Tech analysts split over Elon Musk’s Twitter pitch

New York (CNN Business) – Ask ten tech experts about the future of Twitter right now and you’ll likely hear at least five different answers.

Some rejected Elon Musk’s offer of $54.20 per share to go public with the company. Others take it seriously and expect musk to prevail. On the other hand, others are waiting while watching from afar.

“Well, this can be amusing,” opinion editorial board From the Wall Street Journal Thursday night.

When I posed the question about Twitter’s future to my CNN+ colleague Scott Galloway, he said, “I don’t think it’s a serious proposition and the market doesn’t think it’s a serious proposition,” noting that stocks closed lower on Thursday. down 1.7%. Galloway called Musk’s move “false science.” He said that “the market interpreted this, and I believe correctly, that I am about to sell my shares, and as a result” the stock price fell.

Other analysts were Equally skeptical. But MoffettNathanson’s Michael Nathanson said he would urge Twitter to “accept this offer and turn it on,” noting the many business challenges the company faces. Former financial and banking journalist William D. Cohan said the opinions against Musk’s show were all wrong: he wrote to Facebook “Fried” on Twitter.

“The task of the Twitter board will be to do what it can – and it is not so much – to get the best deal possible with Musk. And it will. Twitter will be sold to Elon Musk. This is how the world works. Its price is fair and there will be no higher bidder. That is unless Musk backs down. And he turns away, which he was known for.”

What will the Twitter board say?

By Claire Duffy:

It’s a strong enough offer that Twitter’s board of directors has a responsibility to consider it seriously, and CEO Parag Agrawal is said to have told employees that the evaluation process is still ongoing, The Verge and others report. The board may reject the offer or put in place defensive mechanisms that may force Musk to the negotiating table. Musk can also make a so-called wholesale stock offer to shareholders. Another potential buyer could come out of nowhere. Anyway, there will be more chaos around the company in the coming days.

>> RELATED: Casey Newton thought at the end of the day: “I have no idea who will own Twitter when all is said and done. But I am really worried that the events of the next few weeks and months are going to be bad for the company, and the product…”

>> Alex Heath predicted: “We’re about to see a chaotic takeover battle between Twitter, Musk and possibly others…”

Did Musk really think about this?

By Brian Fong:

On stage at Thursday’s TED conference, Musk laid out his bid to buy Twitter in the same “civilizing” terms that describe Tesla’s mission: “This is no way to make money… to have a trustworthy, inclusive public platform that is so important to the future of civilization.”

Here are two observations after listening to his words:

>> Musk said he wants Twitter to open up its algorithm so users can know when (and, by implication, why) the platform takes action on their content. But it’s not clear to what extent this can be achieved, given that the company still has to actually implement whatever changes people suggest, assuming (and that’s a big “if”) that it’s possible for the average person to realize how the system works. Algorithm…

>> It’s amazing that Musk didn’t seem to bring up the difficult speech issues. His suggestions mainly consist of 1) not promoting controversial tweets and 2) using more temporary bans, which are adjustments of degree rather than a “civilizational” change. There are legions of academics, advocates, and lawyers who are experts in the intricacies of speech and the tuning of speech, and Masker runs the loop as if he’s engaged in these hypotheses for the first time and falls in love with him: “I’m not saying we have all the answers.” Instead, Musk prefers to solve all the hard issues by applying the easy rule of “Does anyone hate this talk? Then he should be free.” It is a massive simplification of the facts of the speech…

Conservatives embrace Elon Musk as their Twitter savior

This is the title of this political story, which perfectly reflects the right-wing media coverage at the moment. When I glanced at Fox’s The Five, the sign took Musk’s view as fact, saying “Musk is trying to provide free speech with the Twitter offer.” Tucker Carlson later commented on air, “Is it sad that we all desperately need Elon Musk to save us? Yes, he is. But who else is going to save us? Nobody, at this point.” For a quick glimpse into right-wing thinking on this issue, check out this column by Elle Reynolds Federal…

More reviews

– For information subscribers, Jesica Twinkle and Martin Beers detail the people who decide the fate of Twitter: “It is likely that it will be determined by a small circle of people”, including Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and the head of Silver Lake, Egon Durban … (Information)

“It’s hard to know what someone like Musk will do at any moment,” says Kara Swisher. (The New York Times)

– Kristen Empa wrote: “What does it mean that a billionaire can walk alone and eat these kinds of communication platforms? The easy answer is not good…” (WaPo)

– Fred Wilson, Early Investor in Twitter: “Twitter is too important for one person to own and control it. The opposite should be true. Twitter should be decentralized as a protocol that supports an ecosystem of Twitter products and services.” …” (Twitter)

– Note: “Asset management group Vanguard Group recently increased its stake” in Twitter and now owns 10.3%, meaning Musk is no longer the largest shareholder… (WSJ)

Another note…

Conservative writer David French sees Musk trying to buy a broken website. Twitter is relatively small, “disproportionately influential to the political elite, and it distorts both the left and the right in highly destructive ways,” French wrote in his recent newsletter for The Atlantic. Sure, the platform is “far above traffic in terms of raw cultural influence”, but according to French, this cultural influence “harms both sides of the partisan divide in America”.

Of course, his view could be best summed up in a tweet: “Lots of people have a hate/need relationship with Twitter. They hate the social dynamic, but feel they still need to reach out to their peers and followers. If it becomes more toxic the hate eliminates the need …”