Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It appears that that's the remedy for failing to get funds, not for cold feet; there's a performance clause for the latter, so Levine suggests "Musk’s goal here is presumably to walk away from Twitter and pay only $1 billion in damages." - that Musk is negotiating by making a stink to even be able to pay instead of going through with the deal he signed.



Your repeating opinion of someone with extreme biases for clickbait. This fantasy of forcing musk to buy the company doesn’t exist in any contract. Your asking the court to make up a new contract and enforce it.

That’s not how the court works, except in extreme circumstances which don’t apply to this twitter acquisition attempt.

Also, Musk asserts that upto 50% of twitter users are bots, which is totally believable. So the chances Musk will have to pay anything is actually remote, since twitter would have to produce evidence that would reveal trade secrets.

Here’s my prediction: Musk will pay nothing because Twitter has allowed itself to be infiltrated with bots and revealing this will be far more damaging than losing out on a billion. Musk will walk away.


> This fantasy of forcing musk to buy the company doesn’t exist in any contract.

That is precisely what the merger agreement is: a contract forcing Musk to buy Twitter.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: