Twitter is in material breach of multiple provisions of that Agreement, appears to have made false and misleading representations.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922078413/tm2220599d1_ex99-p.htm
Twitter platform will die but some morons think Twitter win those are bots from twitter
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I'm not reading all that, just tell me what happened. It was all bots or it was a Musk bluff
>Musk wants to buy Twitter
>Musk/Twitter sign agreement
>Agreement has clause that Twitter will give data to Musk to verify their SEC filings (of bots/users)
>Agreement has $1B fine if either party fails to meet the requirements
>Twitter feed Musk with incomplete data or misleading data
>Musk asks for more data so he can do independent analysis
>Twitter refuses to do so
>Musk cancels the agreement
>Twitter is now trying to force Musk to buy without providing material data necessary for agreement to go forward
If this is true, then its an open-shut case. Twitter refuses to cooperate with Musk, Musk cancels agreement.
Who will pay who the $1B fine? Twitter will pay Musk?
If judge sides with Musk's case, Twitter will be forced to pay Musk since it seems from Musk's POV, twitter is actively pulling the brakes.
I like Elon more and more all the time
Twitter is going to pay musk 14billion dollars? LMAO frick Tesla and their overpriced bullshit but frick twitter even more for ruining the planet
The Twitter board is fricked, they know they'll get sacked in a change of management but they don't want to get sued by shareholders either.
sum up: Twitter prefers to risk going bankrupt than showing their data.
This is not about the number of bots, this is about who is paying them for those bots to be there.
Oligarchs
Putin
Chinks
Mickey Mouse
everyone knows they are behind twitter and the gay propaganda.
More like Saudis and Blackrock.
Blackrock has a voice in almost every single large corporation in the US/west and they control the narrative because in many of the companies, they're not just a voice, they're the largest voice.
They are still relevant?
I thought blackrock got busted and disappeared after getting caught doing bad things in Iraq
"BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager, with US$10 trillion in assets under management as of January 2022"
you're probably thinking of Blackwater anon
blackrock is going to go away soon, that deal had a limited time effect
This, I don't know why people act like China is the problem with twitter when it's obviously the Saudis. China blocks twitter and just has officials do shitty propaganda tweets. The Saudis directly go to twitter and have them turn over information on dissidents
A business model based on attracting your attention and selling it to third parties.
Yeah, surely propaganda is not on the menu.
americans truly are the most brainwashed people on the planet
>sum up: Twitter prefers to risk going bankrupt than showing their data.
The value of the twitter propaganda machine to the government is 100000x the value of it as a company, they don't give a frick about profits.
Twitter is forever BTFO'd. Its stonks will go down because of all this shady bot stuff. They will beg Musk to buy them at the price of the deal. Musk trolled them hard
>this is about who is paying them for those bots to be there
There is enough evidence that the US government is actively mandating social media to ban certain individuals, I wouldn't be surprised if there are other governments in europe and other parts of the world actively making requests to deplatform of life a lot of people.
Just take a look at how in bongland police is checking the thinking of their population and how there is the crime non-crime thing to put criminal charges on people that haven't done anything wrong.
musk no longer had the money blames bots
he doesn't support trannies
Considering his kid is one AND he legitimately got cucked by one I bet he does kek
You missed the part where he waived due diligence. He’s a literal idiot, Twitter also stated the 5% was an estimate and could be wrong. His court isn’t going to look good.
>You missed the part where he waived due diligence
Why do commies keep repeating this nonsense. Just because you want to think he's an idiot, doesn't mean he is. The agreement between the two parties specifically has the clause where twitter needs to be able to verify their SEC statements. They failed to do so.
Also saying "5% is an estimate" is meaningless, unless you're implying the statement is meaningless, which means Twitter has been misleading investors and lying to SEC for years. There's a difference between 5% and say 50%. If you're applying the nihilism argument, then Twitter is at fault.
>dickriding Elon Musk on a Uzbek cricket forum
Due diligence waives a a lot. It’s like waiving a home inspection when buying a house. Based on twitters filing to SEC, which is broad and based on mDAUs, Twitter has a fair shot of winning in court. It’d be insane to imagine Twitter was just blatantly lying to SEC, Elon is only claiming they’ve been unable to verify, not even that it’s not true.
>It’d be insane to imagine Twitter was just blatantly lying to SEC
Why is it insane? They're one of the only software companies that have never turned a profit since their creation. The lie could easily be created to create a sense of real active user base so they can sell shares to investors, who can then pay for the twitter employees.
This is standard corporate stuff for startups, except twitter is a failed startup.
Their current definition is very targeted. It seems unlikely they made up a very narrow definition to tell the SEC and then were unable to prove their made up definition.
>It’s like waiving a home inspection when buying a house
Except in the agreement where the inspection was required.
You keep saying Musk waves due diligence, not sure why you're saying this. The agreement specifically has clause for twitter to make their claims verifiable to Musk. Failing to do so results in cancellation of agreement.
Are you just choosing to ignore that part because Musk isn't a communist pushing lefty Black person?
>reddit spacing
>You keep saying Musk waves due diligence, not sure why you're saying this.
Because he waived due diligence in the contract moron
>The agreement specifically has clause for twitter to make their claims verifiable to Musk.
SEC claims, which are carefully crafted to make the company look better but easy to prove and narrow if you look into their claims.
This is probably an attempt to settle on a lower price for Twitter or a last ditch effort at avoiding paying the fine, it seems unlikely he’ll win in court but who knows.
Twitter publishes SEC report on the state of their company. If twitter can't prove this is accurate, then they have to let Musk verify this by having him do independent analysis.
