Business Elon Musk Clinches Deal to Take Twitter Private for $44 Billion - The deal marks the close of a dramatic courtship and a sharp change of heart at the social-media network

1649933159786.png

The tech billionaire Elon Musk has offered to buy Twitter for $41.4bn.

A regulatory filing showed on Thursday that Musk was offering $54.20 a share – a 38% premium to the closing price of Twitter’s stock on 1 April, the last trading day before the Tesla chief executive’s investment of more than 9% in the company was publicly announced.

More to follow…



1649933831102.png
1649933810146.png






Elon Musk has made a “best and final” offer to buy Twitter Inc., saying the company has extraordinary potential and he is the person to unlock it.

The world’s richest person will offer $54.20 per share in cash, representing a 54% premium over the Jan. 28 closing price and a valuation of about $43 billion. The social media company’s shares soared 18% in pre-market trading.

Musk, 50, announced the offer in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday, after turning down a potential board seat at the company. The billionaire, who also controls Tesla Inc., first disclosed a stake of about 9% on April 4. Tesla shares fell about 1.5% in pre-market trading on the news.

Twitter said that its board would review the proposal and any response would be in the best interests of “all Twitter stockholders.”

1649936433325.png

The bid is the latest saga in Musk’s volatile relationship with Twitter. The executive is one of the platform’s most-watched firebrands, often tweeting out memes and taunts to @elonmusk’s more than 80 million followers. He has been outspoken about changes he’d like to consider imposing at the social media platform, and the company offered him a seat on the board following the announcement of his stake, which made him the largest individual shareholder.

After his stake became public, Musk immediately began appealing to fellow users about prospective moves, from turning Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters into a homeless shelter and adding an edit button for tweets to granting automatic verification marks to premium users. One tweet suggested Twitter might be dying, given that several celebrities with high numbers of followers rarely tweet.

Unsatisfied with the influence that comes with being Twitter’s largest investor, he has now launched a full takeover, one of the few individuals who can afford it outright. He’s currently worth about $260 billion according to the Bloomberg Billionaire’s Index, compared with Twitter’s market valuation of about $37 billion.

In a letter to Twitter’s board, Musk said he believes Twitter “will neither thrive nor serve [its free speech] societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company”

The takeover is unlikely to be a drawn-out process. “If the deal doesn’t work, given that I don’t have confidence in management nor do I believe I can drive the necessary change in the public market, I would need to reconsider my position as a shareholder,” said Musk.

1649936465070.png


Musk informed Twitter’s board over the previous weekend that he thought the company should be taken private, according to today’s statement.

The $54.20 per share offer is “too low” for shareholders or the board to accept, said Vital Knowledge’s Adam Crisafulli in a report, adding that the company’s shares hit $70 less than a year ago.

Although Musk is the world’s richest person, how he will find $43 billion in cash has yet to be revealed.

“This becomes a hostile takeover offer which is going to cost a serious amount of cash,” said Neil Campling, head of TMT research at Mirabaud Equity Research. “He will have to sell a decent piece of Tesla stock to fund it, or a massive loan against it.”

Musk has hired Morgan Stanley as his adviser for the bid. The offer price also includes the number 420, widely recognized as a coded reference to marijuana. He also picked $420 as the share price for possibly taking Tesla private in 2018, a move that brought him scrutiny from the SEC.

“There will be host of questions around financing, regulatory, balancing Musk’s time (Tesla, SpaceX) in the coming days,” said Dan Ives, analyst at Wedbush. “But ultimately based on this filing it is a now or never bid for Twitter to accept.”

I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy.
However, since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.
As a result, I am offering to buy 100% of Twitter for $54.20 per share in cash, a 54% premium over the day before I began investing in Twitter and a 38% premium over the day before my investment was publicly announced. My offer is my best and final offer and if it is not accepted, I would need to reconsider my position as a shareholder.
Twitter has extraordinary potential. I will unlock it.
Elon Musk’s full letter to Twitter’s board





EXCLUSIVE Twitter set to accept Musk's 'best and final' offer-sources​


Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) is nearing a deal to sell itself to Elon Musk for $54.20 per share in cash, the price that he originally offered to the social media company and called his 'best and final', people familiar with the matter said.

