and 'Platform'

And what difference are you suggesting be clarified?

48 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

2) Twitter changes ownership or has a change of management , resulting in changing policy. Hopefully resulting either a more neutral and fair moderation of content, or moderation only in-line with legal requirements.

Changing WHAT policy? How is moderation unfair?

1 minute ago, Eaglerino said:

How many people have made competitor platforms, and how many do you use? The infrastructure and minds behind Twitter only exist at Twitter, and it would take years or an equal amount of money to create a real competitor.

There are literally dozens of competitors. I'm on pillowfort and deviantart, for example. Many people use facebook and instagram. Then there are the hundreds of forums like these. No one needs twitter and it can die just as easily as digg and myspace did.

[Montana One-Six]

Honestly who cares about twitter?

 

A few months ago I used it occasionally as a way to see photos and videos of news and things happening around the world, like the chaos at Kabul Airport when NATO pulled out and things like that. Now, since you almost instantly get the login popup I quit using it entirely.

[wanderingfool2]

Guess it should still be noted, it will still likely have to come to a shareholder vote.  So even if it's approved the purchase could still fail.

[Zomeguy]

Meh don't really care. The only time I use twitter is when I need to follow someone to apply for a contest. Otherwise I just don't bother.

[Sauron]

I can't bring myself to care much. I kinda hope Musk burns it into the ground by taking his financial advice from reddit and loses billions in the process.

8 minutes ago, Eaglerino said:

if he actually opens Twitter up to free speech (as should be required in a nation with free speech as a fundamental human right)

Sigh

 

Twitter is a private platform, moderation is necessary for it not to be completely unusable and even if it weren't they have a right not to host what they don't want to host. Just like you have a right to turn me away if I want to shout my political positions from your home's window. There have been social networks that have tried doing without a TOS and they have all instantly failed, because it's a bad idea. We'll see what happens with twitter but if Musk doesn't want to lose money on it forever he'll probably only do some performative reinstatement and never touch it again.

 

Free speech in the US applies to public forums and other situations where your ability to speak depends on the US government. Even then there are limits and the US government is not required to signal boost your speech, only not to prevent it.

[Kronoton]

Social media sounds like a good idea, but in reality it is just 99% BS and 1% cat memes.

 

 

I expect Elon to ban cat memes next week.

[Taf the Ghost]

Twitter's problem has always been at the top. For the social cachet, it makes very little money, has never been consistently profitable and its revenue has been rather stagnant for years. Elon has actually done a Warren Buffett move. The product is properly valued by the market, but the potential requires putting a lot better people in place. That wasn't happening without a full buyout. 

 

Twitter has long has a Silicon Valley "dead weight" issue, along with other issues that are more opaque but have given Jack a very nasty case of the "needs rehab" effect. This is the platform, after all, that had Vine years before TikTok blew up, killed it and now look at things. They also spent years courting massive user signup numbers, which mostly meant Bots still absolutely infest the place. While it's not quite as numerous as the YT comments section, their effect is far higher on Twitter for ruining any conversation/discussion flow.

 

This is a good move if you want Twitter to survive. I may feel the place through be burned to a cinder and the ground salted so nothing can ever grow there again, but to each their own.

 

Now, the really fun storyline: USAF kicks out CIA. This is going to have some hilarious factional results. 

[HenrySalayne]

Elon wants to buy Twitter only a few days before the draft for the Digital Service Act (DSA) emerges, and shortly after Twitter accepts his offer.

This could not have been orchestrated more perfectly. Elon saves a few bucks and the Twitter board doesn't have to stick around when the multi-billion Euro fines hail done upon the platform.

 

I think they should rebrand it to MetaSpace 2.0.

[poochyena]

10 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Elon has actually done a Warren Buffett move. The product is properly valued by the market, but the potential requires putting a lot better people in place.

10 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

This is a good move if you want Twitter to survive.

When has a large internet company ever gone from "coasting" to "maximize profits" ever resulted in the prolonged survival of the company? It almost always results in more ads and more paywalls that drive people away.

Musk wants at least one of these two things with the purchase: Short term gains and/or power. Thinking he made this purchase simply as a long term investment with the company's integrity in mind is just foolish.

[Heliian]

42 minutes ago, Zomeguy said:

Meh don't really care. The only time I use twitter is when I need to follow someone to apply for a contest. Otherwise I just don't bother.

I don't even stoop that low.  

 

Elon is buying Twitter as to amass more blood bags to join his cult.  He's done a great job of overhyping the deal to buy it. 

[Taf the Ghost]

On the strategic side of things, Twitter's problem is that it's really two different platforms in one: niche microblogging and mass PR. Twitter basically makes ever Tweet a part of a PR Campaign, so the users of that Reality can easily get cause up in exposure they never wanted. They were, in fact, just leaving a comment on something. Twitter has implemented some features to limit response issues, but, like most things there, it was more to keep the checkmarks happy than anything else.

 

And, of course, there's the obvious elephant in the room: Twitter's ToS enforcement or, normally, lack thereof. Since Twitter is an "Attack First, Attack Often" platform, being an acceptable Attacker makes all of the difference. Enforcement has always been favored to whatever is trendy in San Fran and whatever the non-native English speaking outsourced moderation service could understand. (And that's for English speaking content.)  It's been a problem since at least 2012 and is always getting worse. As they moved into active discussion suppression approaches somewhere in the 2014ish range, it's caused the general state of the way people interact with Twitter.

 

Conversely, I've been told Japanese Twitter is pretty great because they can't outsource moderation staff and active suppression in any ideographic language is far more difficult, computationally. Twitter doesn't have the money to really police those chunks of Twitter in the same way, so they don't.  Sort of a weird Yahoo! Japan variant. 

[Sauron]