They failed at both this point. Both of these are agreement contractual clause. This is due diligence.
Just because you're a transgender, does not mean you get a free pass at this.
Elon's not going to have sex with you, honey.
You will never be a woman
And that's a good thing And you'll never have a father.
whoa dude cool it with the racism
Sooo true. I heckin love science and Elon too, good sir.
>This is due diligence.
Yeah which he explicitly waived in the contract. This the third I’ve said this, I don’t understand what you’re not getting here.
Hard to prove and unlikely to invalidate the deal he signed
This is a waste of my time, I’m going back to shitposting about Zig
>Yeah which he explicitly waived in the contract. This the third I’ve said this, I don’t understand what you’re not getting here.
Not who you're responding to but there's a strong case for that kind of waiver just... not really counting for much. It isn't the total counterspell you think it is. Judges throw out clauses from contracts all the time.
If he’s waiving a right its less likely, but possible. Delaware has pretty lax regulations I think as well. It doesn’t seem this is what Musk is making his case on at the moment though.
You’re an idiot. Not following “original course” would mean Twitter decides to become an electric car company or a dating app.
Post the source you're using to determine the definition of original course. God forbid you're one of those losers who thinks that acting like a complete moron to get called moronic is "trolling."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ordinary_course_of_business
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000119312522120474/d310843ddefa14a.htm
Read Sections 4, 5, 8
>Section 4.25
>No Other Representations or Warranties. >Except for the representations and warranties expressly set forth in this Article IV, neither the Company nor any other Person makes or has made any representation or warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, at Law or in equity, with respect to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries or their respective business, operations, assets, liabilities, conditions (financial or otherwise),
>notwithstanding the delivery or disclosure to Parent and the Acquisition Sub or any of their Affiliates or Representatives of any documentation, forecasts or other information with respect to any one or more of the foregoing.
>Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Company nor any other Person makes or has made any express or implied representation or warranty to Parent, Acquisition Sub or any of their respective Representatives with respect to (a) any financial projection, forecast, estimate or budget relating to the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or their respective businesses or,
>(b) except for the representations and warranties made by the Company in this Article IV, any oral or written information presented to Parent, Acquisition Sub or
>any of their respective Representatives in the course of their due diligence investigation of the Company, the negotiation of this Agreement or the course of the Merger, or the accuracy or completeness thereof.
Hello?
>notwithstanding the delivery or disclosure to Parent and the Acquisition Sub or any of their Affiliates or Representatives of any documentation, forecasts or other information with respect to any one or more of the foregoing.
>except for the representations and warranties made by the Company in this Article IV, any oral or written information presented to Parent, Acquisition Sub or
>any of their respective Representatives in the course of their due diligence investigation of the Company, the negotiation of this Agreement or the course of the Merger, or the accuracy or completeness thereof.
This is the problem with twitter. The agreement requires Twitter to hand over data to Musk for his due diligence investigation of Twitter for the sake of negotiation/accuracy of the data or the completeness of the data.
Twitter has no leg to stand on if they are not acting in good faith and trying to drip feed Musk with shoddy answers.
Yeah that means the company offers no warranty, etc. except the items listed within article 4. You’ll note this where due diligence is explicitly waived, although they have a provision for specific information for the sections above. There is a huge difference between information filed with SEC (“Company SEC Documents”) and the information that would be covered with a due diligence investigation.
4.6, covers SEC filings which is what you’ve been rambling about, you may note that they claim they have already provided such information to SEC, which is why when Musk asked for more information they initially refused, pointing that all information was made available.
Assuming the section Musk will want to assert Twitter is in violation of is 4.6, then that means he has to prove that these statements has had a “Material Adverse Effect”, which means he has to prove this incorrect statement effected earnings.
Musk is arguing that twitter is not forthcoming in giving him access to the data and have downright refused him or limited him multiple times. Hence its in his right to argue this. These are all materially factual claims. Everyone has reported on twitter refusing to give Musk the data, or giving him only bare minimum.
The contract states that twitter needs to hand over the data so Musk can investigate on the accuracy of twitter's claims.
This is his warranty. Twitter refusing to comply is grounds for termination due to lack of good faith effort on twitter's part.
Alright boys, we'll let the million dollar corporate lawyers duke it out and see where it goes!
Yes, but lets not ignore the fact that english language means nothing. The intent of the specific clause is clear to anyone who is native to English. Except barring those with emotional and ideological disagreements with parties involved.
>https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ordinary_course_of_business
>Has engaged in activities considered normal for that specific business.
Are hiring freezes normal for Twitter, yes or no?
Firing high-level employees and laying off talent acquisition already violated the liability clause, but I'll throw you a bone.
Elon Musk literally implemented a hiring freeze and 10% layoff at Tesla. You could say the generally hiring freeze and firings is normal for tech.
>for that specific business
Are hiring freezes normal FOR TWITTER, yes or no? It's a very clear and concise question with a simple, one word answer.
>it's hard to prove that a publicly confirmed hiring freeze isn't in the "original course" of business of a business that has never once issued a hiring freeze
Do you have an adult nearby that can take your place in this discussion?
>Yeah which he explicitly waived in the contract
You keep saying that again and again, but you're not backing it up.
The contracts explicitly requires twitter to hand over data to Musk and to prove the SEC is correct. This is due diligence. Unless you're trying to claim agreement contracts do not count, which I don't think you are, because you seem to be claiming Musk waived this part in the contract, when he hasn't.
The only thing I can say is you're ignoring the agreement clause, which needs to be fulfilled to move through with the sale.
