1. @elonjet suddenly started to engage in some extremist/TOS-breaking behaviour
2. Elon Musk changed his mind
Given that #2 has happened a few times already, I think that's a pretty reasonable assumption.
1. @elonjet suddenly started to engage in some extremist/TOS-breaking behaviour
2. Elon Musk changed his mind
Given that #2 has happened a few times already, I think that's a pretty reasonable assumption.
Elon went hard right after TSLA was excluded from ESG Index (which happened under Biden), and Elons net worth is tied into TSLA stock pretty hard. In controlling Twitter, he hopes to essentially sway the public towards a more conservative view in hopes of getting Republicans elected into office, which then will result in economic policies that should drive TSLA stock up.
Just kidding, he will buy Twitter and turn it into the everything app and it will be awesome.
September 2022 vs October 2022
--------
Elon will fire 75% of Twitter October statement.
Elon will not fire most of Twitter (November). Look, stupid media was tricked by Rahul Ligma.
Elon fires 75% of Twitter (December)
Because Elon Musk signed an ironclad contract promising to buy Twitter.
> Also, what was the November statement where Musk said he wouldn't fire most of Twitter? I missed that one.
Look up the Rahul Ligma stuff. He was implying that all the media got it wrong and he wasn't going to fire Twitter employees. To Turns out the media was right. Musk was planning to fire them the whole time and Musk was just doing his usual distraction shenanigans.
Right, but I hope you can see how "a court prevented him from changing his mind about the acquisition" is different than "he changed his mind again and decided to buy Twitter after all".
> Look up the Rahul Ligma stuff.
I did a bit of Googling, but I don't see what you're alluding to (there's a lot of coverage of Twitter drama involving Ligma, apparently). :/
I'm not asking for examples of Musk being wrong about something and correcting himself. I think it's commonly assumed that Musk discovered that this argument would not hold up in court, so he pivoted accordingly.
>Elon will not fire most of Twitter (November). Look, stupid media was tricked by Rahul Ligma.
This is a better example. Could you link a statement to this effect directly?
He literally signed a document in March to buy Twitter, and literally a month later had to be sued to be forced to finish the contract.
How many times does he have to change his mind before you accept this fact?
The number of times he two-faced flip flopped on the Twitter buyout is insane. I've lost count of examples.
Yes, and the intervening event that justifies the narrative flip is that he got increased access to Twitter's internal systems and decided that the company had deeper issues than initially appreciated. Rejecting a purchase where there's a hidden defect is not flip-flopping, the fact that you can't see the obvious weakness of this example is telling.
btw, where's the statement that Elon said that he would not be firing most of Twitter? Again, that seems to be a much better example.... if you can provide it. But maybe you can't?
This does not make Elon look any better. Elon himself chose to eschew due diligence when he signed the first intent to buy. The first intent to buy was incredibly unusual in the first place because he did not ask for any due-diligence.
If I tell you I will buy your car, no questions asked, and then show up and start complaining about the headlights, that is flip-flopping. It's why the whole thing went to court. Do you really think normal M&A doesn't include due-diligence?
Regardless, the "hidden" issues were a scapegoat. It is far more likely that he wanted to backout because the entire tech sector crashed and 44B was now an insane premium (SNAP, which was worth ~30B at the time is now 15B).
Really? He specifically claimed that the offer was truly unconditional, no matter what sort of fraud or criminality might be occurring within Twitter? That seems very unlikely to me.
Yes. This was a huge deal, I don't know how you missed it. It's also why no one believed he could get out of it. That's why he had to tried sue to cancel the deal instead of just, cancelling the deal? It wasn't even clear that if he managed to prove TWTR had misled investors that could cancel the deal.
[1] https://fortune.com/2022/08/23/twitter-elon-musk-whistleblow...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/judge-calls-elon-musk-legal-...
You are running away from this point. So I'll go focus on this one thank you.
Because you know the Twitter buyout has more waffles and flip flops than you care to defend.
BTW, the contract waived Elons right to research Twitter's books. Suddenly, after signing the contract, he flip flopped on that point too.
And sealioning's just dull, dull, dull.
"All the houses in this picture? They've already got our solar roof tiles fitted!" (they didn't)
"Everything Hyperloop!"
My issue with Musk isn't that he changes his mind based on new evidence, or even oversells promises of the future. It's the fact he's willing to stand in front of a crowd, look people in the eye and _flat_out_lie_ about what state things are in today.
> The people have spoken. > Trump will be reinstated. > Vox Populi, Vox Dei. > 2:53 AM · Nov 20, 2022
I can't think of one, can you?