Again, it's not overvalued if that's the value he placed on it.
Which he did.
Because that's what he decided he would pay for it.
It doesn't matter WHY Musk valued Twitter that highly. But that he bought it for that much means that he DID value it that high.
It by definition works exactly that way.
The borrowing has nothing to do with it except that it's part of the price Musk paid because of the value he placed on the transaction.
@volkris it has everything to do with it. Your Nazi-enabler idol wouldn't be complaining that Twitter has lost 40 billion dollars of value if he hadn't paid, by his own admission, more than twice the value of the site.
If you tank a ~20 billion dollars website with a 13 billion dollars debt that was entirely avoidable by buying it at normal price, and then proceed to alienate the only revenue source, you can't really complain that you are left with something now worth 4 billion (and dwindling)
Musk is a troll. You're talking about him, so his trolling is working. Yay, I guess.
But you're still missing that he paid the amount that the site was worth to him, or else he wouldn't have signed the deal.
He can whine all he wants about it, but that doesn't change the history, that the site was worth to him what he paid for it, or else he wouldn't have agreed to the purchase.
But in the end, he's getting SO MUCH attention out of the whole thing, including your attention, that it sort of seems like he's getting his bang for his buck.
It's hard to see how else he could have used all of that money to get so much reaction, to troll any harder.
@volkris it doesn't work that way.
Especially considering that he had to borrow 13 billions from banks for the acquisition, which are now part of Twitter's debt.