Main Highlights:
- Elon Musk, 50, made a joke at Mark Zuckerberg while speaking at a TED conference in Vancouver, British Columbia.
- Mr. Musk “has discovered what Mark Zuckerberg discovered several years ago: Being the face of controversial big calls isn’t fun.”
- The world’s wealthiest man met with more than six civil rights organisations, including the NAACP and the Anti-Defamation League, to ensure them that he will not modify Twitter’s content policies until the results of next week’s midterm elections are confirmed.
Elon Musk has accused Mark Zuckerberg of wielding too much control over social media, despite his own $43 billion bid for Twitter.
Elon Musk, 50, was speaking at a TED conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, when he made a jab at Mark Zuckerberg on his ownership of Meta, which owns key social media sites including as Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. When asked if his standing as the world’s richest person may create a conflict of interest as he sought to purchase Twitter, Tesla CEO Elon Musk attempted to alter the narrative by taking a shot at Zuckerberg.
“As for media ownership, you’ve got Mark Zuckerberg owning Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and with a share ownership structure that will have Mark Zuckerberg the 14th still controlling those entities,” he said, presumably referring to King Louis XIV of France, whose reign was emblematic of absolute monarchy.
“We won’t have that at Twitter,” Elon Musk continued, to laughter from the audience.
Mark Zuckerberg controls over 55% of Meta’s voting shares, giving him veto power.
Meanwhile, Musk’s $43 billion bid to purchase Twitter may face various difficulties, including prospective government clearances, legal and regulatory due diligence, final deal discussions, and, of course, how to pay for it all.
On top of that, Twitter announced a “poison pill” strategy on Friday to protect itself from Elon Musk’s $43 billion hostile takeover proposal, making it more difficult for the billionaire to get a controlling interest.
Twitter said its board overwhelmingly approved a shareholder rights plan, popularly known as a “poison pill,” that kicks in if an investor acquires more than 15% of the company’s stock without the directors’ approval. Musk owns 9% of the company.
Understand Elon Musk’s Twitter Takeover
A Unique Transaction: Silicon Valley tycoons used to buy boats and islands. They are now wealthy enough to purchase enterprises of their choice.
Hard Fork: The New York Times’ new tech podcast interviews tech writer Kate Conger on Twitter’s strange new future.
Those Who Are Celebrating: Elon Musk’s six-month journey to acquire Twitter was a waking nightmare for many of those involved. However, the sale sparked interest from a variety of entities.
Litigation: While the deal to purchase Twitter has been completed, disagreements over pay and firings, as well as future layoffs, might force both parties into new legal fights.
Elon Musk’s Acquisition of Twitter
A huge transaction. Elon Musk launched an unsolicited $44 billion bid for Twitter in April, stating he intended to transform the social media site into a private corporation and allow individuals to talk more freely on the service. The months-long conflict that ensued went as follows.
The response. Mr. Musk’s bid was met with a “poison pill” defensive mechanism from Twitter’s board. This well-worn business strategy makes a firm less appealing to a potential acquirer by increasing the cost of purchasing shares over a specific level.
Obtaining funding. Though his initial offer was vague and met with skepticism on Wall Street, Mr. Musk, the world’s richest man, moved quickly to obtain financing commitments, putting pressure on Twitter’s board to take his efforts seriously.
Making a bargain. With the funding in place, Mr. Musk met with Twitter’s board in April to explore his offer. The two sides quickly reached an agreement, with the firm agreeing to sell itself for $54.20 per share – a total of $44 billion.
Tensions emerge. Problems arose not long after Mr. Musk and Twitter struck an agreement. Mr. Musk vowed to back out of the arrangement unless Twitter provided more details on how it assesses the number of false accounts. The corporation stated in June that it would grant him access to a major portion of its data.
Musk withdraws. Mr. Musk indicated in July that he was ending the partnership, citing a persistent dispute about the number of spam accounts. Twitter then sued the billionaire to compel him to complete the transaction. Mr. Musk responded in a court complaint, claiming that Twitter committed fraud by concealing the exact number of false accounts on its network.
Preparing for trial. Lawyers on both sides have submitted more than 100 subpoenas in advance of a trial scheduled to begin in October, primarily targeting tech VIPs. A court decided in September that Mr. Musk may expand his lawsuit to include allegations from a former Twitter security head that the business deceived the public about its security measures.
A daring move. Mr. Musk suggested a plan to buy Twitter for $44 billion on Oct. 4, the sum he agreed to pay for the business in April. The transaction was completed on October 27. Mr. Musk swiftly began purging Twitter personnel, firing at least four of the company’s senior executives, including the CEO and CFO.
