Conversation

Notices

1. LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} (lnxw48a1)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 16:10:02 UTC LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864}

   Remote profile options...
   https://nu.federati.net/url/289353 [arstechnica com]
   
   $1,5,000,000 payment on the #Twitter purchase is due soon. Will there be a default?
   • LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} (lnxw48a1)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 16:22:51 UTC LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864}

     Remote profile options...

     in reply to
     > The Tesla and SpaceX chief financed his $44 billion deal to take Twitter private in October by securing the huge debt from a syndicate of banks led by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and Mitsubishi. The $13 billion debt is held by Twitter at a corporate level, with no personal guarantee by Musk.
     
     The article isn't clear about the installment terms. $1.5B/year could be in annual, semiannual, quarterly, or monthly payments.
     
     I cannot imagine how various big banks allowed themselves to be suckered into that deal. From the outside, everything about it seemed unsound from the beginning. And as a lender, I certainly would not have allowed the loan to be collateralized by Twitter itself. It would either have been pledge your ${NASDAQ_[TSLA]} #Tesla shares and #SpaceX shares, or some other way of lending it directly to Elon Musk himself.
     
     Maybe bank regulators need to investigate how these banks got into a clearly unsound situation ... and maybe push these banks' top management executives entirely out of the industry.