Hacker News Reader

Comment by nabla9 | Hacker News Reader

This is a second time Musk has offered to buy a public company in bad faith.

His reputation as a sufficiently reliable counterparty is gone.

The NY Times had an article recently about how all burnt Wall Street financiers, in places like Goldman Sachs, say they will finance Musk again.

Goldman Sachs & other banks are not burned in this. They collect commissions and fees from loans. They deal with increasing risk by increasing fees, collateral and interest rate. That will restrict the deals Musk can afford.

Musk doesn't care about that one iota. He has more money than god. And he's done that by being fairly effective as the head of two big companies.

>He has more money than god.

Yeah ok ... <cue the Titanic sinking>.

The guy has 15X more money than god (using the Vatican's wealth as a proxy).

> using the Vatican's wealth as a proxy

Sounds like a huge logical fallacy.

I'm open to other measures; anything's better than "IDK infinite." What do you propose?

I think it hard to justify a definition of God's wealth that isn't everything or nothing.

I'm pretty sure the Vatican's (by which you I assume include the entirety of the Catholic Church) art assets alone top the $10-12 billion you're valuing the entire church at, to say nothing of their property, 1 billionish loyal followers or legal status as a country.

Reality doesn't care if Musk doesn't care. For certain purchases, there's a probability that Musk will simply find that his money is no good. Not for sale to Elon Musk at any price.

Nah, he's done that by inheriting a bunch of rather blood-soaked wealth and then being fairly effective at predicting which companies he could buy that would then make him a lot of money.

His money will keep on talking tomorrow, unfortunately.

His dollar is worth 70 cent after this.

It's likely that this will be the most expensive manic episode any individual has suffered.

Yeah, I am worried he has a mental imbalance that makes him unsuited for some decisions. If he is wise he should just focus on a few things and do it right. I admire what he has done for space travel for example, but hopefully he doesn’t have to many yes men around him that make him to do much unstable things.

He’s got enough dollars that even if his dollars were worth a penny he’d have a lot more than almost anyone else.

Let's not forget that this is a take, not an indisputable fact. Whether ostensible or true, he has cited potentially valid reasons for both cases (he DID have investors lined up to take it private and there WAS a lack of openness to investigate Twitter). I'm not saying he did or he didn't, I just find this kind of assertion (indeed the whole tone of the article) to be a bit flippant and more of a channeling for dislike of someone then for honest unbiased speculation of what is going on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com