Twitter sues Elon Musk for backing out of $44 billion merger

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    Except he’s not buying a house so your analogy falls flat on its face.

    I would be shocked if Twitter hadn’t covered this exact contingency in the contract.

    Occam’s Razor says this is simply a sociopathic billionaire (but I repeat myself) trying to back out of a bad deal he made.


    1) Bot info is part of the SEC filing info Twitter long ago made public. This is a sham misdirection argument.

    2) To your homebuying analogy, if I offer to buy your home with no contingencies and waive due diligence, and during the closing black mold is discovered in the home, that is my problem, not yours. Musk waived the due diligence portion of the purchase offer. Was that bravado, hubris, or was he just high—you did notice his offer price was $54.20, right?—we may never know. But the odds of backing out of this deal are minuscule.

    Musk’s obfuscation and hostile posturing during this mess has ruined Twitter stock price. His offer was financially insupportable when it was made, and got even worse in the weeks which followed. The Board of Twitter can’t simply allow this to pass and the $1B “break-up fee” (which doesn’t apply unless his funding falls through, which isn’t what Musk is claiming) won’t repair the share damage Musk has caused.
    I'm not the one who compared this deal to buying a house, but your quote made it look like I said that... just an FYI for you and everyone else reading this thread.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,356member
    netrox said:
    If Elon Musk asked for bot account and Twitter failed to provide that, then I don't see how it's illegal or how he can be sued.
     
    It's same with buying a house, a buyer want to have the house inspected and all questions answered before full purchase begins. If the seller fail to provide everything the buyer ask for, the seller has no right to sue. 


    Well, it’s admittedly difficult to get an accurate count of something like that. There’s no evidence that they didn’t supply the numbers as accurately as they could.

    we also don’t have the complete legal documentation of the deal. So we can’t say exactly what it is that he agreed to, and what he’s been trying to add to it verbally.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,356member
    emig647 said:
    I feel like I missed something. I thought Twitter provided Musk with the firehose of data so his team could detect the number of bots? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/technology/twitter-musk-firehose-tweets.html

    I guess there is some ambiguity around the percentage of bots that get counted towards advertising numbers and that is what Musk is fighting. This could get messy, but I think with Musk waiving his right for Due Diligence he may get burned on this. This whole situation was really bizarre. 
    That’s basically correct.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,356member
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    muthuk_vanalingamtmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 38
    This has nothing to do with bots. Its buyers remorse for a rich guy who suddenly realized that he doesn't want to tie up 20% of his wealth for an idea he only half baked.

    Compressed timeline: Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a brilliant idea. Consult yes men.  Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a bad idea, Consult yes men. 

    What ever his actual reasons are it's outrageous that this guy is trolling twitter and playing with peoples livelihood. I'm sure plenty of semi-normal employees have allot of their retirement in Twitters stock and here comes "I do what ever I want and the rules don't apply" Musk. 
    AI_liasgeorge kaplanlolliverdewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 38
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 432member
    This has nothing to do with bots. Its buyers remorse for a rich guy who suddenly realized that he doesn't want to tie up 20% of his wealth for an idea he only half baked.

    Compressed timeline: Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a brilliant idea. Consult yes men.  Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a bad idea, Consult yes men. 

    What ever his actual reasons are it's outrageous that this guy is trolling twitter and playing with peoples livelihood. I'm sure plenty of semi-normal employees have allot of their retirement in Twitters stock and here comes "I do what ever I want and the rules don't apply" Musk. 
    He consulted his Yes men and probably his bot fans on Twitter. He’s known to do that with Twitter polls. 
    JaiOh81watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 38
    This has nothing to do with bots. Its buyers remorse for a rich guy who suddenly realized that he doesn't want to tie up 20% of his wealth for an idea he only half baked.

    Compressed timeline: Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a brilliant idea. Consult yes men.  Eccentric billionaire wakes up, thought it was a bad idea, Consult yes men. 

    What ever his actual reasons are it's outrageous that this guy is trolling twitter and playing with peoples livelihood. I'm sure plenty of semi-normal employees have allot of their retirement in Twitters stock and here comes "I do what ever I want and the rules don't apply" Musk. 
    No more calls, we have a winner. 

