Re:Ask HN: What happened to Twitter poison pill?
by BLKNSLVR on Monday April 25, 2022 @09:09PM
(#31162853)
3a. Saw Netflix, panicked.
Re:Ask HN: What happened to Twitter poison pill?
by ganoushoreilly on Monday April 25, 2022 @09:54PM
(#31163132)
3a(1). Know their numbers are going to be crap on Thursday, double panicked
Re:Ask HN: What happened to Twitter poison pill?
by Rastonbury on Tuesday April 26, 2022 @02:50AM
(#31164723)
Regarding #2, it isn't so simple for the board, they have large institutional shareholders and sovereign wealth funds, including activist Elliot Management who can sue the board if they think the board is accepting a offer too low. Elliot[1] famously sued the country of Argentina and seized one of their warships when they defaulted on their debt which Elliot owned, they're the ones who pushed for Dorsey's exit, interesting to see if they will take the offer or squeeze Musk
[1]https://qz.com/1001650/hedge-fund-billionaire-paul-singers-r...
Re:Ask HN: What happened to Twitter poison pill?
by zmgsabst on Tuesday April 26, 2022 @03:59AM
(#31165086)
Elliot Management had an approximately 9% stake when they went after Dorsey [1], but have since liquidated it and own (if any) a significantly smaller portion. They’re not in the top few investors, anymore. [2]
The Twitter board was sued last year due to their deals with Elliot Management — and may not want to face a second, concurrent lawsuit about breach of duty. [3]
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2021/04/01/jack-dors...
[2] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/060916/top-3-...
[3] https://www.ft.com/content/5f3dd95f-8a7c-4f39-991a-87b2bc056...
Re:Ask HN: What happened to Twitter poison pill?
by Rastonbury on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @12:38AM
(#31176358)
Ah I see, then it depends if the other shareholder think the offer is fair or not
1. Elon Musk proved he was serious by arranging the funding.
2. Elon Musk threatened to sue the board for breach of fiduciary duty — claiming the sale was a good price and shareholders were harmed by not taking it.
And possibly a quiet third:
3. Twitter asked around and no one else was willing to offer a higher price — particularly given the downward trend of markets at present.
I think the board caved when it became clear they’d be personally liable if they refused on purely political grounds.