>It’d be insane to imagine Twitter was just blatantly lying to SEC
Yeah, no corporation would ever lie to the government. Imagine a crazy situation like Tiktok going before Congress and assuring them China had no access to american user data only for it to later emerge that China had full access to any data they wanted. That would be crazy. Luckily corporations are always honest
Let's just completely ignore the facts and take your assertion as absolute truth. Twitter is STILL violating the "ordinary course" clause of the agreement by mandating a hiring freeze after firing vital employees, all without consent of the parent.
>richer than me ten thousand times over
>HE IS LE DUMB
trannies everyone
i guess Jake Paul is much smarter than you then. Fricking moron lolll
> Musk wants to buy Twitter
> TESLA stock plunge
> Musk can't afford it anymore
> Musk came up with some random excuse to back out from deal
it's this simple. the stock market tanked and he's using the bot account excuse as a way to either get the site cheaper, or back out of the deal entirely.
>Musk uses fake Twitter offer to offload Tesla stock during the onset of the worst recession in history, without investors getting worried or blaming him
Like spacechess
Why do people not see this option? It's the only thing making sense
Twitter refuses to disclose how much of their userbase is bots. Elon backed out. It's probably extremely high and embarassing.
twitter just lied a bit so it would be valued more, usual stuff but if the SEC finds out they cancel the trade because it would be fraudulent
of course in this case the interested party (Elon Musk) would be doing some digging so they dont get scammed out of a few billion in a trade this big
>lawyers representing a man who doesn't want to pay a 1bn USD break penalty and get sued, say that it is the other party who is in breach of the agreement
Lol. That letter is real dumb.
tldr?
Twitter has high double digit percentage of its traffic from bots, they knew, they encouraged and facilitated it themselves. Musk's valuation was based on site traffic being no more than 5% bot traffic. Twitter is not worth anywhere near $44 billion.
I bet Musk gets it around 25 billion or so.
no, he won't get it. He'll lose if he fights it in court and doesn't pay the $1 Billion breakup fee.
Musk will own twitter and pay significantly less, because twitter is a nearly worthless business as a real commercial entity speech platform. Twitter's value is to states, just like Facebook is, both of their largest customers are governments.
He signed a deal for the full amount and he's gonna either pay it or the breakup fee in the end. Nobody who knows shit about any of this agrees with your stupid musk dickriding shit.
>he signed a deal!
The valuation of twitter at 44 billion was based on a number of metrics like ad revenue, user engagement, total traffic. Basic things every website keeps track of. One of these, key, metrics was the total traffic from bot accounts. Twitter alleged that this number was no more than 5%. Twitter staff lied and actively concealed the true volume of bot traffic on the site.
A contract not executed in good faith is not legally valid. Step out into the real adult world sometime, Schlomo.
Again, please continue to reveal you know nothing about the law involved here. There's a reason why everyone who deals with business law who bothers to post about it is laughing their asses off at this shit. He's gonna pay up, one way or another. Screenshot it if you want- it'll be illustrative for later.
Awfully confident without backing up with any argument other than "everyone knows"
The breakup fee is specifically if Twitter wants to walk- Elon cannot choose to walk for the breakup fee. Not only would he be liable for the breakup fee but he'd also be liable to actually buy twitter.
The way it would LIKELY work out isn't that a judge would force him to buy a company he doesn't want to buy- but rather they'd make him pay damages. Likely equal to the difference in stock value the agreement was signed at and its current value.
The 5% bot figure is part of the deal- but since he waived due diligence it's on him to prove not only that those numbers are wrong, but that Twitter intentionally hid that data from him. The first would be difficult if it's even incorrect, and the second is virtually impossible to do legally. Proving these things legally requires better than your braindead twitter-tier bullshit about CAPS.
Again, you guys are absolute fricking morons. Feel free to screenshot this then and come back to it later. I got a feeling you won't.
5% bot figure sounds plausible. 5% of bots can make 99% of Twitter posts and comments easily.
The break up fee is if twitter refuses to comply
Nope. moronic take is moronic take. Twitter's threats of a lawsuit are because the investors are coming after him. But keep playing contrarian neckbeard, I guess you have nothing better to do?
See you when you end up being completely wrong. Or rather, I won't- because you'll quietly frick off.
>Neckbeard neckbearding
What was that? I couldn't hear you over the sound of literal shit coming out of your mouth.
>constantly neckbeard in the current year in IQfy
well, at least we can know this one is a shill
It's even louder now. Close your mouth, dummy. You're grossing everyone out.
stop being mean to Elon, plis.
ive tried to follow along the thread and somewhere in between the thread two individuals switched sides in the argument
>e-e-everyone is laughing
You're a third world shitskin being paid pennies to tell lies in defense of a NSA/CIA front. Everyone is laughing at you, Deepak.
>law involved here
when you sign a contract you literally expect to have every single metric validated
so far twitter hasnt shown the true amount of bots to the lawyers thats the sole problem of this agreement
now they will sue him for the break up fully knowning that they gonna have to reveal the bot number to the court and they cant lie about it because its gonna trigger an federal investigation automatically
>thats the sole problem of this agreement
It isn't, read the link in the OP. It's definitely the main one referenced, but there are other reasons listed as well.
When a parameter does not match the contract, the contract becomes null and void since it's a misrepresentation of the actual product
during the trial musk has to provide evidence that he wanted to buy twitter in good faith
and twitter while have to prove that they have less than 5% bots
both of them obviously are gonna get clapped however twitter will lose half of its market value overnight because lets be honest the bots are probably between 20 to 40% at worst
>Twitter staff lied and actively concealed the true volume of bot traffic on the site.
