3 ms·

Not too sure about that one. If a firm deliberately misrepresents anything to a potential buyer/investor we would rightly call that as fraud.

• kmonsen 4y ago
  He declined his right to do any due diligence so they couldn't misrepresent anything since they didn't provide anything. Also they didn't want him to buy and did their best to get him to not do that.
  • HWR_14 4y ago
    > they didn't want him to buy and did their best to get him to not do that. They didn't want to be the target of a pump and dump. And they didn't want a bunch of distracting rumors from a takeover bid with no financing. As soon as Elon put financing together they said "yes" pretty quickly.
    • kmonsen 4y ago
      The board doesn't want to sell to Elon at any price, but the shareholders told them their opinion was not very important as Elon's price was higher than anyone thought the company was worth at the time. Now there is no question that price was way too high.
  • systemvoltage 4y ago
    This is false. He declined his right to do any further due diligence based on what facts that presented in the SEC filings. If those facts turn out to be untrue, shareholders can sue Twitter.
    • kmonsen 4y ago
      Right, he declined to do more due diligence after having done none. Looking at SEC filings is not doing due diligence. It is also not statements Twitter made as part of the deal. Shareholders can only sue Twitter if those facts are materially false. This is an incredibly high bar that is almost never met.
    • aliswe 4y ago
      *inaccurate ;)