Twitter may announce the $43 billion deal later on Monday once its board has met to recommend the transaction to Twitter shareholders, the sources said. It is always possible that the deal collapses at the last minute, the sources added.

Twitter has not been able to secure so far a 'go-shop' provision under its agreement with Musk that would allow it to solicit other bids from potential acquirers once the deal is signed, the sources said. Still, Twitter would be allowed to accept an offer from another party by paying Musk a break-up fee, the sources added.

Twitter and Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment.




Twitter and Elon Musk Strike Deal for Takeover​

Twitter Inc. TWTR 5.52% on Monday accepted Elon Musk’s bid to take over the company, giving the world’s richest man control over the influential social-media network where he is also among its most powerful users.

The deal marks the close of a dramatic courtship and a sharp change of heart at Twitter, where many executives and board members initially opposed Mr. Musk’s takeover approach. The deal has polarized Twitter employees, users and regulators over the power tech giants wield in determining the parameters of acceptable discourse on the internet and how those companies enforce their rules.

The two sides worked through the night to hash out a deal. Earlier on Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported Twitter and Mr. Musk had reached an agreement to value Twitter at $44 billion.

The takeover, if it goes through, would mark one of the biggest acquisitions in tech history and will likely have global repercussions for years to come related to how billions of people use social media. Mr. Musk, who is also chief executive of Tesla Inc. TSLA -1.30% and Space Exploration Technologies Inc., must find a way to balance his commitment to less moderation with the business needs of a company that has struggled to reconcile free-wheeling conversation with content that appeals to advertisers.

On Monday, after the Journal reported that a deal was close, Mr. Musk tweeted to indicate that he wants the platform to remain a destination for wide-ranging discourse and disagreement.

“I hope that even my worst critics remain on Twitter, because that is what free speech means,” he wrote.

The San Francisco-based social-media company had been expected to rebuff the offer, which Mr. Musk made April 14 without saying how he would pay for it.

Twitter, a day after the unsolicited offer, adopted a so-called poison pill, designed to make it more difficult for Mr. Musk to reach more than a 15% stake in the company.

Twitter changed its posture after Mr. Musk detailed elements of his financing plan for the takeover. On April 21, he said he had $46.5 billion in funding lined up. Twitter shares rose sharply, and company executives opened the door to negotiations.

Twitter shares were ahead more than 5% in afternoon trading on Monday.

The potential turnabout on Twitter’s part comes after Mr. Musk met privately Friday with several shareholders of the company to extol the virtues of his proposal while repeating that the board has a “yes-or-no” decision to make, people familiar with the discussions said.

Mr. Musk, with over 82 million Twitter followers, has long used the platform to pronounce his views on everything from space travel to cryptocurrencies. In January, he began buying Twitter stock, becoming the single-largest individual investor with a more than 9% stake by April.

He has previously used Twitter to escalate a conflict with the Securities and Exchange Commission after the agency opened a probe into some of his recent stock sales, and he often blasts his critics on the social network.

Twitter, at the beginning of the month, invited Mr. Musk to join its board—which would have prevented him from owning more than 14.9% of the company’s stock. Mr. Musk initially agreed and then rejected the offer.

Twitter has already embarked on a turnaround plan after a fight with activist Elliott Management Corp. about two years ago. Twitter said a little over a year ago that it would work to at least double its revenue to $7.5 billion by the end of 2023 and reach at least 315 million so-called monetizable daily active users at that time.

Mr. Musk’s proposed changes for the platform include softening its stance on content moderation, creating an edit feature for tweets, making Twitter’s algorithm open source—which would allow people outside the company to view it and suggest changes—and relying less on advertising, among other ideas.

Mr. Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” said in a recent interview at a TED conference that he sees Twitter as the “de facto town square.”

