Twitter has retained the services of a heavyweight merger law firm to sue Tesla CEO Elon Musk for moving to drop his $44 billion takeover of the company, according to a report.

The company has hired Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLP to represent it in a forthcoming suit, Bloomberg reported Sunday. Bloomberg cited sources who declined to be identified due to the private nature of the matter.


https://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/twitter-lawyers-sue-elon-musk-broken-deal-report

I'm sure whoever represents Musk is just as "heavyweight" - yawn.

The attorneys on both sides aren't going to be like Rudy "Normal Scrutiny" Giuliani. There's going to be some big time litigators fighting this out.

Quote:

---

Bloomberg cited sources who declined to be identified due to the private nature of the matter.

---

Curious choice of words there. There's nothing private about the contents of an SEC filing. And if there is and it is material information, Twitter has already lost.

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

Discovery!

From a logical point of view, failure to disclose; or more accurately, deliberately falsifying accurate customer numbers, sure seems like solid grounds to stop a buyout....or minimally discounting the price significantly. Good luck to the Musk team...but I still think Twitter at $35 is even overpriced.

Elon is represented by Skadden Arps so I think its going to be fine.

japantiger said:

---

From a logical point of view, failure to disclose; or more accurately, deliberately falsifying accurate customer numbers, sure seems like solid grounds to stop a buyout....or minimally discounting the price significantly. Good luck to the Musk team...but I still think Twitter at $35 is even overpriced.

---

Of course it's overpriced at @35. That's a 152 PE. This is not an IPO stock. Google has a 21 PE. Facebook is 12. At a 21 PE, Twitter should be about $5 per share.

Twitter is a dog with fleas and has been since the beginning. Now it's eat up with insane liberals running the joint.

Zuck said he's about to fire a bunch of people. Oracle the same. Yet Twitter makes **** profit and they continue with thier social Justice idiocy completely detached from making money. The CEO should be beaten within inch of his life.

Twitter has been exposed.

Don't think Twitter will be around in 10 years.

Would seem odd if he didn't have a feasibility period. Seems unlikely they can enforce specific performance.

They have to in order to re position for negotiations .

What advertiser would give money to twitter right now without some really big questions answered?

Marcus Brutus said:

---

The CEO should be beaten within inch of his life.

---

And he is a pr*ck.

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Agree with this. Especially the board who were probably slow walking or flat out stonewalling most requests. They are trying to play innocent here, but will end up being exposed as the political hacks we know they are.

SMM48 said:

---

What advertiser would give money to twitter right now without some really big questions answered?

---

Ad firms control the buys. They will prob double down and increase ads on Twitter.

Marcus Brutus said:

---

japantiger said:

---

From a logical point of view, failure to disclose; or more accurately, deliberately falsifying accurate customer numbers, sure seems like solid grounds to stop a buyout....or minimally discounting the price significantly. Good luck to the Musk team...but I still think Twitter at $35 is even overpriced.

---

Of course it's overpriced at @35. That's a 152 PE. This is not an IPO stock. Google has a 21 PE. Facebook is 12. At a 21 PE, Twitter should be about $5 per share.

Twitter is a dog with fleas and has been since the beginning. Now it's eat up with insane liberals running the joint.

Zuck said he's about to fire a bunch of people. Oracle the same. Yet Twitter makes **** profit and they continue with thier social Justice idiocy completely detached from making money. The CEO should be beaten within inch of his life.

---

Don't sugar coat it...tell me how you really feel

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Musk wins again

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Or Twitter finds out in discovery that Elon had no intention of buying Twitter and goes to Martha Stewart State for securities fraud.

oldarmyjess66 said:

---

Don't think Twitter will be around in 10 years.

---

Not sure many of these social media apps will be if they continue to conduct their business in such a short sighted manner.

I dropped Facebook years ago due to their algorithm and over abundance of advertising. Just did the same with Instagram. Used to love Instagram because it was just pictures, now it is 2 ads and 2 "suggested" post to every 2 post that I care about. And most of those ads are video post, it's just too annoying. And I've never really used twitter. So I'm now social medialess except for TexAgs. And it's sad because I used to enjoy both FB and Insta.

I know they have to make their money some how, but they are running their "product" away by not making it worthwhile to use.

Elon got himself a mess, I've looked at his contract. Not a good contract.

WestTexasAg said:

---

Would seem odd if he didn't have a feasibility period. Seems unlikely they can enforce specific performance.

---

SP is explicitly mentioned in the merger agreement.

Manhattan said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Or Twitter finds out in discovery that Elon had no intention of buying Twitter and goes to Martha Stewart State for securities fraud.

---

Unlikely, mr shanked punt

You can pause suggested posts on Instagram for 30 days. When they show up again, you just pause them again for 30 days. Makes it much more enjoyable to scroll.

Manhattan said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Or Twitter finds out in discovery that Elon had no intention of buying Twitter and goes to Martha Stewart State for securities fraud.

---

I mean sure, it's a possibility that the world's wealthiest man would commit securities fraud over a transaction that's <5% of his wealth. Given the choice between that and Twitter leadership being exposed as fraudsters who don't care about profit and would lie about it to keep the money rolling ... one of these seems more logical than the other. I'll let you decide which is most likely.

Manhattan said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Or Twitter finds out in discovery that Elon had no intention of buying Twitter and goes to Martha Stewart State for securities fraud.

---

LOL. Yeah because it is always the goal to buy a crap ton of stock before you tank the price.

Stewart used inside information to dump a stock before it tanked.

Keef doesn't think before he posts.

Elon wants to pretend like this never happened but he could buy back all the TSLA stock he sold raising cash for the acquisition, pay the $1B to Twitter and technically still come out ahead like this never happened. He'd come out even better because he'd have more shares and probably gets a $1B write off .

SMM48 said:

---

What advertiser would give money to twitter right now without some really big questions answered?

---

I wouldn't and was directly in a position to see this IRL. I ran Marketing for my last company and ultimately killed all of our ad spending on Twitter after having my team do a current state assessment of our lead campaign ROI. Discovered we were just throwing good money after bad. Never got one single lead from it. Asked the team why we continued to use it and it was basically the classic business trope of, "Well, it's what we've always done and it's Twitter! Everyone is on it!"

I was floored. That confirmed to me it was fake news and is solely a propaganda platform. I immediately killed all spend on Twitter.

Companies that continue to spend money on it are virtue signaling and doing it to support the DNC as a form of political lobby spend.

It isn't even worth the $5 that Marcus Brutus put out there. It's vaporware and the fact that Twitter couldn't/wouldn't share with Musk the number of actual, real people on it should tell us all something.

Not likely.

Not during a recession.

Manhattan said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

He's put Twitter in a really bad spot. Either they fight back and risk discovery proving him right or they don't fight back and the let the investment community draw the conclusion that he was right. Either way this isn't going to end well for Twitter.

---

Or Twitter finds out in discovery that Elon had no intention of buying Twitter and goes to Martha Stewart State for securities fraud.

---

I don't think you understand how contract agreements work. Good luck proving hearsay in court. Worked great for Amanda Heard.

What, pray tell, is the hearsay that would have to be proven in Court?



(This Manhattan character seems to be posting from out in left field, but that word does not mean what you think it means internet lawyer)

I doubt that happened, but I won't be surprised if it did. I refuse to give any ****s about a "news flash " that refuses to name sources. Too few people will accept that as fact, and then never follow up to verify. That's not a healthy way to stay informed.