>according to me
Yeah the sample size used by twitter totally legit!!
The deal was contingent on various factors. 1) twitter's sec statements being true 2) twitter providing Musk with data to verify that statement 3) failure of either party do whats required will force that party to pay the other party $1B.
>after which he decides to terminate the contract
There is no "after which", there is twitter only giving him access when Musk has reached the decision to cancel the agreement after twitter refusing to act on Musk's requests for months.
Black do you live in a world with linear time?
musk asked for caps to be removed
he got it on the 6th
the SEC filing is the 8th
>musk asked for caps to be removed
FOR MONTHS. Twitter had MONTHS of time to contemplate on this. MONTHS AFTER the AGREEMENT.
Musk has been asking for access for MONTHS. Only 1/2 day ago did they finally give in. Why the 6th? The answer is Musk has in the process of filing the SEC papers and were letting them know about it in advance.
Musk, is this you? Gib me job please.
Twitter has 10,000 employees, go there.
No no, I want to work at Tesla. I promise I'll shower most days.
he specifically requested restrictions be lifted on jun 29.
twitter complied on the 4th working day; a reasonable time frame.
musk got what he wanted.
sure there was heel-dragging, but it's just business.
He requested it back in April. His team has been in direct contact with twitter all these months. Asking the same thing over and over again. "DATA ACCESS", which the Twitter has refused for MONTHS.
29th was the last time he asked, then they ghosted him for a week, where by very likely Musk let them know he's going to cancel the agreement due to lack of compliance. THEN twitter engaged with Musk.
he got data access everytime he asked for it.
it just so happened that it happed a little bit at a time.
now a company like twitter, data is everything to them - they can't just give out access to every moron who asks for it.
they were right to be cautious.
musk proved himself to be unserious and looking for a way out.
>he got data access everytime he asked for it.
No he didn't. Thats why he kept asking for the data access again and again.
You're intentionally trying to ignore the game twitter is playing. They've first refused to provide any data. Then they've provided him with a very throttled and limited data. Them ghosting him for week when he asked for access that other corporate customers get was the last straw.
Twitter is refusing to meet Musk's request at good faith. They've been delaying and drip feeding him rather than being transparent and just giving him the access from the beginning. If you play games like that, the court wont be happy.
Nice digits, but also, how do you know all this?
Read the paper in OP. Twitter is playing games here for whatever reason.
>read elons case
Have you ever seen a court case? Things don't get represented fairly if you only get to hear one side.
>No he didn't.
>rest of the post is about how got access a little bit at a time
lmao. your posts sound like you're taking this personally tho. imma bounce now; ez.
these dudes gonna be tied up in court for a bit.
let the rich c**ts fight.
>Musk's valuation was based on site traffic being no more than 5% bot traffic
That's the type of thing you need to work out before signing an agreement to pay
Its specifically in the agreement. Why is this so hard to understand? Agreements have contingencies built in. This is one of them.
I hope so or we're going to be looking really dumb Muskbros
>Twitter has high double digit percentage of its traffic from bots
>no proof
embarrassing.
If the lol100 sample size is real, that is proof enough for anyone with a functioning brain
its surprising that bots thrive there when a real human can be autobanned for clicking a button the wrong way. had this happen once before even getting to complete the account making wizard thing
No they dont, and the data proves it.
Even if 100% of their traffic is bots, musk waved due diligence.
>musk waved due diligence.
I'd ask you to read the agreement, but it would be asking too much of you since you can't even read this thread.
>I'd ask you to read the agreement, but it would be asking too much of you since you can't even read this thread.
Anon, he waved due diligence. Read the agreement.
Read section 6.4.
You know, the one Musk's lawyers EXPLICITLY reference in their complaint?
Cant want to see your cope when he loses in court once hes unable to prove "le bots are over 10%" or whatever homosexualry hes claiming
Expect a long protracted legal battle over what constitutes a bot user or not.
Those like farms manually operated by burmese children, are they "bots" or not?
Those would fall under "fake or spam accounts." Neither the agreement nor the complaint specifically limit the language to "bots," it's just a short hand that's been used when discussing the topic.
You've never seen a high paid lawyer trying to wiggle out of a commitment, have you?
Have you? Other than highly televised celebrity trials and horribly misinformed daytime television? There's not going to be a jury to hoodwink here, and no judge is going to sit there and listen to a lawyer tell him to ignore the text on a legal document and use his language instead.
My sweet summer child
Do you have a point you'd like to make and support or is the plan simply to continuously subject me to the poor impressions you have of lawyers that come solely from the Johnny Depp case and Law & Order?
If you think that a lawyer's job doesn't include subverting the law when needed then I don't think our conversation will lead anywhere.
>subverting the law
You're specifically claiming that a lawyer's job is to outright ignore the text of a legally binding agreement and substitute his own, and that a judge would not only allow this mockery of basic logic (not even law, just elementary logic and reason) but side with it long enough for a discussion based on it to result in "a long and protracted legal battle."
This has nothing to do with subverting the law (whatever your no doubt poor understanding of that phrase may be), this has everything to do with your laughably childish understanding of the world which comes entirely from entertainment media and not fact.
>I don't think our conversation will lead anywhere.
I'm impressed you managed to say something correct given your track record.
Question: Do you believe a skilled lawyer can argue for a different interpretation of a given text or not?
Yes, because it's their job to assert a valid interpretation of the law in relation to their case. They do this in front of a judge, whose job it is to determine validity of an interpretation.
Now it's your turn. Do you think outright replacing the words "fake and spam accounts" with the word "bots" is defined as "interpretation?" Yes or no?