Twitter should be more cautious when deciding to take down tweets or permanently ban users’ accounts, Mr. Musk said, pointing to temporary suspensions as a better solution.

Mr. Musk said he also wants the platform to be more transparent when it takes action that amplifies or reduces a tweet’s reach. He said he wasn’t certain how some of those ideas would be implemented.

Twitter has spent years advocating for healthier discourse on its platform and adding content moderation, arguing at least in part that it is good for business.

The company also has introduced new features that have been gaining some traction with users, including Twitter Spaces, which allows people to host live audio conversations with each other within the platform.

Mr. Musk has said he wants Twitter to rely less on advertising—which provided roughly 90% of its revenue in 2021—and shift its business model more toward subscriptions. The platform currently offers a subscription-based service called Twitter Blue, which gives customers premium features like “undo tweet” for $2.99 a month. He suggested removing all ads on Twitter as part of the subscription offerings.

Mr. Musk also floated the idea of cutting staff, shuttering the company’s San Francisco headquarters building and not giving the board of directors a salary. The latter could save roughly $3 million a year alone, he said.

His other proposed changes for Twitter include trying to stop spam and scam bots and allowing for longer tweets. The current limit is 280 characters.

On Thursday, Twitter is scheduled to announce its first-quarter earnings.


 

Attachments

Last edited:
My favorite autism has been the "why can't magas just make their own platform and go there?" type. The absolute lack of self-awareness of these people who don't realise THEY ARE the ones who invaded the platform and ruined it for the rest of people who were using it before they got there... They really don't get that all the restrictions where not a thing before they started to sperg and demand more censorship. Why couldn't they leave and make their own platform themselves in first place instead?

Fuck it, we all know why: these are parasites who can't create, only infiltrate and destroy. I think we're seeing first hand how's the inside of a person after taking a dewormer.

Twitter wasn’t created as a conservative platform but every single “lol make your own” attempt at Twitter or big tech or whatever has been undermined at every opportunity.

If there’s something has a small following and not a direct competition, it still has to be stamped out. You can see the extreme measures taken by Null just to run KF, and even if you remove the part about lunatics dedicating their life to taking KF down, there’s no realistic way to get investors or make money.
 
So I figured I'd give my own two cents on this, because..... Well, fuck it, why not.

In a healthy online ecosystem, problems like Twitter are, ultimately, self-correcting. A site that fucks up hard enough gets Digg'd, and gets shoved aside in favor of a new platform that sucks less. Because no platform is really immune to this, it provides an incentive to both innovate and for big platforms to not be cocks, since they could very well face the proverbial wall if they do.

The problem is that we do not have a healthy online ecosystem, specifically because of two problems: Payment processors and Site Hosts.

The reason that dipshit leftists love to use the HURRDURR, START YOUR OWN is that they know they can count on the chokepoints in the ecosystem to effectively kill any competition before it gets out of the crib. If it looks - even remotely - like your new site might potentially have the ability to absorb even a sliver of the traffic of the big boys, it will be nuked from orbit, and you should know this because all of these tactics - and then some - have been leveraged against the Farms.

Activists will pressure your site hosts to shut you down for harassment and other issues, even if you've done literally nothing wrong and your credentials are immaculate. They will lie, they will break laws, and they will use every single trick at their disposal to get your site offlined and defunded because in their worldview, you don't just lack a right to a platform, they believe you lack a right to exist. We have pages worth of jannies on Reddit who quite literally download CP and then upload it to sites they want to shut down and then report it. Articles will be written about your site and how it's basically the work of Satan. These articles will then be used to pressure companies in turn.

And that's just the permanently-online activist dickhead side of things. The corporate side of things will be infinitely worse. They will leverage everything to stifle your growth, to make sure that competitors can't arise, and to kill your site, whether you're a fucking massive corporation or a dumbass like Andrew Torba. You will be artificially throttled. You will be subjected to restrictions no other site has. You will effectively be prevented, by any means necessary, from being successful, even if they have to violate every law and use every resource to make it happen. The internet is littered with the graves of countless would-be competitors to Youtube, Twitter, and Facebook, untold billions worth of capital pumped into them, and strangled out and killed long before they could ever pose a threat.

