placeholder

Your argument here is just another way of stating anything's possible. But the issue isn't one of possibility but probability.

As was pointed out in the article, the numbers would have to be hugely off to qualify to be an MAE. So that's a really big and unlikely "if". And the SEC is not going to "join the fray" just on the say so of Elon Musk. And your point about the CEO revealing "the true nature of the fake accounts" assumes that he would be hiding something. Ya got any evidence for that? As for "it's only an opinion" It's an opinion that is widely shared by legal experts based on overwhelming legal precedent. You'll be hard put to find any experts that say differently. So, sure, anything is possible with the right arguments if there are right arguments to be found. But this isn't magic. There isn't some magical "abracadabra" that will melt the heart of a judge or jury. If it goes to court, the trial will take place in the State of Delaware under Delaware state law. There are reasons that corporations choose to base themselves in the tiny state of Delaware. And none of them are about making it more difficult for them to win court cases. "Anything is possible" is the epitome of a Hail Mary argument. Impossible to refute, but no reason to be taken seriously. .

"Twitter staff admitting Twitter is run for ideological purposes not for profit.." You really want to use that as evidence? This guy is a senior engineer. He's on the technical side of things. He's not an executive or involved in financial management.. What's more he's one person. Yet you characterize him as "staff". You think that one person speaks for all the staff? Who knows how many people Project Veritas secretly recorded before they found some Twitter employee who apparently said what they wanted to hear? What's more, as usual, Project Veritas only released clips. And they have a long history of releasing misleadingly edited videos. So, who knows what the genuine gist was of the remarks offered by this senior engineer? Apart from these objections, you made some really great points.

Twitter has made the necessary caveats about its membership numbers to comply with SEC rules. It has admitted that it did sightly overestimated its numbers but not enough to constitue a Material Adverse Effect.. What's more Musk explicitly waived his right to exercise due diligence. Only if the numbers were hugely off would Musk have a case. " That is an incredibly high standard: Delaware courts have almost never found an MAE. An MAE has to be something that would “substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally-significant manner,” the courts have said; there is a rule of thumb that an MAE requires a 40% decrease in long-term profitability. If it turned out that 6% or 20% or 50% of Twitter accounts are bots, that will be embarrassing and might even reduce Twitter’s future advertising revenue, but will it be an MAE? " https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-05-13/elon-musk-trolls-twitter The answer to that final rhetorical question was negative. .

If you had bothered to look at legal opinions about the contract you would have noted that Musk doesn't have the option of just withdrawing and paying 1 billion. This contract was designed to make the commitment to buy legally binding. In ft.com, there is an exemplary and brief article that clearly explains the dilemma Musk has created for himself. There's a firewall, but it's easy to legitimately circumvent. Just go to incognito mode in chrome, or whatever the equivalent is in whatever browser you use, and use the following search term: Twitter deal leaves Elon Musk with no easy way out ft.com

There have been plenty of mainstream media reports about possible side effects and even fatalities from covid vaccinations. But, unlike the way conspiracy alarmists frame the data, they are presented in the context of the total numbers of people vaccinated and the respective percentages of those who get vaccinated vs. those who don't. It's all down to innumeracy, word popularize by a mathematician named John Paulos. "Innumeracy refers to a lack of ability to reason with numbers. The term was coined by cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter; however, it was popularized in 1989 by mathematician John Allen Paulos in his book Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeracy#:~:text=Innumeracy refers to a lack,Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences.

If it was just the opinion of "armchair quarterbacks here" you might have a point. But you're gonna have to look long and hard to find experts who think that Musk has much of a case. The contract he signed was specifically designed to keep him from being able to back out. It, and others like it, are fashioned this way because of previous unhappy experiences with those who reneged on such deals. The odds are overwhelming that he's not going to wriggle out of this deal without it costing him.

Sure. And what percentage of You didn't note that in the same article it says that while Musk's worth increased by 13.8 billion between 2014 and 2018, he paid ony 455 million in taxes. In 2018 he paid no income tax at all. The article is based on the the reporting of Propublica. The Secret IRS Files: Trove of Never-Before-Seen Records Reveal How the Wealthiest Avoid Income Tax "ProPublica has obtained a vast cache of IRS information showing how billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Warren Buffett pay little in income tax compared to their massive wealth — sometimes, even nothing... According to Forbes, those 25 people saw their worth rise a collective $401 billion from 2014 to 2018. They paid a total of $13.6 billion in federal income taxes in those five years, the IRS data shows. That’s a staggering sum, but it amounts to a true tax rate of only 3.4%." https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax

Nice try at deflection. What has that got to do with the predicament Musk has created for himself in respect to Twitter?

Clearly, what you're referring to is, is the alarmisn promoted by anti covid vaxxers that there could be some long term latent effects from the vaccines. No vaccine has ever been know to result in long term latent effects. But it's not at all uncommon in the case of viral infections. In fact, it turns out that those who came down with covid and seemed to make a full recovery have a higher incidence of coronary events than those who didn't.