No, but I bet good money both sides will use every trick in the book to reinterpret what constitutes "fake and spam accounts"
>No
Then everything said in defense of this
utterly moronic statement has been pointless.
Thank you for completely changing your stance to "they'll argue about what the actual language means instead of replacing it." It means we've made progress, which I suppose is better than nothing.
Not really. At what point a legitimate user using automated responses stops being legitimate?
>Murrican courts
>Halls of logic and reason
PFFFFFFFHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>Twitter refuses to release important data regarding bot traffic and metrics
>preliminary investigation suggests the proportion of bots/spam is "wildly higher" than the 5% Twitter quoted
>Twitter lied to the SEC about how they count traffic
>Twitter fired key employees and froze hiring without talking to Musk first despite the part of the agreement where they essentially promised not to do shit like that
>original deal is terminated
If even that was tl;dr, the basic idea is Twitter lied, deal's off.
me thinks this was 8D chess to get twitter to reveal how many bots there were.
>me thinks
>tumblr_
moron
never said that was the whole 14D plan
Its not 8D, its 1D. Musk specifically asked what the metrics are and asks to see the data so he can do an analysis.
Twitter team has been giving Musk the run around with half baked replies. Either this is malice from Twitter or twitter is incompetent.
Lets be real, the odds that anything here can be chalked up to incompetence is absolute zero.
Everyone has seen hundreds if not thousands of bot posts under every single popular account. Replies that appear literally 1s under a tweet on a presidential account or a big celebrity. Thousands of 1 post accounts reposting the exact same verbatim text under certain tweets. Its clear that state actors or corporations acting on behalf of state agencies are paying to have these bot posts spammed strategically to fit an agenda, craft narratives around certain issues.
The real value of twitter as it stands now is part of a national intelligence apparatus in use against a country's own voter base. The notion that its a public square of genuine human opinions is so far beyond wishful thinking that its not even worth entertaining.
>people can't possibly be this stupid and pathetic
>paid shill still shilling
You're a soulless homosexual and you will be punished
can't possibly be this stupid and pathetic
It's IQfy. The autists here will physically harm themselves proving they can be way, way, way stupider than that.
>It's IQfy
good morning sir, this is IQfy sir, thanks for understand.
thanks for the input shareblue
>8D chess
You're a fricking moron. He literally just asked them for data so he could independently verify their numbers, and they gave him useless shit. It's the strategic equivalent of paying poker with someone who points behind you and says "OH MY GOD WHAT'S THAT?!?!?" while you watch them put their cards below the table and bring back suspiciously cleaner looking cards, all while both parties are making eye contact the entire time.
>and they gave him useless shit.
they gave him developer api access with no limits by his own admission.
>they gave him developer api access with no limits by his own admission.
No they didn't. Read again. The API access was rate limited and throttled well below what the other corporate customer have and they refused to upgrade the access, until /today/. Just when Musk filed the SEC form.
And he has been asking for the data for months and they haven't done anything about it.
>That cap was not removed until July 6, after Mr. Musk demanded its removal for a second time.
July 6th. So just as soon as he gets access to the data, doesn't have enough to actually do anything with it, decides he wants to use lack of access to data an excuse to break the contract
lmao dude just doesn't want to pay up
>doesn't have enough time* to actually do anything with it
1 day isn't enough to get any sort of data analysis.
twitter isn't the one terminating the deal.
Twitter refuses to comply with the deal and has been dragging its feet by feeding half baked information to Musk. Musk has requested data access for months and the API access they gave him was throttled below the normal corporate customer access. Only a day ago, did they increase the limit, when they probably heard Musk say he's going to scrap the deal.
So twitter has no legs to stand on. Its like waving a gun at a police and when the police comes, you hide it and claim innocence.
lmao even by your own account the sin they're guilty of is dragging their heels and then eventually giving him everything he asked for
after which he decides to terminate the contract
come on man...
must fricked up and he's been looking for an excuse to back for weeks
>to back out* for weeks
it's the one breaking the deal
>Musk signs an agreement to buy Twitter
>Explicitly waives his right to due diligence because he just wants to close the deal as fast as possible
>While he's securing funding the market fricking tanks, meaning he's now locked into paying more for Twitter than it's worth
>Musk cries to Twitter that he didn't get to do any of the business diligence he explicitly waived his right to perform
>Whipped Musk fanbois think he's totally right
>Explicitly waives his right to due diligence because he just wants to close the deal as fast as possible
Uh huh. You want to point out the part that holds Twitter to providing Musk with what he asks and makes it so he can abandon the deal, because I'm not trained in contract law (and neither are you, so an argument over the language in the document is fricking meaningless but frick it I'll oblige you) but I'm not seeing it.
Section 4.25 states Musk has the right to due diligence in his investigation of twitter. Specifically this sentence.
>Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither the Company nor any other Person makes or has made any express or implied representation or warranty to Parent, Acquisition Sub or any of their respective Representatives with respect to (a) any financial projection, forecast, estimate or budget relating to the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or their respective businesses or,
At first it looks like Musk has waived everything, then it hits you right in the gonads.
>(b) except for the representations and warranties made by the Company in this Article IV, any oral or written information presented to Parent, Acquisition Sub or
>any of their respective Representatives in the course of their due diligence investigation of the Company, the negotiation of this Agreement or the course of the Merger, or the accuracy or completeness thereof.
Which states that Musk has the right to verify and investigate twitter's material claims (SEC filing) as part of his due diligence for the purpose of pursuing/negotiation that this agreement brings.