Musk doing this effectively circumvents this entire paradigm. They can't just deplatform the sheer volume of money he's leveraging, and they can't just call in favors to stop him when he's willing to go nuclear to get what he wants. Make no mistake - he can - and will - pump-and-dump Twitter to tank its stock prices and then buy the company up anyway if he so chooses. Twitter has effectively never been profitable, despite continual cash infusions and exists solely in its current state as a way to falsify public opinion cascades. However you feel about the guy, his doing this is quite literally the first thing we've seen in nearly 20 years shaking up the internal lock these big companies have had on the online ecosystem. Whether he crashes Twitter with no survivors or simply turns it into a shit-show doesn't matter at this point: he's effectively dismantled one of their three pillars of control by himself and the results, whatever they may be, are virtually guaranteed to be good for the 'net as a whole.
 
However you feel about the guy, his doing this is quite literally the first thing we've seen in nearly 20 years shaking up the internal lock these big companies have had on the online ecosystem. Whether he crashes Twitter with no survivors or simply turns it into a shit-show doesn't matter at this point: he's effectively dismantled one of their three pillars of control by himself and the results, whatever they may be, are virtually guaranteed to be good for the 'net as a whole.
And here we stand, at the junction of cope and hope, praying for the mercy of a billionaire African autist to save us from our current technocratic overlords and become our benevolent dictator, ushering in a few years of pure lulz and comeuppance.
 
And here we stand, at the junction of cope and hope, praying for the mercy of a billionaire African autist to save us from our current technocratic overlords and become our benevolent dictator, ushering in a few years of pure lulz and comeuppance.
hey, it's him potentially letting everyone say nigger or some globohomo faggot who expects you to respect a retarded crayon aficionado's preferred retard label
 
They always have tumblr
Not after the porn ban. Coomers gotta coom.
I’m an absolute retard when it comes to the stock market but doesn’t just the public announcement of “hey I got 8 gorillion shares of twitter I want to sell” have an impact on the stock price? Even if he can’t sell the whole block at once?

Like just putting it out there to the market that his shares are for sale?
Massively. Stock, like anything else, is subject to supply and demand in addition to the fucked-up "rules" about financial markets that boil down to "the stock has poor value because people think it has poor value". Take a look at how bad the pound got hit immediately post-Brexit despite literally nothing changing regarding its actual economic worth. So it sank because... one George Soros did a massive short, which convinced people its price would tank. Literally all Soros had to do was announce "I'm shorting the pound because I think its gonna tank post-Brexit" and bam, pound tanked post Brexit. Not because the pound was actually worth less, but because Soros was saying it was going to be.
If you're a middle class person and your net worth (mostly tied up in housing and retirement plans) is $500k, a fun midlife crisis at 15% of your net worth is a decent sports car.

If you're a doctor and your net worth is $4 million, spending 15% of your net worth on a midlife crisis is a decent yacht and a yacht club membership.

If you're a successful stockbroker and your net worth is $100M, your equivalent midlife crisis is a nice private jet.

But when you're Elon Musk rich, mere material goods don't cut it. There's no private island, no 747, no megayacht that can possibly spend even 2 or 3% of your wealth. You've got to buy a major corporation. I love it.
To paraphrase Alfred's words from Batman Begins: "What do billionaire playboys do? They enjoy the company of women and buy things that aren't for sale." And I'm afraid Elon Musk is the hero we deserve.
Is this "dutytowarn" account a poe? "If Twitter falls, America may too." LMAO.
I can't trust anyone with a Psi Corps-looking symbol like that. Buch of glow-in-the-dark ESP niggers there.
I saw someone propose that even if he doesn't get a commanding stock in Twitter, he could 'force' the value of the company to absolutely tank through this exact method. He would then be 'justified' in selling his shares to leave the company, which would tank the value further. All of which could end up triggering a massive lawsuit from the investor class against Twitter for negligence.

