Friday, September 22, 2023

Twitter war: Here’s what could happen next in battle with Elon Musk

By Clare Duffy, Brian Fung and Rachel Metz, CNN

Elon Musk moved Friday afternoon to terminate his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter the latest twist in a whirlwind process[1]in which the billionaire Tesla CEO became the companys biggest shareholder, turned down a board seat, agreed to buy the social media platform and then started raising doubts about going through with the deal. The next chapter in the saga is almost certain to be a court battle.

A lawyer representing Musk claimed in a letter to Twitters top lawyer that he is ending the deal because Twitter is in material breach of multiple provisions of the original agreement, which wassigned in April[2], according to a regulatoryfiling[3]Friday evening.

Musk has for weeks expressed concerns, without any apparent evidence, that there are a greater number of bots and spam accounts on the platform than Twitter has said publicly. Analysts have speculated that the concerns may be an attempt to create a pretext to get out of a deal he may now see as overpriced, after Twitter shares and the broader tech market have declined in recent weeks. Tesla stock, which Musk was planning to rely on in part to finance the deal, has also declined sharply since he agreed to the deal.

Pixabay image

The Twitter Board is committed to closing the transaction on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and plans to pursue legal action to enforce the merger agreement, Twitter board chair Bret Taylor said in a tweet Friday, echoing earlier statements by the company that it planned to follow through with the deal. We are confident we will prevail in the Delaware Court of Chancery.

Twitter shares fell nearly 6% in after-hours trading Friday immediately following the news, after ending the day down 5%. Tesla stock gained more than 1% in after-hours trading.

Musk in Maysaid[4]the deal was on hold as he evaluated the number of spam and fake accounts on the platform a reversal from his previous statements that he wanted to acquire Twitter to eradicate bots on the platform. Last month, hedirectly threatened[5]to walk away from the deal, accusing Twitter of breaching the merger agreement by not providing the data he says he needs to evaluate the number of spam and fake accounts on the platform. In response, Twitter agreed to hand over itsfirehose stream of tweets[6].

Still, Musks lawyer alleged in the Friday letter that Twitter has not complied with its contractual obligations to provide Musk with sufficient data, and said Twitter appears to have made false and misleading representations upon which Mr. Musk relied when agreeing to the deal.

For nearly two months, Mr. Musk has sought the data and information necessary to make an independent assessment of the prevalence of fake or spam accounts on Twitters platform,’ the Friday letter reads. This information is fundamental to Twitters business and financial performance and is necessary to consummate the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement.

It continues: Twitter has failed or refused to provide this information. Sometimes Twitter has ignored Mr. Musks requests, sometimes it has rejected them for reasons that appear to be unjustified, and sometimes it has claimed to comply while giving Mr. Musk incomplete or unusable information.

Twitter has repeatedly said it has cooperatively shared information with Musk in order to close the deal at the originally agreed upon terms.

Tweet this: Twitter is laying off a third of its talent acquisition team[7]

Twitters stock is trading around $36, down nearly 30% since its price the day Musk and Twitter announced the acquisition and well below the $54.20 per share Musk offered, suggesting deep skepticism among investors about the deal going through at the agreed upon price. The declining value may also be among the reasons Musk is no longer interested in the deal, analysts have said.

What could happen next

In accusing Twitter of materially breaching the merger agreement, Musk appears to be setting up the argument that he should not be on the hook for the $1 billion set out in the deal terms as a breakup fee in the event the acquisition fell through, according to Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond.

The way these things usually work is that if theres a billion-dollar breakup fee and youre the one trying to acquire, then that is enforced against you, Tobias said, unless theres some kind of material breach or some kind of reason that can be offered up that persuades a court that Twitter, for example, is not making good on the deal.

Musks lawyer claimed in Fridays letter that Musk has requested, but not received, information such as the daily number of monetizable daily active users for the previous eight quarters, as well as access to the sample set used and calculations performed by Twitter to determine that spam and fake accounts represent fewer than 5% of its monetizable daily user base. Twitter has said that it relies on public and private information, such as ISP numbers and geographic data, on its users to count bots on the platform.

Despite having signed a binding acquisition agreement, Fridays letter also claims that Musk negotiated access and information rights within the Merger Agreement precisely so that he could review data and information that is important to Twitters business before financing and completing the transaction.

Twitter is likely to ask the court for two things in its litigation against Musk, said Brian Quinn, a law professor at Boston College. Twitter is expected to seek a ruling that it has not violated its contract with Musk, and it will likely seek a judicial order requiring Musk to complete the acquisition, he said.

Twitters board unanimously recommends shareholders approve Musks $44B offer[8]

In assessing Musks claims, Quinn added, the court will likely consider the information Twitter has provided so far and whether Musks requests for further disclosures are reasonable and necessary for completing the deal for example, whether the information Musk wants is needed to obtain government regulatory approvals or financing commitments.

Even as any litigation continues, however, the two sides will likely keep talking, Quinn said, and the situation could resolve itself through a renegotiated sale price. That type of resolution is common in merger disputes, he said, citing the recent deal involving luxury brands Luis Vuitton and Tiffany, which went to court but was ultimately completed at a lower price.

Musks claim to need more information is a hard argument to make, Quinn added. A judge in Delaware is going to be pretty familiar with how these transactions operate and whats normal and whats not.

The-CNN-Wire & 2022 Cable News Network, Inc., a WarnerMedia Company. All rights reserved.


More Posts

Send Us A Message

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.