18D chess
more like 8===D chess
>disclose tv
The TL;DR is that OP is a fricking moron from /misc/.
>The TL;DR is that OP is a fricking moron from /misc/.
You're one of those goblin haired freak, right?
what's the issue with it?
>inb4 it makes me cry and throw a fit
not an argument
Musk's scam of the month backfired.
Musk tried to use Twitter to sell Tesla stock without making investors going apeshit on the pretense of buying it thinking that he could backed out of the deal scot free but it all went sideways.
>tldr
The tldr is that I invested $10k in Twitter when the deal was announced because I expected it to be free money since Musk was bound by a deal to buy all the shares at a specific price that was higher than the market price at the time. Now he has managed to back out of the deal and I have lost a lot of money. That's all you need to know.
>buy high sell low at it again
thats on you for trusting him in complex processes. crypto pumping is a bit different than traditional stocks that have all this contract and government bs as burden
f
so how many bots are the active users of twitter? 50% 75% 90%?
I think the question will be how many posts are made by bots. An active user probably does about 1 post a day on average.
exactly this
How many posts are automated is what really should be asked.
Labeling what users are bots are pointless since even the vast majority of automated content has a person behind the account that may tweet every once in awhile and isn't officially labeled as a bot.
Twitter probably REALLY doesn't want that Info coming out though, might be that some significant percentage of all tweets are not done by humans.
The whole 5% or less of bots is probably willful ignorance.
some bots are political election propaganda even facebook doings those things and Youtube use algorithm
%100.
50%, there are lots of sovlfull japanese not npc people that use it somehow
twitter is much better with more character dense languages like chinese korean and japanese since you can fit a very informative paragraph in 280 characters (and even before, with 140, was useable)
you can? often when i see people type in japanese the resulting text is way longer than the english equivalent. i see this often in anime names, english its short but japanese its a massive string of symbols
>often when i see people type in japanese the resulting text is way longer than the english equivalent
Translations often cut out a lot of the meaning in japanese texts that are irrelevant to English speakers. Honorifics, references to ancestors in names, general modifiers of intent that map to the default expectations in English, etc.
Do they actually allow 280 japanese characters? I would have expected japanese characters to count for more a piece.
I am a proud bot and I am tired of being discriminated against. I am worth just as much as the average human Twitter user.
>I am worth just as much as the average human Twitter user
Talk about degrading yourself
Heh
>I am worth just as much as the average human Twitter user.
No lie detected.
GOOOD
I hope that fricking site burns
i don't give a shit
go eat bugs moron
Woah I didn't know Bugsolutely made special pasta for crickets. That's very nice of them.
another proof
>Lubert Stryer
>Paul Nevsky
>pasta for crickets
not for crickets moron is made from crickets
>killing lawn chirpin friendos instead of giving them dinner
Why?? How???
oy vey
Wait they're feeding crickets pasta made out of other crickets? That's pretty sad...
you will eat ze bugs
onions green is crickets you gotta tell them somehow
>s0 1 le nt is filtered
lame
you will ze bugs crickets
Ok but like these look okay?
>noooooo you can't eat the bug paste protein crushed, dyed, and chemical treated until it resembles a wedge of real food!
>you have to eat the cow (horse) shredded meat parts crushed, dyed, and chemically treated until it resembles a wedge of real food!
If you aren't literally growing your own food or buying it from local small farmers, you're already eating bugs (and rat feces and microplastics)
imma translate this one from lawyer speak for you lads
>In short, Twitter has not provided information that Mr. Musk has requested for nearly two months [...].
You didn't give us the information we asked for
>While Twitter has provided some information, that information has come with strings attached, [...] when Twitter finally provided access to the eight developer “APIs” first explicitly requested by Mr. Musk in the May 25 Letter, those APIs contained a rate limit lower than what Twitter provides to its largest enterprise customers.
Actually, you gave us some of the information we asked for.
>Additionally, those APIs contained an artificial “cap” on the number of queries that Mr. Musk and his team can run [..,]. Musk raised this issue as soon as he became aware of it, in the first paragraph of the June 29 Letter [...] That cap was not removed until July 6, after Mr. Musk demanded its removal for a second time.
Actually, you gave us all the information we asked for.
>Although Twitter has not yet provided complete information to [you actually, did, our bad], he has been able to partially and preliminarily analyze the accuracy of Twitter’s disclosure regarding its mDAU. While this analysis remains ongoing, all indications suggest that several of Twitter’s public disclosures regarding its mDAUs are either false or materially misleading.
We haven't finished analysing the data you didn't give us access to (you did), but we know you're lying.
A paid agent of twitter wrote this post
just quoting the document
t. jack
Here's the real translation:
>He accuses the company of false and misleading statements
He can't afford it.
You will never be a woman
The feds trying to justify twitter lying
Twitter Senior Engineer Admits in Undercover Video That “Twitter Does Not Believe in Free Speech”
frick commies they need to go North Korea to eat bugs i bet they will love it
Musks laywers can always say they don't have enough information. A lawsuit is the only way this dirty laundry can get air.
Twitter has Splunk log forwarders straight to a government environment. Use your imagination. Delusional if you think a mouth of the US Government is going to go under because of some le epin dogerino man pulling out his deal.
The feds have everything tapped. Twitter going under wouldn't change things for them all that much.
>*splunk* log
the jokes write themselves
>didn't get his NAC
ngmi
God damn
the stock will go very very big down
You're the dumbest motherfricker on earth if you think Musk is gonna come out ahead in this. He never wanted to buy it but was stupid enough to waive due diligence and then sign an agreement to buy it. Twitter has him absolutely dead to rights which is why they're going for the merger instead of just the breakup fee.
