EXPLAINER: Musk Twitter turnaround reflects legal challenges
News that Elon Musk has agreed after all to proceed with his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter may have felt like a stunning surprise from the brash billionaire who loves to shock
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.News that Elon Musk has agreed after all to proceed with his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter may have felt like a stunning surprise from the brash billionaire who loves to shock. It sent shares of the social media platform soaring and stoked alarm among some media watchdogs and civil rights groups worried about what kind of free speech would flourish on Twitter under Muskās vision.
But it wasnāt surprising to observers of the monthslong rollercoaster of the Twitter vs. Musk legal battle, as Twitter tried to compel the worldās richest man to consummate the buyout he had tried to back out of. In the months since his initial offer to buy Twitter in April, Musk faced a huge legal challenge.
A combination of gambles or missteps by Musk and potential advantages that didnāt pan out made his hand appear weak in the trial looming in less than two weeks in Chancery Court in Delaware. He is setting as a condition for completing the deal that the trial being put on hold.
More immediately, Musk faced a deposition in the case by Twitterās attorneys starting Thursday.
What gambits, challenges and missed advantages came along the way?
WHAT WAS MUSK'S MAIN ARGUMENT FOR BACKING OUT OF BUYING TWITTER?
Musk grounded his argument largely on the allegation that Twitter vastly misrepresented how it measures the magnitude of āspam botā accounts that are useless to advertisers.
But Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the courtās head judge, apparently wasnāt buying it. As the two sides presented evidence prior to the trial, the judge appeared to focus narrowly in line with the court's mandate: on the merger agreement between Musk and Twitter, and whether anything had changed since it was signed in April that would justify terminating the deal.
A former Twitter head of security, fired early this year and turned whistleblower, appeared to bolster Muskās argument. Peiter āMudgeā Zatko, a respected cybersecurity expert, filed complaints in July with federal regulators and the Justice Department alleging that Twitter misled regulators about its efforts to control millions of spam accounts as well as its cyber defenses.
But help to Musk from Zatkoās disclosures was a ālongshot,ā said Brian Quinn, a professor at Boston College Law School, and in the end, āit didnāt really change the (legal) landscape in any significant way.ā
DID MUSK'S APPROACH TO BUYING TWITTER HURT OR HELP HIS CASE?
āHe was fairly cavalier,ā Quinn said. Recently released text messages between Musk and others show jubilation over Musk taking a large stake in Twitter and joining its board. It wasnāt until after he signed the merger agreement in late April that he undertook whatās called due diligence, close inspection, regarding the company and starting lodging complaints about bots, Quinn noted. That may not have impressed the judge as the right approach for someone buying a major company.
WHY DID MUSK CHANGE HIS MIND NOW?
In addition to the trial looming and his deposition scheduled for Thursday, Musk faced a ticking meter of potential rising interest costs. If he lost the trial, the judge could not only force him to close the deal but also could impose interest payments that would have increased its cost. Experts say the interest likely started piling up mid-September.
But of course the deal isnāt done yet, and there are legal hoops yet to be jumped through. Given Muskās track record and volatility, it would be a mistake to assume that itās tied up in a bow.