    This saga may have begun as a way for Musk to put Twitter in play for some deep-pocketed suitor (Apple, Microsoft, etc) to buy it and Musk would reap handsome profits on the shares he had been buying without notifying Twitter. 

    When that didn’t happen, there was a passive-aggressive dance between Musk and Twitter Board, each saying the right thing in public while loathing the other party. Musk was invited to the Board, which he accepted then rejected. Then he placed the hostile offer, which the Board rejected then accepted, knowing nothing better would be found. 

    Now we are in the realm of open hostilities, but Musk painted himself in this corner by the way he structured his offer—remember, Twitter didn’t seek to be acquired—and didn’t leave an escape path on the deal. The Delaware Court of Chancery does not have many examples to suitors it left off the hook. Musk’s meddling and open disparaging of Twitter has greatly reduced share value—making his offer even worse as a buyer—and Musk’s own shares of Tesla, which were to secure the loans for purchase, also took a market hit. 

    He hates what he’s done, and nobody is to blame but Musk. 
    dewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 38
    toddzrxtoddzrx Posts: 245member
    How many fukking idiots do we need in every Musk/Twitter story talk about bots or Twitter not giving up that information when Musk waived due diligence? Seriously, how stupid are you?

    NVM, some people still think Trump won or the Earth is flat. Why should they limit their stupidity to those two when they can add Musk/bots to their arsenal?
    How many fukking idiots do we need in every Musk/Twitter story talk about bots or Twitter not giving up that information when Musk waived due diligence? Seriously, how stupid are you?

    NVM, some people still think Trump won or the Earth is flat. Why should they limit their stupidity to those two when they can add Musk/bots to their arsenal?
    Clapping Applause GIF - Clapping Applause Bravo GIFs
    Apparently just one “idiot” sends you guys off the deep end. Go back to your safe space and calm down. 
  • Reply 29 of 38
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,202member
    tmay said:
    netrox said:
    If Elon Musk asked for bot account and Twitter failed to provide that, then I don't see how it's illegal or how he can be sued.
     
    It's same with buying a house, a buyer want to have the house inspected and all questions answered before full purchase begins. If the seller fail to provide everything the buyer ask for, the seller has no right to sue. 


    It depend under which circumstances.

    If he came up with this demand as part of the agreement (“there must be no more than x% bot accounts or this short-form purchase agreement is void without penalties”) then he should be fine.

    If he introduced this demand after the initial agreement, then he’s in trouble. 
    It would be the same thing as signing to purchase a car within the next 30 days and then suddenly demand that the seller needs to prove that the car should at least run 500 miles on a tank of gas. 

    Regardless of the car’s ability or reasonable expectation to do so, it is something you’d had to put in writing on as part of the purchase contract. 

    What if the car actually would run 500 miles, and suddenly you’d posed yet another demand that the seats should be able to recline 80 degrees?
    What if you’d introduce these demands knowing that the car isn’t able to do those things, just so you can talk your way out of it?

    With a merger/acquisition normally you discuss a due diligence phase that happens before the actual purchase (and is done after a letter of intent or short form agreement). This due diligence phase could take a long time in some cases and contain clauses with roles and responsibilities for both companies. It’s like test driving the car and asking a mechanic to look under the hood to see if it’s a healthy car. This happens both ways: the seller would check out the buyer in a similar fashion.

    Also, consider the below:

    https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/explained-how-elon-musk-twitter-bid-may-have-been-a-smokescreen-to-liquidate-tesla-stocks-10896291.html/amp


    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I think it’s actually a money grab by Tesla (see above link). 
    A good sale opportunity to Twitter is not a ‘money grab’ (assuming the word has a negative connotation) by Twitter especially because they did not seek to be bought. Musk offered to buy.

    Jack Dorsey is quiet because it is professional. A CEO doesn’t move a purchase dispute onto a public forum. It’s unprofessional and dangerous.
     
    Twitter however did officially respond (on Twitter), and as it should be in these specific situations, it comes from the board of directors. 

