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:
I keep hearing about how Twitter is the public square, but honestly is it really?

I've heard about how only a small percentage of people even use Twitter, and of that small percentage an even smaller group generates most of the overall posts.

I don't use Twitter, how many people do y'all know in real life who use Twitter?

I think it's funny that so many people are mad on the internet because of the takeover.

But outside of that, who fucking cares? I don't use the service, and I don't know anyone who does..


I think the only people on that website are celebrities, politicians, and random trannies. Who gives a shit about what any of those 3 groups of "people" have to say?

The problem with Twitter isn't it's censorship, it's that anyone gives a shit what Twitter thinks about anything any weight at all.
Its a public square in the sense that journoswines keep writing articles based on tweets, thus amplifying their opinions while hiding behind a facade of "news".
 
Fuck Jack, didn't see him talking like this when he was testifying before Ted Cruz and Congress. It's easy to be the ideological guru who blesses Elon when he has nothing on the line anymore but he was the same as Zuckerberg when it mattered.
He was the only one who really pushed back against Congress though. While Zuckerberg was begging them to regulate him harder, Jack told them Twitter shouldn't regulate speech and neither should the government. While Facebook was asking for Section 230 to be carved up, Jack argued that doing so would only support the largest companies. He wanted to talk about Bluesky's goal of decentralizing things but all they wanted to do was ask the companies how Congress should run social media.

Jack lost the fight inside Twitter and much of his testimony was corporate CEO speak trying to tell Congress they were doing something but he was the only guy from any of these companies who made the case to Congress even halfway in favor of free speech and maintaining Section 230 and the First Amendment. Zuckerberg and Facebook went up there practically trying to be enshrined as a monopoly.

Jack's not great or anything but even his defense of banning Trump was half-hearted and he said he personally might not have done it if the decision was entirely his which is probably what got him eventually driven out since these lunatics all think Trump's Twitter was the most powerful force to ever exist in the universe.
 
I keep hearing about how Twitter is the public square, but honestly is it really?

I've heard about how only a small percentage of people even use Twitter, and of that small percentage an even smaller group generates most of the overall posts.

I don't use Twitter, how many people do y'all know in real life who use Twitter?

I think it's funny that so many people are mad on the internet because of the takeover.

But outside of that, who fucking cares? I don't use the service, and I don't know anyone who does..


I think the only people on that website are celebrities, politicians, and random trannies. Who gives a shit about what any of those 3 groups of "people" have to say?

The problem with Twitter isn't it's censorship, it's that anyone gives a shit what Twitter thinks about anything any weight at all.
No, the problem with twitter is that journalists and politicians think it's a valid cross-section of society, and are too addicted to the immediate, positive feedback they can get from the service to change their minds. Journos especially. Twitter's design tricks its users into feeling like they're talking with friends in a private environment, or into exposing their inner monologue to the outside world, so it's filled with people screaming into the void about anything and everything. Meanwhile, the media loves to use twitter as a sounding board and a cheap story source and is constantly chasing after the latest trending topics there, which is why twitter drama keeps getting blown up to international news status.

Some rando making a crass joke about being white to their friends doesn't get turned into an international pariah without a lot of effort, because the joke is harmless and their friends aren't usually retards. Someone making the same crass joke on twitter, in the mistaken belief that they're communicating with cultural peers, is guaranteed to be exposed and pilloried because the entire point of twitter is public exposure, but it is also designed to cultivate the belief that you're communicating with trustworthy "friends".
 
I don't think it's Musk or Trump she's having problems with.

Elon Musk will make Twitter worse – and it’s already a cesspit of Nazis and killjoys​

I am hopelessly addicted to Twitter, despite its many faults. Musk’s takeover, and the likely return of Donald Trump, fills me with dread

How does he do it all? Elon Musk is a father of seven, a busy businessman, a would-be coloniser of Mars and a full-time internet troll. As if he didn’t have enough on his plate, the world’s richest and most attention-seeking man has also just reached a deal to buy Twitter for $44bn. Not content with simply spending an inordinate amount of time posting puerile jokes on the platform, he is now seizing the memes of production.

But don’t worry: it is not just a vanity project, it’s “philanthropy”. Musk has explained that he is buying Twitter to protect free speech and civil liberties. “Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” Musk said in a statement posted to his new toy.

If you are a billionaire, Twitter may be a digital town square where existential matters are debated, but for most users it is more like a school playground that the bullies have taken over. I have been using Twitter for more than a decade. In that time, it has gone from being a joyful place populated by brilliant, witty people to being an awful cesspit full of Nazis and killjoys. Rightwingers will harass you for being a woman with an opinion. Leftwingers will harass you for being a woman with the wrong sort of opinion. (I had to lock my account after suggesting that demisexuals – people who are not sexually attracted to others unless they have a strong emotional bond – are not the most oppressed people on the planet.)

Twitter has become an objectively horrible place, yet I can’t seem to quit it. I am helplessly addicted. The joy has been sucked out of the platform, but it remains a uniquely efficient way to hear a variety of opinions on a variety of subjects. Plus, it remains a place where you are expected to have a presence if you want a career in the media.

Is it possible that Musk will make Twitter great again? The right certainly thinks so. There has been a lot of jubilation from conservatives about Musk’s acquisition; they seem to believe a billionaire buying a social network is a win for free speech and a rebuke to big tech. (No one does mental gymnastics like a conservative.)

