Musk actually buys Twitter.

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
That's too bad. I think it's pretty bullshit. It's like offering to buy a nice-looking car for the price of a cherry example only to find out its floor is rusted out and the engine is locked up before money has actually changed hands, but the slimy salesman has managed to convince the law that the buyers should be forced to buy it anyway, and at the inflated price.

In this case, Musk absolutely screwed himself over by explicitly waiving due diligence because he wanted the most expedited possible sale. He really cannot then turn around and argue that the sale contract should be voided on the basis of alleged fact finding, because that's literally what due diligence is and he already voluntarily waived that.

To use your car example, this is like someone not only choosing to sign a "purchased as-is" contract for a used car without having a mechanic look at it, but proactively suggesting a waiver of all implied warranty because they don't want to "waste time".

In other words: Musk actively chose to be insanely reckless in his hasty purchase offer, then started crying about "no take backs".
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
I keep seeing leftists claiming he did this. I've never understood what the claim is supposed to be based on.
Regardless, he clearly screwed something up; otherwise he wouldn't be trying to avoid court right now. Unless he's planning something nobody has clued onto yet.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
I keep seeing leftists claiming he did this. I've never understood what the claim is supposed to be based on.
Musk did waive due diligence in the contract, however there is more than one kind and he didn't waive all due diligence, just one specific aspect.

At any rate, the trial isn't dependent on due diligence. Multiple whistleblowers have come forward and stated that Twitter engaged in fraudulent acts and misled Musk before the offer was made. This negates any claim he "waived due diligence" because a company is not allowed to commit fraud regardless of what the victim waives. Carrying forward the car metaphor, in this case it would be entering into a sight-unseen no-warranty purchase of Elizabeth Taylor's Rolls Royce but what gets delivered is a Volkswagen Beetle formerly owned by Roseanne Burr, the sight-unseen no-warranty part doesn't matter.


Twitter's counter-argument is that, after they obtained all of Musk's text messages for that period in disclosure, he had texted that he wanted to get rid of bots in some of them so this indicated he hadn't been the victim of fraud and knew the bots were there before. Legal analysts I'm following think this is a potentially compelling argument in court and may have been strong enough to bring Musk back to the table with his latest offer. Others suggest Twitter may have been able to disclose even more personal documents of his that could have been more damaging to his reputation and he's resuming the offer to prevent them from being subpoenaed and revealed to the public. We may never know the gory details of what's going on in the smoky back rooms.

 

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
I would point out that "renegotiated the terms and settled out of court" is pretty much the standard outcome of such a lawsuit. It is extremely, extremely rare for the courts to actually void a signed and sealed contract; it's far more common for both sides to posture a lot, spar over discovery, occasionally make dramatic sounding public allegations that roughly mirror but substantially exceed the much more nuanced and technicality-laden arguments they're actually making in court, and then eventually settle down and make a quiet out-of-court deal.

In other words, all this brouhaha is pretty much par for the course aside from Musk having a much, much bigger mouth than the average CEO.
 

Doomsought

Well-known member
Regardless, he clearly screwed something up; otherwise he wouldn't be trying to avoid court right now. Unless he's planning something nobody has clued onto yet.
Legal cases are incredibly expensive, regular people who win court cases often end up bankrupt or destitute due to it.
 

Buba

A total creep
As a non-user I know very little about Twitter, apart from it being some sort of leftard bastion as they "de-platformed" Tusk (hopefully I got that right). Why are the employees unhappy? Were they hired on some sort of wokist card carrying criteria and will be fired if incompetent?
 

Arch Dornan

Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
As a non-user I know very little about Twitter, apart from it being some sort of leftard bastion as they "de-platformed" Tusk (hopefully I got that right). Why are the employees unhappy? Were they hired on some sort of wokist card carrying criteria and will be fired if incompetent?
They don't like Elon's beliefs which conflict with theirs.
 

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
Legal cases are incredibly expensive, regular people who win court cases often end up bankrupt or destitute due to it.

Neither Musk nor Twitter are remotely "regular people" of course, but yes. Corporate acquisitions cases like this pretty much require the elite "big law" firms, and the amounts those guys charge are *ruinous*.

Musk and Twitter have of course both retained best-of-the-best firms; Musk has Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, while Twitter has Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.

Both firms are engaged in Full-Bore Legal Shenanigans to the maximum degree possible; for example, when Musk failed to fully comply with a round of court-ordered discovery, his Skadden lawyers immediately cried to the court that Watchell was being unprofessionally mean to them by immediately complaining to the court that discovery was not complied with, because they said they'd fix it. That's the degree of tit-for-tat technicalities that are constantly played at this tier of legal dueling; naturally, neither side ever actually does anything without explicit court orders, but both are constantly Outraged! Outraged, Sir! at the other for lacking professional courtesy and grace.

It is actually rather funny to read when you realize how much of a posturing game it really is.
 

Ixian

Well-known member
Neither Musk nor Twitter are remotely "regular people" of course, but yes. Corporate acquisitions cases like this pretty much require the elite "big law" firms, and the amounts those guys charge are *ruinous*.

Musk and Twitter have of course both retained best-of-the-best firms; Musk has Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, while Twitter has Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.

Both firms are engaged in Full-Bore Legal Shenanigans to the maximum degree possible; for example, when Musk failed to fully comply with a round of court-ordered discovery, his Skadden lawyers immediately cried to the court that Watchell was being unprofessionally mean to them by immediately complaining to the court that discovery was not complied with, because they said they'd fix it. That's the degree of tit-for-tat technicalities that are constantly played at this tier of legal dueling; naturally, neither side ever actually does anything without explicit court orders, but both are constantly Outraged! Outraged, Sir! at the other for lacking professional courtesy and grace.

It is actually rather funny to read when you realize how much of a posturing game it really is.

Going to be a great HBO miniseries about this in 10 to 12 years.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
As a non-user I know very little about Twitter, apart from it being some sort of leftard bastion as they "de-platformed" Tusk (hopefully I got that right). Why are the employees unhappy? Were they hired on some sort of wokist card carrying criteria and will be fired if incompetent?
Yes.

 

Robovski

Well-known member
Yes.

I'm only concerned where are all of those purged from Twitter going to end up instead? They won't just stop being who they are.
 

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
Going to be a great HBO miniseries about this in 10 to 12 years.

I mean, this is pretty much elite lawyer 101 -- "I am a consummate professional who always acts in perfect good faith and should be given every professional courtesy (and then some; it's only reasonable!). My rival on the other side is a grasping scoundrel whose every twitch must be closely monitored by the court. This means that even when I'm wrong, it is the opponent who has wounded me to the quick with his discourtesy and rudeness, and I am merely reporting to the court that he is a crybaby and a tattle-tale!"
 

Tyzuris

Primarch to your glory& the glory of him on Earth!
They don't like Elon's beliefs which conflict with theirs.
Yeah. Apparently some Twitter employee already commented that if this deal goes through soon enough, it's going to have potential effects in upcoming midterms.

Which kinda in implied way proves that Twitter has made it easier for liberals/left-leaning people by favouring them and censoring right/conservative-leaning people.

Of course the left and liberals will be mad now that the moderation in Twitter will change and now there's no more preferential treatment for lib-lefties by moderator staff winning their arguments for them by silencing right/conservative-leaning people against whom the left-libs have weaponized mass reporting to silence them rather than doing the actual job of debating and so on...

And now this terrifies the lazy lefties who're gonna have to work and argue for their views rather than have Twitter staff press the scales in their favour.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top