KKdU9EXbBhmLznR

You're right, they should've said that his hobby is just pretending things in general. He enjoys very much being Nelson [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo].

The "SEC interference", as you called it, came long after he had his Nelson moment in that case. (A more accurate name for it might be "SEC slap-on-the-wrist", because it was both completely ineffective and entirely deserved.)

He most likely will have to pay a ridiculous fine (or, more likely, settlement). Of course, the ridiculousness of it will be that it doesn't consider his incredible means, and therefore he'll never miss it and it will have absolutely no impact on his behavior.

... how is that an excuse? He knew that full well before he ever started thinking about buying it, much less making public statements about it. (Just like he knew about the bots)

Except that he knew that it was at least 5%. So you'd actually have to figure out how much the discount already included in the value is for that 5% (which is highly subjective, but the discount is almost certainly not also 5%), and then multiply it by six-fifths (maybe, because the discount is also almost certainly not linear).

Of course, this is all a moot point, because what an actual businessman (as opposed to a con artist) would do, if they were concerned the bot stats might be inaccurate, is make sure the agreement had specific terms in it as to what would happen if it was found to be inaccurate.

> Would he line up billions of dollars of financing and sign a binding merger agreement with a specific-performance clause and a $1 billion breakup fee as a joke? I mean! Nobody else would! But he might!

What a silly thing to say. Of course he would; I'd also risk $20 (~1/200th of my assets, like $1b is for Musk) on a joke, especially if I knew I'd almost certainly never lose that much.