3 ms·
If he says that the bots inflate the number of eyeballs that is reason enough to pull out. He is already publicly implying it.
by 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 agoPublicly 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 agoHe 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 agoLike 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 agoMusk'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.