So he may even destroy the company through this other means, which is hilarious.
There's no end of perfectly legal fuckery that can be conducted so long as one has sufficient money. And you don't even need to get the law changed!
As someone who wants to watch the salt mountain be piled up to dizzying heights, then burn, Elon is fulfilling my expectations and will continue to regardless of what he does from here

He's already got the managerial Avengers of Democracy (TM) profoundly declaring in unison that to save freedom we must destroy it, a pretzel that would make the men of the Enlightenment and their immediate successors who created the modern free republican style of government want to grab their muskets and arquebuses

The absolute madlad
"Down here, salt is a way of life."
And I'm sure we all know the rest of it by heart by now.
It's checkmate. No way the shareholders leave an instant 40% return on the table. Especially for Twitter stock. A company that has yet to turn a profit
Christ, given Twitter's complete lack of path towards profitability the board's fiduciary duty absolutely compels them to recommend the sale.
>twitter
>income

without glowie funds twitter would be bankrupt years ago and they barely make a profit as is.
I think they've had maybe 4 quarters total of actual profitability instead of just fresh investor funds coming in to balance out their outflows.
This saga will probably end like the GameStonks lulzapalooza last year. The Establishment, having been beaten at their own game, will find a way (usually running to daddy gubbmint) to change the rules.
Bold of you to assume the world's richest man doesn't include Congressmen among his asset portfolio.
Gee, if only there wasn't a glut of currently-unemployed straight white and Asian men he could tap into as a result of diversity policies making them either unhireable or unpromotable.
i don't fucking care if this was already posted
View attachment 3180935
Oh no, how terrible. An end to pedophilia and open faggotry.
And here we stand, at the junction of cope and hope, praying for the mercy of a billionaire African autist to save us from our current technocratic overlords and become our benevolent dictator, ushering in a few years of pure lulz and comeuppance.
HONK FUCKING HONK.

And TWENTY SEVEN YEARS pages of autism later.
 
So I figured I'd give my own two cents on this, because..... Well, fuck it, why not.

In a healthy online ecosystem, problems like Twitter are, ultimately, self-correcting. A site that fucks up hard enough gets Digg'd, and gets shoved aside in favor of a new platform that sucks less. Because no platform is really immune to this, it provides an incentive to both innovate and for big platforms to not be cocks, since they could very well face the proverbial wall if they do.

The problem is that we do not have a healthy online ecosystem, specifically because of two problems: Payment processors and Site Hosts.

The reason that dipshit leftists love to use the HURRDURR, START YOUR OWN is that they know they can count on the chokepoints in the ecosystem to effectively kill any competition before it gets out of the crib. If it looks - even remotely - like your new site might potentially have the ability to absorb even a sliver of the traffic of the big boys, it will be nuked from orbit, and you should know this because all of these tactics - and then some - have been leveraged against the Farms.

Activists will pressure your site hosts to shut you down for harassment and other issues, even if you've done literally nothing wrong and your credentials are immaculate. They will lie, they will break laws, and they will use every single trick at their disposal to get your site offlined and defunded because in their worldview, you don't just lack a right to a platform, they believe you lack a right to exist. We have pages worth of jannies on Reddit who quite literally download CP and then upload it to sites they want to shut down and then report it. Articles will be written about your site and how it's basically the work of Satan. These articles will then be used to pressure companies in turn.

And that's just the permanently-online activist dickhead side of things. The corporate side of things will be infinitely worse. They will leverage everything to stifle your growth, to make sure that competitors can't arise, and to kill your site, whether you're a fucking massive corporation or a dumbass like Andrew Torba. You will be artificially throttled. You will be subjected to restrictions no other site has. You will effectively be prevented, by any means necessary, from being successful, even if they have to violate every law and use every resource to make it happen. The internet is littered with the graves of countless would-be competitors to Youtube, Twitter, and Facebook, untold billions worth of capital pumped into them, and strangled out and killed long before they could ever pose a threat.