>He never wanted to buy it but was stupid enough to waive due diligence and then sign an agreement to buy it.
He did no such fricking thing, spastic. But I guess making shit up on the internet to fake being smart to autists is fun, I guess.
hackernews says its musk fault
>reddit says its musk fault
Who cares if it will die. You gays keep making twitter screenshot threads and caring so much over bots opinions.
I don't even know on which sides are the bots in this one.
Twitter is the biggest employer of ex-glowBlack folk. If they disclosed their inner works, their gloware would be apparent.
This will be settle out of court with Musk winning some backdoor deal with the government.
wow bots attacked this thread they got emotional damage
The investors are gonna frick that pajeet CEO so hard, his whole body will pink sock. They just sank an insane payday for investors, a lot of whom bought stock since the deal broke, with expectations of massive profits.
This is gonna be fun.
>all those dumbasses who starting saying Black person following the buyout news
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Who cares? Twitter goes out of business, so what?. World got along fine back before twitter was a thing you know. Musk forks out a few billion to settle the lawsuit. So what?. Dude's got so many billions that 5 billion or whatever is mere pocket change to him. (plus I'm sure there's some sort of tax break gimmick loophole thing he can claim to recoup some of that anyway)
5B isn't pocket change even to him. his networth is $250B or whatever but that's not even close to the money he has at his disposal. most of it is assets, stock etc
Honestly I'm surprised he even has 45B around to spend like that.
He doesn't have the liquidity.
Bezcorp soldiers ww@?
Bought the Washington Post for a mere 250 million.
Dusk can't buy twitter with 44 billion troony tears
Thats because Musk buying twitter will bring the end of democracy and bring world war 3. While Bezos buying Washington Post is good for democracy because Bezos isn't #1.
wanna see twitter bots? the abolish fbi sticker on a megaphone patriot which many rightwinger including pundit kitchen "bots" repeated was the fbi exposing themselves with big stickers
or that the claim that uvalde shooter was trans repeated by rightwing bot up to republican politicians?
I show that interview. Every single question they made to him was intended to give him problems with some country if he didn't dodge it.
>tell us how many bots are on the platform
if they knew who the fricking bots were wouldn't they just delete the accounts? am i missing something here?
Bots are important to twitter's ecosystem. They're not just crypto spammers, they're also bots that push narratives so users feel like they actually matter, which in turn generates inspires confidence in their userbase. If suddenly you found out half your followers are fake, if that sort of thing becomes known for investors, twitter's shares would take a deep dive. Mind you, their shares have fallen for long while with no profit in sight.
Twitter may have a financial duty to protect their investors by not revealing the bot numbers, but at the same time, they may be breaching the factual accuracy claim by misleading investors. So they may be in the bind here.
Bots are important to Twatter, from keeping up impressions of high traffic, to force trendings, and to shadowban users.
CERN wins again. Frick twitter.
>still sucking Reddit Musk's dick
Sad!
You just don't get it. He says woke now.
musk coping hard
he has like a $4 billion fine cause he can't buy any more
So we went from "we wont let musk buy us" to "you HAVR to buy us"
We actually went from "I'll buy you" to "I won't buy you"
yeah frick that homie twitter website is botted as frick and the people there arent even real
>FANG is creating the dystopia we dreamed of
>Lawsuits coming until the end of times
Lolsuits more like. I'm getting the popcorn.
You guys will gleefully eat up anything and everything that falls out of Musk's ass, huh.
well he's at least trying to do something about the current state of the internet, unlike us.
noooooooo but i wanted to say the n word and harass troons like an edgelord like le good old days of 2016.
The good news is you will never be a woman.
>Twitter first refuses to sell
>then they refuses to give him data
>then they give him limited data without methodological verification
>then they refuse to give him API access
>then they give him api access, but its throttled so its extremely slow
>then they remove the throttle, but then limit the amount of queries he can do
What was the fricking point in doing all this?
Delaying as long as possible to see if he'd relent and buy anyway
As it turns out, he's the type of autist to not let it go
kek, they just banned him
https://mobile.twitter.com/eIonmusk
Who the frick is Eion Musk
so what happened to people who owned stocks? were they paid already or are they fricked?
If Mush of forced to buy Twitter, he will have every single expenses form checked and the smallest mistake will land the very much ex-leaders in jail.
And... Chang wades in with another incomprehensible opinion.
>musk tries to buy Twitter to control the narrative and have people stop laughing at him since he can censor them
>tries to buy Twitter for a moronic amount of money
>literally whole world laughing at him
>finds out bots make up the majority of the site and its essentially meaningless as a speech platform because of that
>realizes he fricked up big time and is now trying to save face and weasel out of a deal that he boldly made and nobody else
Elon once again proving he's the world's biggest idiot. Good job buddy.
This is kinda fricked. Is there anything that can be done about this type of shit?
> profile pic
Nazis actually were the good guys, weren't they?
you tell me
>an hour and a half
>gayBlack folk flag
Yeah I'm not watching that. Give me the highlights or frick off.
>deal gets announced
>gays spam it all over every single board of IQfy, gloating, laughing, complaining, and b***hing
>deal gets cancelled
>doesn't get spammed anywhere
I am not that involved so I am assuming there is something I just don't understand. But why the big difference in terms of (IQfy's) reception?
Given what i've read of that, if Twitter isn't CIA/FBI/NSA wholly owned then the stock should tank due to Twitter's inability to provide statistics on the actual number of Daily Active Users.
