#BringBackWhatsapp CAMPAIGN

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ebuka Allison

New member
Feb 19, 2013
1,391
0
0
Visit site
The point is, since this is a review and not approval, the deal is likely not conditional on it and possibly closed and Facebook=WA.
The point is, using MS acquisition of a Nokia division as an explanation for why facebook =/=WA is completely wrong as they were two drastically different deals from the execution perspective.
The point is, one way or the other, you really think Facebook can't influence WA at this point?!

Btw we're still waiting for the "business deal" explanation from you
Facebook's acquisition of messaging service WhatsApp is facing a potential antitrust review in Europe, an unexpected twist to a $19 billion deal that has been approved in the U.S. but raised concerns among Europe's telecom companies
 

borasar

New member
Jan 4, 2013
457
0
0
Visit site

The approval is not necessary since WA doesn't have enough revenues to warrant such approval. And even if it was necessary, the approval thresholds would have been very different between an acquisition of a large chunk of Nokia and a WA acquisition, due to revenues and where the companies are based.

The deal can close without this review as the approval isn't necessary, this is a precautionary measure that they are taking to avoid the telcos going after them after the fact.

I'm still however waiting on you countering the other differences I've stated, you seem to be hanging on to this one regulatory thing cause it's the easiest to Google.

Bottom line is, Facebook acquisition of WA is totally different from MS acquisition of a large chunk of Nokia, so one should have never been mentioned as support for why the other has or hasn't closed.
 

Ebuka Allison

New member
Feb 19, 2013
1,391
0
0
Visit site
The approval is not necessary since WA doesn't have enough revenues to warrant such approval. And even if it was necessary, the approval thresholds would have been very different between an acquisition of a large chunk of Nokia and a WA acquisition, due to revenues and where the companies are based.

The deal can close without this review as the approval isn't necessary, this is a precautionary measure that they are taking to avoid the telcos going after them after the fact.

I'm still however waiting on you countering the other differences I've stated, you seem to be hanging on to this one regulatory thing cause it's the easiest to Google.

Bottom line is, Facebook acquisition of WA is totally different from MS acquisition of a large chunk of Nokia, so one should have never been mentioned as support for why the other has or hasn't closed.
It hasn't been closed till all the bodies have been appeased
 
Last edited:

borasar

New member
Jan 4, 2013
457
0
0
Visit site
It hasn't been closed till all the bodies have been appealed

There is no appeal, because there was no rulling.
The approval wasn't required. The difference between getting clearance and getting an opinion.
Let me ask you this, what is the latest by which this deal must close? And what happens if it doesn't?
 

Ebuka Allison

New member
Feb 19, 2013
1,391
0
0
Visit site
There is no appeal, because there was no rulling.
The approval wasn't required. The difference between getting clearance and getting an opinion.
Let me ask you this, what is the latest by which this deal must close? And what happens if it doesn't?
Sorry, typo. I meant appeased. I don't know, I don't know and this is irrelevant. We didn't know about Apple/ Beats, MS/Skype/Nokia and Google/Moto. It changes nothing. Approval is needed for mergers to through. This is boring and I'm going away now.
 

borasar

New member
Jan 4, 2013
457
0
0
Visit site
Sorry, typo. I meant appeased. I don't know, I don't know and this is irrelevant. We didn't know about Apple/ Beats, MS/Skype/Nokia and Google/Moto. It changes nothing. Approval is needed for mergers to through. This is boring and I'm going away now.

I guess that's hard to Google? It's actually relevant since the deal has to close very soon or Facebook has to pay $1B to WA for not closing the deal on time. So given that, do you think Facebook would put an unnecessary condition into this deal that can potentially prevent it from closing on time?

Lawyers: "Hey Mark, this deal doesn't actually need EU approval, but we gonna go ahead and put this as a condition for closing anyway. Btw if we don't get the approval, which we don't need, the deal won't close and you'll have to pay $1B to whatsapp"


Approval isn't needed, they are getting an opinion, since the deal can close without it. I've shown it to you and you are ignoring it. Also this wasn't a merger, this was an acquisition. If this was a merger it would take longer from the legal and tax standpoint. If you're going to be arguing technicalities at least get that right.

I guess it's boring when you lose arguments and don't know what you're talking about. iamtim was adult enough to admit when he was wrong, you clearly don't have that in you.

I'm done, have a good one!
 

Ebuka Allison

New member
Feb 19, 2013
1,391
0
0
Visit site
I guess that's hard to Google? It's actually relevant since the deal has to close very soon or Facebook has to pay $1B to WA for not closing the deal on time. So given that, do you think Facebook would put an unnecessary condition into this deal that can potentially prevent it from closing on time?

Lawyers: "Hey Mark, this deal doesn't actually need EU approval, but we gonna go ahead and put this as a condition for closing anyway. Btw if we don't get the approval, which we don't need, the deal won't close and you'll have to pay $1B to whatsapp"


Approval isn't needed, they are getting an opinion, since the deal can close without it. I've shown it to you and you are ignoring it. Also this wasn't a merger, this was an acquisition. If this was a merger it would take longer from the legal and tax standpoint. If you're going to be arguing technicalities at least get that right.

I guess it's boring when you lose arguments and don't know what you're talking about. iamtim was adult enough to admit when he was wrong, you clearly don't have that in you.

I'm done, have a good one!
Also, meant acquisition, stupid news blogs confusing me.
I don't know, you may have me over on this one so thanks for the explanation.
However, the point was just to show that Facebook and Whatsapp are independent at the moment,nothing more. That is right, isn't it? I'm tired and this is boring because I don't like business stuff, I prefer philosophy and science :)
 

dedracer

New member
Jan 4, 2014
133
0
0
Visit site
@joebelfiore Sorry for being quiet about WhatsApp. We've worked with them to get a fix built and expect it to be back QUITE SOON.
 

dedracer

New member
Jan 4, 2014
133
0
0
Visit site
So I presume that the fix has been done as joe is talking in the past sense, and guess we can expect the update in few days. Maybe till Monday ! Andddd I dunno what does his quite soon means! 1 day? 1 week? Or 1 month? ;)
 

Everton Lagemann

New member
Apr 10, 2014
6
0
0
Visit site
I know that it could be a little bit late for a change, and I haven't read all the thread to see if someone already said that, but I think that it may be more effective if we use a hashtag that make whatsapp looks like it is been shut down like #GoodByeWhatsapp or #WhatsappIsOver. It will make a lot of non-WP user pay attention to this (fear of lose the app) and by consequence make it a TT.

Making WHATSAPP IS OVER a TT will for sure draw attention of whatsapp inc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,916
Messages
2,242,890
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb