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:
So for the people saying that Twitter was a glowie psyop too valuable to tptb to ever let be sold, what's your take on this?

Were you wrong and Twitter just another pozzed tech company that was insufferably liberal and censurious all by itself?

Or did Elon do some business magic where it would have been impossible to save the luminescent operation without it being exposed?

If that's the case, how long do you give til our favorite African American is found dead of a suicide via gunshot to the back of the head? Or is he too financially powerful for even the glowies to fuck with?
IMO what happened with twitter was a black swan event so big it's got an event horizon. I doubt that twitter glows from the ground-up, But would surely be useful to such and I'd be surprised if there wasn't some involvement by several different interests. It's a useful tool to have. Nobody controlled it completely, Nobody needed to and likely nobody could. The company's simply too big for one person to just up and buy. Anyone with the money just barely has it and is vulnerable to outside pressure from other similar people/groups if it ever came to that.

And then Elon musk comes along, A guy with almost more money than God and a built-in level of immunity to fuckery by even goverment agencies, Thanks in part to Spacex's utility to the USAF as a launcher for their spysats. Damaging that is a no-kidding national security concern. So twitter's actions somehow catch this guy's attention, He decides it's worth 40+ billion dollars to change how things are run over there and just goes and does it. It's insanely unlikely and far too expensive to counter. He was in a position to do it and there just really isn't any way to stop him without an Apollo-program scale budget.
 
lmao, seethe some more, won’t change the fact that your team had all the power and lost. You can’t even go “but muh true Christian society has never been attempted! It’ll totally work THIS time!” because it has, and it failed due to its own hubris.
I grew up when the religious right was supposedly at their peak and about was many people did what they wanted then as do now. The only groups that forced anything through had a healthy left wing population, like Tipper Gore's PMRC.

The religious right whined on television in the government mandated publicly available slots on television stations and everyone rolled their eyes at them. BADD failed at getting rid of dungeons and dragons, Jack Thompson failed at getting rid of video games, and hilariously, even failed to get rid of 2 Live Crew, and Nancy Reagan failed at getting rid of drugs.
 
IMO what happened with twitter was a black swan event so big it's got an event horizon. I doubt that twitter glows from the ground-up, But would surely be useful to such and I'd be surprised if there wasn't some involvement by several different interests. It's a useful tool to have. Nobody controlled it completely, Nobody needed to and likely nobody could. The company's simply too big for one person to just up and buy. Anyone with the money just barely has it and is vulnerable to outside pressure from other similar people/groups if it ever came to that.

And then Elon musk comes along, A guy with almost more money than God and a built-in level of immunity to fuckery by even goverment agencies, Thanks in part to Spacex's utility to the USAF as a launcher for their spysats. Damaging that is a no-kidding national security concern. So twitter's actions somehow catch this guy's attention, He decides it's worth 40+ billion dollars to change how things are run over there and just goes and does it. It's insanely unlikely and far too expensive to counter. He was in a position to do it and there just really isn't any way to stop him without an Apollo-program scale budget.
Add to that the lightning pace at which an individual is able to conduct business. It’s utterly shocking to me that the entire timeline between Musk announcing his intentions and it ending up in his collection took place over the course of about two weeks. Now, surely he had plans in place before then and had likely secured promises of funding well before any public statement, but as an individual he was able to do things quietly under wraps and spring them with a massive ambush.

Given the amounts of money involved, any possible response would have needed to be a coordinated institutional effort, and two weeks probably isn’t even enough time to get all the right people in the same room with each other to start discussing their strategy, much less formulating a plan and executing a decisive counter-attack.

Elon, on the other hand, is beholden to no one. He wants to buy Twitter, all he needs to do is ask his lawyers and finance guys to make sure that everything is legally in the clear.

Even the most powerful institutions cannot possibly hope to compete with one man with limitless resources who has unilateral authority to make and execute decisions on the fly. They literally cannot react fast enough as he runs circles around them.
 
Last edited:
Still does for me on a few, but not all. Mostly seems to be anything with more than 100 replies.

I used to know people who used it, but since 2016 it was all just bullshit politics and LGBT. As people slowly drifted away, there was less to see and therefore less reason to keep logging in.

Before that you’d sometimes see interesting art discussion threads, or people discussing game design, or just fun pictures. Now maybe there’ll be some good Rimworld posts again. Plus I can go back to calling Jason Schrier a necrophiliac.