    Some details;

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/07/twitters-lawsuit-against-elon-musk-15-revelations.html

    and;

    https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22084462-twitter-v-elon-musk-complaint?responsive=1&title=1

    Elon fucked up. Whether he will end up owning Twitter after the lawsuit is adjudicated, is all that is left.
    Well, Elon did make the mistake of making an offer.  I'll cost him some.  But his Twitter losses pale in comparison to the current market turmoil.

    NYMAG 15 point article is weak - full on hearsay and one-sided argument without supporting data.  Musk asked for a large amount of data because he has the ability to process it.  Number of verified non-commercial accounts is vanishingly small.  Number of users who has sent tweets in the last 30 days is less than 8%.  You can draw your own conclusions as to the bot content.  My 2 cents is it much higher than Twitter claims.

    Regardless, Twitter board still has to deal with Blackrock and other large investors who are unhappy with the non-sale.  The board will be forced to change.   They should hope golden parachutes await.  Because they're done whether they like it or not.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 38
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,202member
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 38
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    Elon Musk has aa history of making claims that are misleading or flat out falset. He claimed he had funding to take Tesla private, he claimed he made ventilators and delivered them to hospitals, he was going to open a taxi service in 2020 with aa fleet of Tesla cars, accused the diver a diver of being a pedophile because he rescued kids, the list of Tesla products that were announced but never shipped (semi, cyber truck, roadster), claimed he had approval to build the east coast hyper loop, fully automated self driving cars (literally has been selling a feature that doesn't exist)  .... the list goes on .... it is pathological. Anyone that sees his him is trustworthy is either woefully or willfully ignorant. I can't say that I follow statements put out buy Twitters board of directors but I would be surprised it if matched Musks trail of bullshit. Feel ffee to enlighten us. 
    edited July 2022 george kaplanAI_liastmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 38
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    https://insideevs.com/news/580787/elon-musk-tesla-private-tweet-false-judge-says/

    Stop me if you heard this one before: Musk states he’s going to buy a public company, then decides not to follow through, with claims he couldn’t get the financing. 

    The judge in the shareholder lawsuit ruled this past April that Musk lied when he tweeted he had the financing lined up. That is the very essence of “not trustworthy”.
    AI_liaswatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 38
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,202member
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    Elon Musk has aa history of making claims that are misleading or flat out falset. He claimed he had funding to take Tesla private, he claimed he made ventilators and delivered them to hospitals, he was going to open a taxi service in 2020 with aa fleet of Tesla cars, accused the diver a diver of being a pedophile because he rescued kids, the list of Tesla products that were announced but never shipped (semi, cyber truck, roadster), claimed he had approval to build the east coast hyper loop, fully automated self driving cars (literally has been selling a feature that doesn't exist)  .... the list goes on .... it is pathological. Anyone that sees his him is trustworthy is either woefully or willfully ignorant. I can't say that I follow statements put out buy Twitters board of directors but I would be surprised it if matched Musks trail of bullshit. Feel ffee to enlighten us. 
    Your desperation to find something is reaching. It’s OK, you could just admit you don’t like him as a person without resorting to this secondhand trash.
  • Reply 34 of 38
    A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 38
    JWSC said:
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    Elon Musk has aa history of making claims that are misleading or flat out falset. He claimed he had funding to take Tesla private, he claimed he made ventilators and delivered them to hospitals, he was going to open a taxi service in 2020 with aa fleet of Tesla cars, accused the diver a diver of being a pedophile because he rescued kids, the list of Tesla products that were announced but never shipped (semi, cyber truck, roadster), claimed he had approval to build the east coast hyper loop, fully automated self driving cars (literally has been selling a feature that doesn't exist)  .... the list goes on .... it is pathological. Anyone that sees his him is trustworthy is either woefully or willfully ignorant. I can't say that I follow statements put out buy Twitters board of directors but I would be surprised it if matched Musks trail of bullshit. Feel ffee to enlighten us. 
    Your desperation to find something is reaching. It’s OK, you could just admit you don’t like him as a person without resorting to this secondhand trash.
    So you are in the willfully ignorant camp. Got it. 
    AI_liastmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 38
    command_fcommand_f Posts: 396member
    Not exactly, Musk and Twitter signed a contract and that becomes the governing document for the deal. As part of the deal Musk waived his right to due diligence. Per your analogy that would be like making an offer for a house and waiving your right to have it inspected. Per the contract he did have the option to drop out of the deal for no reason but only if he paid Twitter a billion dollars. He is trying to get out of the deal without paying the billion and using bots as the reason but waiving his right to due diligence is what will potentially sink him here.  Correction, he doesn't have a billion dollar exit option, the contract allows Twitter to force him to get the financing and close the deal.  

