Jump to content

Big Tech/Social Media Censorship. Musk: Blackmailing Advertisers Can ***** Off.


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Twitter's Chairman has already announced that they are taking this to court:

 

 

Seems like they aren't that worried about the discovery process.

 

What else are they going to say? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Their stock price will tumble.

Maybe…. But the stock price will be priced to accurately to reflect the market value. If a super rich guy offers you one billion dollars for your one million dollar house and then decides not to buy it, doesn’t it’s value revert to whatever the next guy is willing to pay you for it? (I realize I’m over simplifying things.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Maybe…. But the stock price will be priced to accurately to reflect the market value. If a super rich guy offers you one billion dollars for your one million dollar house and then decides not to buy it, doesn’t it’s value revert to whatever the next guy is willing to pay you for it? (I realize I’m over simplifying things.)


They realize that no one else is buying it, much less at that price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Was it Is there another buyer? How is anyone damaged here? 

 

As far as I know, there is not another buyer lined up. But Twitter's stock price has taken quite the hit since this whole ordeal started. There is no guarantee that it will rebound upon resolution (whatever that may be). As a public company, Twitter has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders, so it's possible that the board will be sued for mismanagement that led to the stock drop.

 

If the stock price remains low, it is possible that another buyer comes in at a price lower than $44 billion and buys Twitter.

 

In any case, the board has made a solid case that it should be replaced. Either by Musk upon acquisition, or, if he does not end up buying it, then they should be forced to resign and replaced by people who would be better stewards.

 

As an aside, Musk planned on leveraging some of his Tesla stock to finance the deal and since then, Tesla's stock has also plummeted (which makes the Twitter deal less affordable to Musk).  There is an outside chance at a similar shareholder lawsuit on behalf of Tesla stockholders but that seems less like than the one for Twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twitter sues Musk after he tries backing out of $44 billion deal

 

Quote

Twitter sued Elon Musk on Tuesday to force the billionaire to complete his $44 billion acquisition of the company, setting the stage for a prolonged legal battle over the fate of the social media service.

 

Quote

At the heart of the case is the issue of disclosure. To terminate the deal, Mr. Musk claimed that Twitter balked at handing over information about spam bots, also known as fake accounts, on the platform. He repeatedly said he did not believe the company’s public statements that roughly 5 percent of its active users are bots. Twitter intentionally misled the public, he said, and obstructed his efforts to get more information about how it accounts for the figures. Mr. Musk has also taken aim at Twitter for not giving warning before recently firing two key executives.

 

But Mr. Musk signed a legally binding agreement with Twitter. And in that contract, Twitter included a specific performance clause that allows it to sue to force the deal through, so long as the debt that the billionaire has corralled for the acquisition is in place.

 

In a letter to Mr. Musk’s lawyers on Sunday, Twitter’s lawyers said that his move to terminate the deal was “invalid and wrongful” and that Mr. Musk “knowingly, intentionally, willfully and materially breached” his agreement to buy the firm. The company has said that it is confident in its figures about spam accounts, and that it uses experts in spam to audit the count and ensure its accuracy.

 

Still, Mr. Musk’s threat of walking away could bring Twitter back to the negotiating table, allowing the billionaire to buy the company at a discount. Mr. Musk’s reluctance to proceed with the Twitter deal has coincided with a significant dip in the value of many Silicon Valley companies, including Tesla, his electric vehicle company, which is the main source of his wealth.

 

The two sides could also settle. Or they could pay a $1 billion breakup fee and walk away, an option allowed only under certain circumstances, such as if Mr. Musk’s financing fell through.

 

Quote

The case may then move to a trial, though there is a chance the judge assigned to the case will dismiss Mr. Musk’s efforts to walk away. If the suit proceeds to trial, the judge will decide whether Twitter’s disclosures were insufficient and constituted a material harm to the deal. The process is likely to take months.

 

In the past, Delaware’s Chancery Court has prevented companies from trying to walk away from deals. In 2001, for example, when Tyson Foods tried to back out of an acquisition of the meatpacker IBP, the court ruled that Tyson had to follow through with the agreement. In situations where the court has allowed buyers to exit, it has required them to pay damages. By most readings of Twitter’s contract with Mr. Musk, damages would be capped at $1 billion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Judge orders trial for Twitter’s suit against Musk to be held in October.

 

Twitter had asked for September, Musk asked for early next year. 

Can’t have any dissenting opinions available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/1/2022 at 10:20 AM, B-Man said:

 

 

Why Does the Left Have Such a Difficult Time With the Concept of 'Free Speech'?

BY RICK MORAN 

 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2022/04/30/why-does-the-left-have-such-a-difficult-time-with-the-concept-of-free-speech-n1594050

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE ATTACK ON SALMAN RUSHDIE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU EQUATE WORDS WITH PHYSICAL VIOLENCE. 

 

Too many Americans, especially younger ones, think it’s clever to equate offensive speech with physical violence as a way of shutting their opponents down, or justifying violent tactics to silence them.

 

Yesterday we saw what that looks like in horrifying fashion: a 24-year-old man repeatedly stabbing a 75-year-old in the eye and the liver and severing the nerves in his arm, all for the non-crime of writing a book some people didn’t like.

 

It’s way past time for the “speech is violence” people who infest every cultural institution in this country to grapple with the reality that what happened to Rushdie is exactly what they say they want for all of us.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/salman-rushdies-stabbing-shows-the-danger-of-conflating-words-with-violence

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

THE ATTACK ON SALMAN RUSHDIE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU EQUATE WORDS WITH PHYSICAL VIOLENCE. 

 

Too many Americans, especially younger ones, think it’s clever to equate offensive speech with physical violence as a way of shutting their opponents down, or justifying violent tactics to silence them.

 

Yesterday we saw what that looks like in horrifying fashion: a 24-year-old man repeatedly stabbing a 75-year-old in the eye and the liver and severing the nerves in his arm, all for the non-crime of writing a book some people didn’t like.

 

It’s way past time for the “speech is violence” people who infest every cultural institution in this country to grapple with the reality that what happened to Rushdie is exactly what they say they want for all of us.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/salman-rushdies-stabbing-shows-the-danger-of-conflating-words-with-violence

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

It's gone beyond words are violence.

 

We've already had "silence is violence" from the left. 

 

IOW: violence is anything that goes against leftist ideology. 

 

Edited by DRsGhost
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Cool. So all of the tweets about the 2020 election being stolen should be deleted by Twitter?

 

Nope.  Not "obviously" false at all. 

 

Unless you want to have them delete all the "Russian collusion" stuff as well.  Among other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

There’s as much evidence that 2020 was stolen as the earth is flat or that video Hannity is complaining about is not edited or that birds aren’t real. 

 

Fine, let's get rid of it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

There’s as much evidence that 2020 was stolen as the earth is flat or that video Hannity is complaining about is not edited or that birds aren’t real. 

 

:lol:

 

But 2016 was stolen by Russians, right?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...