Here's what NASA says: The Effects of Climate Change "The effects of human-caused global warming are happening now, are irreversible on the timescale of people alive today, and will worsen in the decades to come... Droughts in the Southwest and heat waves (periods of abnormally hot weather lasting days to weeks) everywhere are projected to become more intense, and cold waves less intense everywhere... Hurricane-associated storm intensity and rainfall rates are projected to increase as the climate continues to warm." https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/

That could certainly be part of it. But waiving due diligence was just nuts. Maybe he was off his meds?

Twitter has Musk right where it wants him: Twitter board tells Elon Musk: We will not alter the deal Board vows to enforce $44 billion agreement despite Musk's waffling and complaints. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/05/twitter-board-tells-elon-musk-we-will-not-alter-the-deal/

So, you know that it's impossible how? You've examined the various statistical analyses performed by researchers and relevant authorities and have come to the informed opinion that their conclusions are invalid?

Just because the vaccine wasn't designed for the current version of covid, doesn't mean that it's ineffective. There's a huge gap between "not as effective" and "ineffective". The T-cell system particularly, is a great generalizer and can adapt to different variants of the virus. Denialists tend to focus on the vaccines lesser effectiveness at stopping transmission rather than on their far greater effectiveness in reducing serious illness and deaths. In fact, generally speaking, when they use the term "effectiveness" or "efficacy" they act as though these terms only have to do with transmission. Which is extremely misleading at best. Also, as data from the US shows, deaths are far higher in areas where vaccination rates are lower. Before vaccinations were available this wasn't the case. The divergence happened after the vaccines became available. And the divergence persists until today. The Changing Political Geography of COVID-19 Over the Last Two Years https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing-political-geography-of-covid-19-over-the-last-two-years/

FT.com, the website of the Financial Times, has the clearest, and one of the briefest explanations of why Musk is going to have a very hard time if he tries to walk away from this deal. To see the article, go to "incognito mode" in Chrome, or "in-private mode" in Edge or whatever the equivalent is in whatever browser you use. Use the following as a search term and it will legitimately bypass the ft.com firewall Twitter deal leaves Elon Musk with no easy way out

Who needs statistically valid scientifically conducted follow-up studies when we lucky folks here at thaivisa.com can rely on reports from anonymous posters?

That may be a sound argument for better vaccines, but it's not one that supports not getting vaccinated with the most effective ones available now.

Of course, to acquire that immunity to covid, you first actually have to contract covid. As we've seen from the figures in the USA, death rates from Covid are much higher in areas that have lower vaccination rates. That vaccines do protect against serious illness and death may seem like a minor point to you, but not so much to me.

From a legal standpont , Musk is screwed. "Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) published its account on Tuesday of its deal negotiations with Elon Musk, showing he opted out of asking the questions about the social media company's business he has now cited in declaring the $44 billion acquisition is "on hold." The account, published in Twitter's proxy statement that outlines what shareholders need to know to vote on the deal, paints a picture of Musk in a rush to clinch a deal with his "best and final" offer. Musk negotiated the Twitter deal over the weekend of April 23 and April 24 without carrying out any due diligence, the proxy statement shows." https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/twitter-committed-elon-musks-44-billion-deal-2022-05-17/

How did you come up with the ridiculous claim that a senior engineer at Twitter a "top Twitter exec"? Engineers are not executives. Here is a link to a job description of the duties of a senior software engineer at Twitter: https://careers.twitter.com/en/work-for-twitter/202010/8e22521c-6d5e-4c26-949b-0cc472f8bf01/585b1193-dafa-4b9b-b2f4-0361723e51d0.html/software-engineer-mid-level-sr-backend-content.html

Why would anyone trust a video from Project Veritas given its history of dishonesty including misleading editing? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas#:~:text=Project Veritas unsuccessfully attempted to,Prize after uncovering the operation.

Not Cantonese but there are 2 excellent Chinese restaurants specializing in authentic Chinese-Muslim cooking. Both are owned by Chinese emigrants. The first is Qin Kitchen. Authentic Xian noodles, dumplings etc. The owner and staff are very friendly. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Qin+kitchen/@18.7721825,98.9830306,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x30da30718081618f:0x7e147b22029bdcea!8m2!3d18.7721774!4d98.9852193 The second is Diannan. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Diannan/@18.7739262,98.9978817,19z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x30da31c91b19e56b:0x6cb11ff4d3af0006!8m2!3d18.773906!4d98.9984481 A friend of mine who speaks Chinese says it's authentic home style chinese cooking. The lady who owns it is also the chef. She makes 12 roast ducks every day and they always get sold out. She's also a really nice person who speaks virtually no Thai or English. But her 2 daughters who work there do. Another friendly place.

Which is why almost everyone wins when it comes to investing.

Unless you have access to a crystal ball or time machine, how do you when the price is at a low, and when it's at a high?