View attachment 3220970View attachment 3220969I don’t understand this line of reasoning. I don’t care if Elon Musk likes me. I’m not going to have sex with him. (Hell, depending on how good of a hatefuck it is, don’t even need to like someone for that.)

He is doing something that benefits me. The CEO of my last company met me once and fucking big-timed me for telling him he did a good job on a speech, but he paid my salary so who cares?

…and yeah, double post, but it’s been like 45 minutes between so fuck u.
Don't simp for Elon Musk, simp for Zelensky and his oligarchs and neo-Nazi militias!

I didn't know that laughing at people losing their shit counted as simping, but okay.
 
Semi off topic but how in the FUCK did Twitter ban a sitting president because of "unprecedented and ongoing violent situation in Washington DC" which he didn't incite and wasn't even a real thing let alone a big deal, but people were actively rooting on whole cities who burned, looted and in some cases murdered people for nearly an entire summer.

What in the fuck. happened there? I hope this all really ends up sucking for these demons.
It's because they were given full covering fire by the media and people who were against the censorship and theft of the election were summarily banned off platforms like Twitter.
To most of the USA and world, if CBS News doesn't run programs explaining it to viewers like they're 5, it didn't happen and you are a conspiracy theorist even though those same damn fools went hook line and sinker for years of the Russian collusion hoax and believe the 2020 riots were secretly done by the Proud Boys.
 
I don't know if this is just coincidence or not but Google just updated their Play store terms of service and the tinfoil in me sez this is aimed at Musk's new Twitter.

Included are new terms that define what a "News" App must be

A weird bit is here:

News apps must:
  • Provide ownership information about the app and the source of news articles including, but not limited to, the original publisher or author of each article. In cases where it is not customary to list individual authors for articles, the news app must be the original publisher of the articles. Please note that links to social media accounts are not sufficient forms of author or publisher information.
  • Have a dedicated website or in-app page that is clearly labeled as containing contact information, is easy to find (e.g., linked at the bottom of the home page or in the site navigation bar), and provides valid contact information for the news publisher, including either a contact email address or a phone number. Please note that links to social media accounts are not sufficient forms of publisher contact information.

Plus they added a hate speech clause that will permit removal of apps that:

  • We don't allow apps that promote violence, or incite hatred against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, caste, immigration status, or any other characteristic that is associated with systemic discrimination or marginalization.
  • Apps which contain EDSA (Educational, Documentary, Scientific, or Artistic) content related to Nazis may be blocked in certain countries, in accordance with local laws and regulations.

Plus they added a bunch of new rules for using the Android OS's new API pulling features that will severely restrict the ability for a person to record calls, messages and monitor in coming/out going data streams of their phones.

It's just a little too convient that all these new rules that can be used to de-list and ban Apps related mostly to social media came out just a day after Musk buys Twitter. But I'm sure this is just co-incidence...
 
I don't know if this is just coincidence or not but Google just updated their Play store terms of service and the tinfoil in me sez this is aimed at Musk's new Twitter.

Included are new terms that define what a "News" App must be

A weird bit is here:

News apps must:
  • Provide ownership information about the app and the source of news articles including, but not limited to, the original publisher or author of each article. In cases where it is not customary to list individual authors for articles, the news app must be the original publisher of the articles. Please note that links to social media accounts are not sufficient forms of author or publisher information.
  • Have a dedicated website or in-app page that is clearly labeled as containing contact information, is easy to find (e.g., linked at the bottom of the home page or in the site navigation bar), and provides valid contact information for the news publisher, including either a contact email address or a phone number. Please note that links to social media accounts are not sufficient forms of publisher contact information.

Plus they added a hate speech clause that will permit removal of apps that:

  • We don't allow apps that promote violence, or incite hatred against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, caste, immigration status, or any other characteristic that is associated with systemic discrimination or marginalization.
  • Apps which contain EDSA (Educational, Documentary, Scientific, or Artistic) content related to Nazis may be blocked in certain countries, in accordance with local laws and regulations.

Plus they added a bunch of new rules for using the Android OS's new API pulling features that will severely restrict the ability for a person to record calls, messages and monitor in coming/out going data streams of their phones.

It's just a little too convient that all these new rules that can be used to de-list and ban Apps related mostly to social media came out just a day after Musk buys Twitter. But I'm sure this is just co-incidence...
Think Musk has the balls to play chicken with Google?
 
Back