6 ms·

Twitter gonna pull the UNO Reverse and sue him most probably for that 1B break up fee. This is going to be once again a media spectacle.

• Krasnol 4y ago
  I really hope they do so the next clown puts some thought in it.
• amluto 4y ago
  No, they’ll sue him for the actual damages and/or to force him to actually complete the transaction, which is much more than $1bn.
  • nullc 4y ago
    The actual damages will be more than $1bn? How is that remotely credible?
    • khuey 4y ago
      He agreed to buy them at $44B and they're trading after the news broke at $26B, so Twitter shareholders clearly stand to lose a lot of money if this doesn't go through.
      • nullc 4y ago
        That's a perspective but TWTR is currently trading higher than in March when the rumors started, and MUCH higher relative to Facebook (which is highly correlated and in a substantially related business).
        • amluto 4y ago
          Which could well be related to anticipation of a possible successful lawsuit. Also, right now META’s P/E ratio is very close to 1/10 that of TWTR’s. One might credibly argue that TWTR and TSLA need amazing growth to justify their market caps, whereas META is actually worth its market cap without any growth required. (At a P/E <13, assuming that Meta’s profits remain unchanged forever, their stock is a bargain even at rather higher interest rates than we have today.) It does indeed seem to be the case that TWTR has fallen less from its all-time high.
        • danielmarkbruce 4y ago
          It's not a "perspective". The shareholders are short about $18 bill right now because he's walked away. The board will take it to court and either force him to close, or sue for damages (the $18 bill). He's walking away from a pretty water tight contract. The letter sent from Musk to Twitter notifying them doesn't read well. It's not compelling, and I'd guess the lawyer at Skadden knows it.
• yucky 4y ago
  How though? Haven't they been misrepresenting their bot numbers to their investors on every single earnings call for years? Won't that just trigger an enormous class action against Twitter for misleading all of their shareholders?
  • jrochkind1 4y ago
    If you know that, then presumably Musk knows it too, and knew it when he made the offer, no? If it's true, then Musk knew it. He signed a contract to buy Twitter anyhow, so.
  • danielmarkbruce 4y ago
    What makes you say this? Ie that they have been misrepresenting the number.
    • yucky 4y ago
      Daily Active Users are reported in every earnings call, since that is one of the foundational metrics used to determine value of the platform, and the officers (at least, probably the Board as well) have known the bots were a much bigger chunk of that total than they have been letting on. They didn't "come clean" until Musk moved forward on his offer. I think that may open them up to legal liability from the shareholders. From the outside at least, it looks like fraud.
      • danielmarkbruce 4y ago
        What does "come clean" mean? They are standing behind their existing filings. There is no evidence that they are wrong other than Elon claiming he can't verify it.
        • yucky 4y ago
          >They are standing behind their existing filings. My understanding is they have historically said bots are around 5% of users on their earnings calls, are you saying that they are still sticking by that number? I don't think anybody believes that number including Twitter, hence the potential liability. I'm not a lawyer or a Twitter shareholder though so it's not something I care enough about to debate I suppose.