Liberals are not so enthused. Various people, including the actor Jameela Jamil, have vowed, on Twitter, that they will quit the site as soon as Musk takes over. They won’t, of course. Because, as I said, the sort of people who care that Musk is taking over Twitter are also the sort of people who are hopelessly addicted to it.

It is important to put Musk’s acquisition into perspective. He is not taking over a socialist cooperative that fosters the best in public discourse. He is taking over a hellhole that is owned mainly by institutional investors and whose founder is now a billionaire. That said, it is important that we don’t minimise the harm Musk could unleash as the head honcho at Twitter. Musk is notoriously thin-skinned, yet he likes to describe himself as a “free-speech absolutist”. It seems highly likely that he will unravel what little content moderation there is at Twitter, making life harder for minorities, who are disproportionally harassed on the platform.

You know what else Musk will probably do? Let Donald Trump back on Twitter. Trump insisted on Monday that he has absolutely no interest in rejoining Twitter, but that is hard to believe. The former president’s new social network, Truth Social, has been a complete disaster and his relevance has plummeted since being kicked off Twitter. If Trump has any hope of making a political comeback, then Musk is his best bet. I have no idea how Musk’s acquisition of Twitter will pan out, but it looks as if the trolls will inherit the Earth.
  • Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
1650973430428.png



 
A lot of the reason twitter censors opinion online is because of laws. Free speech may be possible in the US, but Twitter is on the Internet and operates worldwide. It has to comply with EU law or else pay huge fines. This won't change.
Kek. Fuck the EU and their fines. The correct response to EU demanding money from an American company for breaking EU laws (which the American company is not subject to) is "lol."

Re: twitter, the EU has two options when it comes to somehow "punishing" twitter. 1) Demand fines and bent knees, then somehow physically block access to Twitter from the EU when they don't comply (good luck) and 2) Cope and seethe when nothing happens.

"I'm a twitter shareholder." lol not for long, pal.

Musk needs to ban the use of blocklists and punish users who use them. That is when twitter really went to shit.
Agreed. Anyone who's blocked more than a few hundred other accounts needs to be heavily scrutinized, especially if all those blocks were added rapid-fire in a short period.

It'd be hilarious if they just blanket removed all existing blocks and told users "try again, only blocking people who are actually bothering you." A "great reset," if you will.
 
I keep hearing about how Twitter is the public square, but honestly is it really?

I've heard about how only a small percentage of people even use Twitter, and of that small percentage an even smaller group generates most of the overall posts.

I don't use Twitter, how many people do y'all know in real life who use Twitter?

I think it's funny that so many people are mad on the internet because of the takeover.

But outside of that, who fucking cares? I don't use the service, and I don't know anyone who does..


I think the only people on that website are celebrities, politicians, and random trannies. Who gives a shit about what any of those 3 groups of "people" have to say?

The problem with Twitter isn't it's censorship, it's that anyone gives a shit what Twitter thinks about anything any weight at all.
You're not wrong, but, keep in mind that Twitter has become the main platform for many politicians. In some cases that even includes official communications. With that quantity (if not quality) of political discussion going on, I think it has to be considered part of the public square.
 
Agreed. Anyone who's blocked more than a few hundred other accounts needs to be heavily scrutinized, especially if all those blocks were added rapid-fire in a short period.

It'd be hilarious if they just blanket removed all existing blocks and told users "try again, only blocking people who are actually bothering you." A "great reset," if you will.
Blocking 100% needs to be revamped and just changed to Discords version, which is the best. Idiot thats annoying can still see what you say, but you can't see them and they can't DM you.

Twitter blocking is straight up harmful to their own platform.
 
Blocking 100% needs to be revamped and just changed to Discords version, which is the best. Idiot thats annoying can still see what you say, but you can't see them and they can't DM you.

Twitter blocking is straight up harmful to their own platform.
So how does bird site blocking work?
 
I keep hearing about how Twitter is the public square, but honestly is it really?

I've heard about how only a small percentage of people even use Twitter, and of that small percentage an even smaller group generates most of the overall posts.

I don't use Twitter, how many people do y'all know in real life who use Twitter?

I think it's funny that so many people are mad on the internet because of the takeover.

But outside of that, who fucking cares? I don't use the service, and I don't know anyone who does..


I think the only people on that website are celebrities, politicians, and random trannies. Who gives a shit about what any of those 3 groups of "people" have to say?

The problem with Twitter isn't it's censorship, it's that anyone gives a shit what Twitter thinks about anything any weight at all.
It is and it isn't.

Twitter is only a very small amount of people, however it leverages a massive amount of power as a public square because all of the "elites" use it and despite trust in the Media being at an "all time low" the majority of Normies still take the Local news and News Papers at face value and haven't realized that "Things the Media directly lies about" is only part of the problem and haven't come to grips with "The Media also lies by outright not talking about certain things."

A big example here is the Hunter Biden Laptop story, which nobody I know outside Kiwi farms has any idea about.
 
Blocking 100% needs to be revamped and just changed to Discords version, which is the best. Idiot thats annoying can still see what you say, but you can't see them and they can't DM you.
That would be fine so long as they don't impliment the stupid

"THIS MESSAGE IS FROM A BLOCKED USER" thing that discord does.
 
Back