Elon Musk Twitter

With Wall Street uncertain about Musk's megadeal given Twitter and Tesla stock drops, the billionaire announced—on Twitter, of course—that the $44 billion ...

It is unclear why Musk suddenly raised this concern now, as the estimate was disclosed 11 days ago. But he could attempt to skirt that fee by accusing Twitter of reporting incorrect user estimates. That Musk put the deal on ice wasn’t a shock to Wall Street, though his stated rationale was unexpected.

Tesla chief executive blames bots, but some think he is looking for a better deal — or an excuse to walk away.

Elon Musk said on Friday (May 13) his US $44 billion deal for Twitter was temporarily on hold, citing pending details on spam and fake accounts.

Musk, the world's richest man and the chief executive of Tesla, had said that one of his priorities would be to remove "spam bots" from the platform. "Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5 per cent of users," Musk said in a tweet. Elon Musk said on Friday (May 13) his US $44 billion deal for Twitter was temporarily on hold, citing pending details on spam and fake accounts.

Hi, it's Liana and Yiqin in New York, still feeling the whiplash from Elon Musk's latest tweets about Twitter. Below, we take a look at Musk's options now ...

Two hours later, he clarified that he was “still committed to the acquisition.” While he seems to be toying with the emotions of Twitter investors, employees (and deal reporters), it’s too early to tell which way this is going to go. Elon Musk tweeted this morning that his deal to buy Twitter was “ on hold”, sending shares in the company into freefall. Plus, Pfizer pulled off a creatively structured deal this week, and GTCR made an acquisition.

Earlier in the week, the billionaire Tesla CEO said he'd reverse the platform's ban of President Donald Trump if his purchase goes through. The same day, he ...

More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance. It has always had intrigue and it has always had drama, says Leslie Miley, a former Twitter engineering manager. There's a lot of hate on Twitter, especially directed at minorities. Why? Because at its best, it promises an open, free exchange of facts and ideas, where knowledge is shared, debated and questioned. It enacted new policies, added labels to false information, kicked off repeated violators of its rules against hate, inciting violence and other harmful activities. Twitter had 27 employees at the time, and its most popular user was Barack Obama. That's why she's stayed all these years, despite harassment and death threats she's received on the platform. So Twitter is both a reflection of and a driver of what people are thinking about, says writer, editor and OnlyFans creator Cathy Reisenwitz, who's been on Twitter since 2010 and has over 18,000 followers. Whether and how the takeover will happen is anyone's guess.

Musk said his team was picking the Twitter official account and looking through 100 random followers to see if they were fake, spam, or duplicate accounts.

"I just can't fathom that Musk is doing anything other than trolling us with this silly sampling scheme." Bergstrom wrote in a message to CNBC, "There's no reason to believe that followers of the official Twitter account are a representative sample of accounts on the platform. The biggest issue Musk would face with this approach is known as selection bias. He wrote, on Twitter, that his team would do their own analysis and expressed doubt about the accuracy of numbers Twitter has reported in its most recent financial filings. He clarified his methodology in subsequent tweets, adding: "Pick any account with a lot of followers," and "Ignore first 1000 followers, then pick every 10th. If many people independently get similar results for % of fake/spam/duplicate accounts, that will be telling.

Tesla owner says $44bn deal has been paused until he gets more information about fake accounts.

“We’d always said he may cut or run or change his tune at the 11th hour and 59 minutes and 59 seconds on the clock. Tesla shares have lost a quarter of their value in the last month, and have fallen from about $1,150 in early April when Musk confirmed he had taken a huge stake in Twitter, to $769.59 on Friday. In 2021, it introduced an “automated account” label to publicly mark such accounts as being run by a computer, not a human. The filing does not appear to contain new information on spam accounts, however, with previous quarterly filings going back to 2014 also referring to the “fewer than 5%” figure, albeit with the caveat that the true number could be higher. If the Twitter board has a spine it will just say no and sit on its rights under the agreement.” The Tesla chief tweeted on Friday morning that the deal was being frozen while he awaited details supporting Twitter’s assertion that fewer than 5% of its users were spam or fake accounts.

Is Elon Musk a climate hero that the climate movement and its allies should embrace, or does his libertarian (or conservative) politics turn him into an ...

Urgent policy action is needed but this would probably require decoupling climate issues from other political and social debates (call it the BBB effect). There is a compelling argument against decoupling because the climate crisis reflects and contributes to deeper social and political problems. Virtually every major automobile company is committed to transitioning from ICEs to EVs. Should then Musk not be placed in the Climate Hall of Fame? But as climate policy begins to encompass other policy domains, it picks up new opponents (sometimes supporters as well). This is where the ongoing controversy about Elon Musk’s potential buyout of Twitter comes in. Is Elon Musk a climate hero that the climate movement and its allies should embrace, or does his libertarian (or conservative) politics turn him into an object of scorn? Many climate activists are frustrated (and rightly so) with the slow pace of progress on climate issues and blame it on Republicans or conservative Democrats. They believe that the “other” side does not act in good faith and cannot be trusted in making political compromises. At the opening ceremony, Indiana’s Republican Governor Eric Holcomb noted, " It’s an incredibly electrifying day for the state of Indiana as we celebrate Doral Renewables' significant investment in the future of energy generation and the state of Indiana." Instead, they use phrases such as “clean energy” for climate mitigation and “disaster management” for climate adaptation. Bipartisanship advocates we should avoid employing the phrase “climate change” or “global warming” policy because they have become polarizing. In 2020, in an act of bipartisanship, Congress enacted the Great American Outdoors Act, providing $20 billion for National Parks and other federal lands. Senator Manchin, the swing vote, is willing to support a smaller bill (around $550 billion) focused on climate, prescription drugs, and deficit reduction. Even in the Great American Outdoors Act, National Parks were not framed as conservation measures to address climate change. Social media, which shapes the political discourse of young climate activists, views bipartisanship as selling out.

It was the tweet heard round the world. In the early morning of May 13, Elon Musk posted "Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting ...

That explains the big drop in Tesla's shares, and the strong rebound on May 13 when he tweeted that Twitter may be a no-go. The best bet may be that Musk tries to reprice the transaction in the low $40s, shaving as much as 25% or $11 billion from his $46.5 offer. "All in all, it's a terrible setup for the Twitter shareholders," he concludes. The options are all on Musk's side, and it looks like the maverick planned it that way. That's why it's so essential for the seller to get terms that makes it as difficult as possible for the buyer to get out," declares Woolery. It looks rushed, as if they were so happy to get the offer they didn't demand the right protections." "The target would have to mount a lawsuit to force the buyer to close," says Woolery. "They're losing a lot of key employees already as if the new owner were already in charge. The agreement requires that all of the information publicly disclosed by Twitter prior to the signing be accurate. Second, if the target gets a higher or "topping bid." Two hours after issuing the shocker, Musk tweeted "Still committed to the transaction." Musk clearly harbored fewer resources to secure an incredibly costly, high-risk deal, especially since he intended to margin his Tesla's stock to raise the needed cash, adding to the tens of billion in shares and options already pledged. In the early morning of May 13, Elon Musk posted " most publicized and controversial acquisition gambit in recent memory was dead.