Inside 62 page case Twitter, which opened on Tuesday, accused Elon Musk of violating its deal to buy the social media company. $44 billion. Mr. Musk, the richest man in the world, tried back from purchaseCiting the number of Twitter’s fake accounts, he accused the company of failing to provide him with sufficient information and misrepresenting himself.
In its lawsuit, Twitter tried to show that it had the right to sue him for closing the deal. Musk’s arguments against it were of no value. Instead, Mr. The company said it was Musk who violated the agreement. Twitter was brutal, describing its escape strategy as a “model of hypocrisy” and a “model of malice”. He backed up his claim with numerous tweets from the billionaire.
Here are the key points Twitter has made to show that it is not in breach of the agreement, and Mr. It was Musk.
Twitter Make the necessary disclosure on spam accounts.
The company, which, unlike Mr. Musk, claimed that Twitter had hindered efforts to learn about spam accounts, said it provided him with data in his case. When Mr. Musk requested information, the company complied with some of his requests.like handing over the so-called fire hoseor lots of streams of tweets.
But even so, Twitter has Mr. Musk’s requests for information became increasingly unreasonable.
According to the lawsuit, “From the very beginning, the defendants’ requests for information were designed to try to break the deal”. “Musk’s increasingly bizarre demands reflect a litigation-driven campaign attempting to create a record of Twitter’s uncooperativeness, not a genuine review of Twitter’s processes.”
Twitter said it had no “material negative impact”.
Mr. Musk argued that Twitter’s public disclosure that about 5 percent of its users are bots is financially misleading, and that this would have a “material negative impact” under the terms of the agreement. Mr. Musk’s contract with Twitter requires that the regulatory statements he has made since January are accurate.
But Twitter noted that regulatory filings warned the numbers were estimates. (Twitter’s CEO, Parag Agrawal, outlining how the company detects and fights spam bots.) Twitter also noted that the bots’ existence was a sign of Mr. Musk wanted to buy Twitter. It had a “material negative impact” as regulator statements, which estimated roughly 5 percent of its users were bots, were misleading. Discussing about Twitter
Twitter said it was running its business as it normally would and was hiring Mr. Musk has been updated.
Mr. Musk said another reason he wanted to pull out of the deal was because Twitter wasn’t running its business as he expected as the acquisition closed. Among other things, Mr. Musk said Twitter was slowing his recruiting and didn’t let him know. before firing two executives recentlyHe said he violated the terms of the agreement.
But Twitter said in its case that the slowdown in hiring is in line with Mr Trump. Musk had told the company he wanted it. The company added that it informed Mr. Musk’s lawyers said they “did not object” to the decision to release the two executives and the lawyers. When the team Mr. Musk’s lawyers were informed of these decisions.
Twitter says Mr. Musk violated the deal by halting efforts to close the deal.
According to the terms of the agreement, Mr. Musk should use “reasonable best efforts” to close the deal, including debt financing for the $44 billion acquisition.
However, in the Twitter case, Mr. Musk seemed to have given up on efforts to complete debt financing in breach of the deal. The company also said it disappeared when its executives, including Twitter’s chief financial officer Ned Segal, reached out to discuss the numbers regarding Mr.’s spam accounts. Musk has expressed concern.
Mr. According to the lawsuit, Musk also appeared to get rid of executives who worked to help him close the deal, like Intel’s former CEO Bob Swan. On June 23, Mr. Musk said on Twitter that he “asked Swan to drop the deal process as we are not on the same wavelength.”
Twitter says Mr. Musk violated the terms of the deal by humiliating the company.
The contract of agreement was also signed by Mr. Musk could not disparage Twitter or its employees in his tweets. Yet it has repeatedly done so, Twitter claimed, in violation of the agreement.
The case included a series of screenshots of Mr. Musk’s tweets said that a lawyer on Twitter informed him that he had violated a confidentiality agreement. In another, Mr. Musk used a poop emoji in response to a tweet from Mr. agrawal Also, Twitter, Mr. Musk’s comments on Twitter and at conferences cast doubt on the veracity of Twitter’s disclosure of spam accounts.
