3 ms·
> They wouldn't accept his advice or help on how to make twitter better after he became a 9.1% shareholder. They were happy for him to become a director. He ba
by rodgerd 4y ago
> They wouldn't accept his advice or help on how to make twitter better after he became a 9.1% shareholder.
They were happy for him to become a director. He balked as soon as it became clear that he'd have to pass the same background check as all the other directors. I wonder why that is?
> It's possible he was afraid of what discovery would reveal.
Like... his degrees being dodgy and having been an illegal overstayer in the 90s, which is a documented claim doing the rounds?
- nocoiner 4y agoHe also would have owed fiduciary duties to the TSLA stockholders if he were a director. I think this, and not the D&O questionnaire, was the primary reason he turned down the board seat. No more pumps and dump with TSLA stock or playing fast and loose with SEC filings triggered by stock accumulation.