Hacker News Reader

Comment by Dylan16807 | Hacker News Reader

> One is a 12-month price target for the stock, the other is a takeover price (based on the long term)

If you expect a certain price in the future, then you should want to buy/sell toward a similar price (minus interest) in the present, shouldn't you?

> where GS is acting on behalf of the company and its existing shareholders.

That explains wanting some premium. It doesn't explain the difference between 30 and >54.

View on HN

The most obvious reasons is it’s different people doing the analysis so they should come to different conclusions.

Not that Twitter paid GS for the latter opinion, and obviously wants a higher estimated valuation to strengthen their bargaining position? Getting paid by an entity to appraise an asset they own comes with obvious moral hazard.

> The most obvious reasons is it’s different people doing the analysis so they should come to different conclusions.

Well, that's the obvious reason it wasn't a typo.

But they're trying to measure roughly the same number. It's the opposite of obvious that two competent groups would have such wildly different results.

You want to buy 100% of the stock (think about what that does to the volume of buy orders). That obviously has a much higher price than the normal market dynamics. Both things can be accurate, the price sticking at $30 on normal trading, and a full takeover requiring a significant premium.

By any normal measure I’d consider $54 a very significant premium to $30.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com