I wondered this early on. More so when I thought he would actually buy twitter as Twitter had had some serious share price decline at that point for over 6 months, so it's a way to shift money from an inflated area to a more moderately priced one. Plus he obviously likes the platform in general.
If true, I don't think it's the case he did it intending to pull out. Seems unlikely he would have signed the billion dollar exit clause when he could have easily dragged the initial talks on a bit longer for largely the same result before 'changing his mind'.
My best guess is the offer was genuine (thought impulsive) but as he's seen the price drop further, now his offer seems too much. Why pay $44bn for a sub $30bn company. Kinda simple but seem most likely than all these more complex theories.
Happy to have a conversation with you on reasoning, and apologise if I'm wrong in how I read your reply message, it feels like a curt criticism statement, not add value to discussion.
But anyway, yes I believe it is possible to be impulsive followed by more logical decision making. This process seems fairly commonplace in the world I observe.
I apologize for being curt, I thought my statement was obvious. Here's some lines from your comment
"If true, I don't think it's the case he did it intending to pull out. Seems unlikely he would have ......
My best guess is the offer was genuine (thought impulsive) but as he's seen the price drop further, now his offer seems..
"
Considering his impulsive behavior, which has prior occurrences. 1. Making an immature derogatory remark to one of the people trying to assist with that cave rescue. 2. His statement that he was taking tesla private that he retracted later 3. This situation..
Why do you think he's acting logically now? Why is it your best guess? Your words
> Why do you think he's acting logically now? Why is it your best guess? Your words
1) As said, its not uncommon to act impulsively, followed by more logical decision making after. From your examples, I dont feel listing a few impulsive cases removes his ability to act logically. And the sequence I've guessed seems the most likely in my kindly eyes.
2) Because its not my second best guess, or any other.
I think we have a disconnect on probability and booleans. Elon musk can act logically or impulsively. Each historical act of impulsiveness increases the probability of future impulsive acts
I feel there is huge profitability growth potential there. If you look at the better quarters the revenues can be significant. If you ran that against a lean headcount and were genuinely A-political there's really a money maker there potentially.
That said the risk is huge as the world can move on quickly as we saw with MySpace. And Elon s becoming increasingly a political risk factor himself in a business were peoples view on the leaders/owners really matters.
My point is he can pay more because he believes he's going to make much more in the future. There is a downturn but most people suffer downturns through life and hold through them. It's just childish to back out now but I would expect that from him.
His views really don't matter. Nothing happened to Facebook and nothing will. People will just continue fighting (tweeting).
I see you point, but being childish in backing out may not mean much if you feel you're overpaying $14bn, or if not him his funding partners. People have a much stronger emotional response to losing something than gaining something.
But really who knows. Maybe he realised he had too much on his plate, or any number of things.
If true, I don't think it's the case he did it intending to pull out. Seems unlikely he would have signed the billion dollar exit clause when he could have easily dragged the initial talks on a bit longer for largely the same result before 'changing his mind'.
My best guess is the offer was genuine (thought impulsive) but as he's seen the price drop further, now his offer seems too much. Why pay $44bn for a sub $30bn company. Kinda simple but seem most likely than all these more complex theories.