Musk doing this effectively circumvents this entire paradigm. They can't just deplatform the sheer volume of money he's leveraging, and they can't just call in favors to stop him when he's willing to go nuclear to get what he wants. Make no mistake - he can - and will - pump-and-dump Twitter to tank its stock prices and then buy the company up anyway if he so chooses. Twitter has effectively never been profitable, despite continual cash infusions and exists solely in its current state as a way to falsify public opinion cascades. However you feel about the guy, his doing this is quite literally the first thing we've seen in nearly 20 years shaking up the internal lock these big companies have had on the online ecosystem. Whether he crashes Twitter with no survivors or simply turns it into a shit-show doesn't matter at this point: he's effectively dismantled one of their three pillars of control by himself and the results, whatever they may be, are virtually guaranteed to be good for the 'net as a whole.
Questionable. Always assume someone has an ulterior motive. The motherfucker may be the biggest stoner in the world, I dont think hes burning money just to own the libs or whatever. Hes selling you something, too.
 
i don't fucking care if this was already posted
View attachment 3180935
Anyone who could afford to go to a night club at that point was, well, not a normal person. In fact, they were rich. Most people in the Weimar Republic were struggling to even afford a loaf of bread by the time the Nazis showed up.
 
For the people threatening to leave twitter: How is that a threat? Do you have a subscription? Do you pay to post? Will anyone anywhere care or even notice that you're no longer there? All you're doing is making room for people who aren't self-important, triggered assholes.

Most of them said they would move to Canada. They're still in America.

I don't see them moving away from Twitter either.
 
Most of them said they would move to Canada. They're still in America.

I don't see them moving away from Twitter either.
Yeah, that'll show 'em - then they'll be another country's problem!

Has anyone suggested Russia?
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Yamma Damma
Questionable. Always assume someone has an ulterior motive. The motherfucker may be the biggest stoner in the world, I dont think hes burning money just to own the libs or whatever. Hes selling you something, too.
I'm still believing he wants to have some control over what people say abojt jim and his companies, as he wanted with chinese social networks. That should be reason enough. Also, it might be easier for him to manipulate markets.

However, I don't really care about this whole affair: it's not my taxes he's wasting his projects. I might even get some laughs from the whole ordeal.
 
Questionable. Always assume someone has an ulterior motive. The motherfucker may be the biggest stoner in the world, I dont think hes burning money just to own the libs or whatever. Hes selling you something, too.
Whatever Musk's motives are they are way better than that of the people in Twitter screeching at this. Acting like capitalists are evil because they actually get something out of the deal too is retarded.
 
I'm still believing he wants to have some control over what people say abojt jim and his companies, as he wanted with chinese social networks. That should be reason enough. Also, it might be easier for him to manipulate markets.

However, I don't really care about this whole affair: it's not my taxes he's wasting his projects. I might even get some laughs from the whole ordeal.
I have never, nor will ever have a Twitter account. But if he gets these danger hairs and blue checkmarks to rage quit or kill themselves, I'll be happy.

So far it's been pretty funny seeing these people claim how having Freedom of Speech is dangerous and will lead to facsism.
 
Regardless of Musk's reasons for wanting to buy Twitter, outright buying it is a lot better then setting up his own. Alternate Social Media sites tend to get smothered in their cribs, and having a name like Musk attached to it would make a narrative easy to build against it. By owning Twitter, he gets everything needed right away. Sure, people might say they'll leave, but to where? There's no way they'll go to Gab or Parler, and building one from the ground up would require plenty of work. Even then, they'd have to reach a tipping point in users to be any real competition.
 
The pure seeth musk bring out in these people is glorious.

View attachment 3179091

Because dictators are well known for their desire to allow free and open communication.
Every inch (or millimeter as Robert Reich has very few inches) of that pompous little tiny dwarf leprechaun thing is seething.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titos
Back