> Delaware courts have almost never found an MAE Not a lawyer, but I'd make the argument that social media is a relatively new industry that hasn't had the opp

> Delaware courts have almost never found an MAE Not a lawyer, but I'd make the argument that social media is a relatively new industry that hasn't had the opportunity to make as many notable legal challenges. This is important because the nature of centralized "digital assets" like user accounts that a social media firm possesses makes it far easier for businesses to misrepresent their possible value. There's a big difference here. Their accounts are just entries in a database: their stated user accounts could just as easily come from real users as they could from some automated program churning out fake accounts, to sweat shops that use manual labor to promote businesses, to even artificially generated accounts that social media firms generate themselves to pump up their numbers and have a better chance at tens of billions in ad revenue. Without access to Twitter's database, you can't really begin to tell their actual story. And even with access to Twitter's database, it's kind of tough to "prove" that a user account is a real person or not. In contrast, older types of businesses generally possess physical or at least some tangible assets. These are much harder to fake. A logging company might have to actually buy acres and acres of valuable forest land in order to have that asset on the books. A mining company actually owns mineral rights in some area and performs assays and things. There's a real record of these things and it physically exists. It's hard to fudge these numbers too much. A manufacturer would have to own land and trucks and machines and other assets. There's a physical, verifiable record of it. It's hard to fudge the numbers of many traditional businesses too badly and these things can be audited in some way. In contrast, social media numbers could be grossly inflated very easily, and there's no way for Joe Citizen to be sure.