> There's no reason to assume Twitter shares can't reach the same levels ever again
but it depends on how far that "again" is.
If you bought at $33 a month ago, you'll be now getting a 60% return. You can put that in another less risky investment and still have a very healthy return over the next 5 years, say 5% , less than the historical sp500 rate, you'd get to ~$69.
So if Twitter gets back to $70 in five years Musk's offer is still an ok investment, but its growth has been almost zero for the last 8 years, it's not trivial that it would become a powerhouse in the next 5.
Think about it this way – if Twitter shares were to rise ~17% from where they are today, would >50% of investors immediately hit the sell button? If not, then why would the same number agree to this deal?
The difference is that one option is selling a declining company today for 17% bonus, the other option is selling a company that has shown 17% growth. Its not the same comparison
There's a selection bias you need to consider. Twitter investors probably wouldn't be Twitter investors if they thought it was on the decline without significant growth prospects.
but it depends on how far that "again" is.
If you bought at $33 a month ago, you'll be now getting a 60% return. You can put that in another less risky investment and still have a very healthy return over the next 5 years, say 5% , less than the historical sp500 rate, you'd get to ~$69.
So if Twitter gets back to $70 in five years Musk's offer is still an ok investment, but its growth has been almost zero for the last 8 years, it's not trivial that it would become a powerhouse in the next 5.