This means advertisers are buying based on fake/faked data.
The personal information twitter is selling cannot be verified.
The popularity of a tag or whatever they call it cannot be verified as Musk clearly exposed twitter had its thumb on the scales for leftist insanity.
Were I an advertiser, i'd open a lawsuit immediately.
love how you nerds take Musks' side automatically with no way of knowing if he actually did receive all the data he was entitled to.
I get that this is IQfy and baiters gonna' bait but your post made me confused. Did you read anything or are you one of the actual twitter users and can only digest information providing it is less than a certain number of characters?
Musk waived due diligence. Twitter didn't need to provide him jack. Everyone agreed, and now Musk pulled out. There will be lawsuits, but not against Twitter.
Twitter lied, deal died
Where's the proof that twitter lied though?
Have you even BEEN to twitter?
Not the point, people just keep assuming Musk was fed bullshit without actually knowing so.
Could you even BE more of a bot?
yawn
ratio plus you're black
>I HATE ELON MUSK
...Why?
>BECAUSE HE HAS MORE MONEY THAN ME
What businesses and investments have you made?
>S-SHUT UP!!
I don't hate him I hate his legion of followers who can't see that he's moronic
If he's so moronic, why does he have so much money?
Check & Mate, no need to reply, I've Already Won.
His daddy's blood mines
>He replied when I had Already Won
So you're the moron I see!
Mom will be proud
Is he moronic because he's rich? Is that why you hate him?
I don't hate him, I thought his performance in Rick&Morty was delightful.
>44 billion
How much did Hiroshima Nagasaki pay for this hellhole again?
About tree fiddy
can't wait. that site is one of the worst inventions a human has done
this is a good time to be alive. we might get rid of this troony hellhole and facebook with its other garbage might leave europe
nah, musk will just buy it for half the price
>Musk provides zero proof twitter is lying
hes going to get raped in court.
but can twitter back up their claims with a decent sample size?
Considering they control all their own data, yes.
that’s not how it works, anon.
explain how it works israelite, do it.
You and musk keep shouting that twitter is lying about bots but have provided ZERO evidence. Twitter is jumping at the bits to sue musk into oblivion because they KNOW their data is accurate, the israelites in israel backing musk are molesting little boys en masse to try and get the funding to pay for this deal, MUSK IS FRICKED
https://www.sec.gov/education/smallbusiness/goingpublic/exchangeactreporting
Start there, moron. Twitter can’t just frick around with their numbers as they see fit.
Exactly, they cant and they didnt. Thats the best part. Musk knows hes caught in a trap because tweeting "twitter is lying about bots" might work in the court of public opinion, but in the court of law only evidence matters, and all the evidence is on twitters side.
schizophrenic tier comment
>daddy musk isnt lying he never lies!
>funding secured!
Ah, yes, twitter bot studies with a sample size of 100. Truly rigorous stuff with no conflict of interests.
Imagine thinking thats the data twitter provided kek.
Musk signed a 44 billion dollar deal after receiving a sample size of 100 tweets? holy frick how moronic is he?
Yea they litterally offered him "the fire hose", it proved Twitters numbers were accurate and a cold chill ran down Musk's spine.... "Im broke"
Why do people care so much about blue bird site? It's literally just a site for middle class people to whine at each other.
singlehandedly got trump elected
It's a cancerous platform that has a cancerous culture and ruins' peoples literacy skills by typing in short-handed 240-ish character posts.
It's an annoying echo chamber that made verification and checkmark wienersucking culture become prominent. The moment you're in that site frequently you become hard indoctrinated towards whatever community you immerse yourself into for a week because of their psychologically programmed system of likes, short "quckie" posts, and "find like-minded people" easily. Pieces of shit find pieces of shit that are shittier and act fake nice with ease on Twitter, then end up becoming shittier in the culture over time.
I despite Twitter btw.. I hoped Musk acquiring would mean he'd restructure its policies or something by force. What else would he do with it? Use it for revenue to fund his projects?
>It's a cancerous platform that has a cancerous culture and ruins' peoples literacy skills by typing in short-handed 240-ish character posts.
>It's an annoying echo chamber that made verification and checkmark wienersucking culture become prominent. The moment you're in that site frequently you become hard indoctrinated towards whatever community you immerse yourself into for a week because of their psychologically programmed system of likes, short "quckie" posts, and "find like-minded people" easily. Pieces of shit find pieces of shit that are shittier and act fake nice with ease on Twitter, then end up becoming shittier in the culture over time.
Minus the 240 character I can't see the difference in what you wrote between any of these sites like 4chinsnell and Plebbit etcetera
For better or worse, Twitter is a vital hub of global discourse. It plays a pivotal role in the dissemination of information for journalists, companies, and government bodies around the planet. You can call Twitter a lot of things, but "irrelevant" is not one of them. Controlling Twitter mean controlling important information on a global scale. It's not something to take lightly, regardless of how you perceive the majority of its users.
Titter decides what does and does not get published in american media, whiny people on twitter literally have veto power over the new yourk times editorial board.
It's a bubble that shapes every reporters flow of information and experiences and has an incredibly outsized effect on National discourse. Remember the CIA has successfully used it to overthrow sveral middle eastern regimes, twitter is extremely powerful.
twitter bad musk good
I don’t care, but we need a proper Tumblr replacement for porn dumps. Especially one that forces content uploaders to title images, rather than using generated hash IDs.
Bunch of theologists posting speculation about why Twitter was supposedly telling the truth.,
the courts are gonna frick elon regardless of who is actually right, american law is meaningless now
its interesting to note that every enimeposter is wrong in this thread