That risk and upside is already priced in if you believe in market efficiency.
They’re not. You’re mixing up the market as a whole and the owners of a majority of shares.
The ask price is the lowest ask. If you buy a lot of something, you reach further into the order book and the price is going to be higher. If you want a 51% stake, then a lot higher.
Many of them are passive, and only adjust once a quarter or once a year. Additionally, big spikes by one stock match drops in other stocks, aka they're not likely to make a big sale because one stock (twitter) had a good day.
The market is large and has plenty of participants with different strategies. There are people selling at the going price, and there are people who are not. The trading price is a good reference price, but it's not the "right price" for everyone.
But it's the only price based on facts rather than opinion.
Every market participant has a buy price and a sell price for one share influenced by their personal opinions and the state of the whole market; each at a different level and trading price is only calculated on actual trades. So all the shareholders that are unwilling to sell for any of the current offers do not influence it.
Yet if you were to buy 100% of the shares then you would eventually have to climb up to their price.
I don't anyone would find your squishy confidence it's worth 50% more than current value any more credible than shorters who think it's worth 50% less. Both seem like fringe opinions without much foundation.
It's not my opinion that TWTR is worth 50% more. Please don't understand it as such. It's an example of what someone long TWTR could be thinking when they simultaneously hold their position and want to reject the Musk takeover.
I don't think it's worth continuing this thread anymore though. Have a great day.
Every time a stock trades, there’s a single price. And that price is the price one person is willing to sell at, and another is willing to buy at.
That’s how markets work.
My guess is Musk and a few key players are acting in a logical way and the rest of the price action is made up of emotional response.
It’s anyones guess what the endgame here is, but one thing is for sure, Musk muddying the waters spells trap to me. I’m swimming the other way.
If you can buy 1 share at $1, that means that yes.
But a controlling interest in something almost always requires more than 1 share. It may require millions or billions of shares.
And once folks figure out that they’re the couple percent that will block that controlling interest, their own prices tend to change.
That volume of shares also means you can't just buy from the person who is happy to sell right now, you need to convince folks who don't plan to sell ever, or aren't in a hurry, or don't need money right now. Their prices tend to be different too.
And just like buying a tank of gas is different than buying an oil field, the value propositions and likely price discussions are different.
If you can buy an oil field of gas one tank at a time, more power to you - but you’ll likely quickly discover it doesn’t scale the way you want.
I believe a lot of my long positions are worth more than their current price, doesn't mean I'm going to spend all my money buying them up to that price.
If I lock in a 20% gain today that's nice, but I might believe with high confidence that it'll rise 50% in the next year. Then Elon's bid doesn't move me that much.