4 ms·

That's not how it works – he has to go through with the deal unless one of the possible reasons he may back out for (and pay the US$1 billion) comes into being.

strangattractor 4y ago
If he says that the bots inflate the number of eyeballs that is reason enough to pull out. He is already publicly implying it.
- sgarman 4y ago
  Publicly implying won't let him back out for free. He needs to prove twitter acted in bad faith or "material adverse effect." No such evidence has been provided. BTW material adverse effect is an very hard standard to prove it needs to “substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally-significant manner."
- arcticbull 4y ago
  He waived contingency on due diligence. He has no right to back out on the basis of the due diligence he should have done before he signed the contract. A court can order him to complete the purchase as committed ('specific performance').
  - strangattractor 4y ago
    Like reporting inflated numbers. Whatever - then he is stuck with not being able to change anything. Or we will see a protracted court battle. Or Twitter will take their billion and be happy.
    - jcranmer 4y ago
      > Or we will see a protracted court battle. Delaware is actually pretty quick with court cases, a couple of months end-to-end.
- klyrs 4y ago
  Musk's twitter account has a famously tenuous relationship with reality. He declined to perform due diligence, and his attempted pullout was contemporaneous with the TSLA stock (which his loan is leveraged against) plummeting. We'll probably see how it all plays out after years of protracted court battles. If I was Jack, I wouldn't want to stick around for that drama either.
bfgoodrich 4y ago
mikkergp 4y ago
I’m very confused by all the news articles being wishy wash on this, but while I understand what you say to be the truth, I think the reality is we won’t know what the “actual” consequences are until 1. Musk makes some kind of decision official, 2. Twitter sues to force him to complete the deal and 3. A judge decides.

strangattractor 4y ago

If he says that the bots inflate the number of eyeballs that is reason enough to pull out. He is already publicly implying it.

sgarman 4y ago
Publicly implying won't let him back out for free. He needs to prove twitter acted in bad faith or "material adverse effect." No such evidence has been provided. BTW material adverse effect is an very hard standard to prove it needs to “substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally-significant manner."
arcticbull 4y ago
He waived contingency on due diligence. He has no right to back out on the basis of the due diligence he should have done before he signed the contract. A court can order him to complete the purchase as committed ('specific performance').
- strangattractor 4y ago
  Like reporting inflated numbers. Whatever - then he is stuck with not being able to change anything. Or we will see a protracted court battle. Or Twitter will take their billion and be happy.
  - jcranmer 4y ago
    > Or we will see a protracted court battle. Delaware is actually pretty quick with court cases, a couple of months end-to-end.
klyrs 4y ago
Musk's twitter account has a famously tenuous relationship with reality. He declined to perform due diligence, and his attempted pullout was contemporaneous with the TSLA stock (which his loan is leveraged against) plummeting. We'll probably see how it all plays out after years of protracted court battles. If I was Jack, I wouldn't want to stick around for that drama either.

bfgoodrich 4y ago

mikkergp 4y ago

I’m very confused by all the news articles being wishy wash on this, but while I understand what you say to be the truth, I think the reality is we won’t know what the “actual” consequences are until 1. Musk makes some kind of decision official, 2. Twitter sues to force him to complete the deal and 3. A judge decides.