    Agreed. I was surprised when Musk waived due diligence (see, eg, here); IIRC he said at the time that it was to speed up the process. That means he waived his rights to crawl through the worth of the business and the truth of what was being claimed before signing-up to buy - bit of a rookie mistake.

    I think he's now on a sticky wicket (difficult position) in demanding information and then saying he will walk away if he doesn't like it because that's precisely what the due diligence phase would have been about.
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 38
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,717member
    JWSC said:
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    Elon Musk has aa history of making claims that are misleading or flat out falset. He claimed he had funding to take Tesla private, he claimed he made ventilators and delivered them to hospitals, he was going to open a taxi service in 2020 with aa fleet of Tesla cars, accused the diver a diver of being a pedophile because he rescued kids, the list of Tesla products that were announced but never shipped (semi, cyber truck, roadster), claimed he had approval to build the east coast hyper loop, fully automated self driving cars (literally has been selling a feature that doesn't exist)  .... the list goes on .... it is pathological. Anyone that sees his him is trustworthy is either woefully or willfully ignorant. I can't say that I follow statements put out buy Twitters board of directors but I would be surprised it if matched Musks trail of bullshit. Feel ffee to enlighten us. 
    Your desperation to find something is reaching. It’s OK, you could just admit you don’t like him as a person without resorting to this secondhand trash.
    Not desperation, memory. The thing is I liked Musk. I thought what he did with SpaceX and Tesla was amazing. He was a visionary who made things happen. But as his wealth and power have grown he changed. Now he's just a rich guy with an ego and a mouth that doesn't think the rules apply to him any more. He's just a guy with deep pockets and a Jesus complex that keeps himself willfully ignorant of the damage he does. 

    A decade or more ago I really respected Musk. But one lie at a time, one failed promise at a time, one outrageous act at a time, he's lost the iconic status he had.
    muthuk_vanalingamAI_liaswatto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,356member
    JWSC said:
    melgross said:
    tshapi said:
    I think this is a money grab by twitter.  See, musk has claimed he doesn’t believe that twitter is being honest about the # of bots. And it appears that twitter is simply pointing to there public SEC filing as proof that there really is only 5% bots. 

    I also find it interesting that jack dorsey is quiet through all this. He’s allegedly musks ally in this, he created twitter and it’s my understanding that he was still an active part of the
    Company. 

    As I said uptop. This is a money grab. When Elon made the offer, the main reason it was accepted is because the investors got a financial offer that was hard for them to pass up.  

    I also think it’s possible that this is a war between Elon musk and the current CEO who doesn’t want to lose his job. 
    I can’t agree with that. Remember when Musk was going to take Tesla private? He Tweeted “funding complete!”. But he actually had no funding.

    from what I’ve been reading, and people I know who are as they say “close to the parties”, he never raised the $44 billion he claimed. His portion is only about 20-25% of that, and the other investors and potential investors had gotten a bit squirmy over the prospect at that high price the deal was going for. He seems to be working to, successfully so far, to lower the price of the company so far that he could change the specifics of the finances and possibly allow the purchase at a much lower price - one that would allow the deal with the funding he’s actually got.

    I can see that happening, with him saying that; “Well, at this price, it’s worth it.”

    remember that he’s just not trustworthy.
    Huh?  Why is Musk not trustworthy?  Is the Twitter board any more trustworthy than Musk?  Come on.
    Have you not followed his history?
    muthuk_vanalingamtmay
Sign In or Register to comment.