[madeofpalk]

> Imo, the only hypothetical reason for Musk not to buy it would be because the real numbers on the bot issue showed the company has seriously defrauded investors, and the stock goes to almost zero.

My understanding, at least from reading Twitter's lawsuit and other's commentary on it, is that Twitter lying about bot numbers is irrelevant because Musk agreed to, in contract, buy it regardless of those facts.

[cmer]

Based on information publicly available deemed correct and accurate by the company. This is false representation and downright fraudulent. If indeed Twitter lied about their not numbers, there will be a major lawsuit against the company.

[graeme]

Not quite:

1. Twitter represented that they made sample, exercised judgement, and could be wrong

2. That is hard to falsify

3. For it to matter in this lawsuit, it would have to be so false that it materially adversely affects the company

If 10% of users are bots, #1 wouldn’t even be false. If 20% of them were, it might be, but you’d still have to cause a material adverse effect. Like a large change in expected revenue.

[Sebb767]

Even 20% would not fly, winning with MAE in Delaware is basically impossible - the one case where a buyer actually proved MAE there is still referred to as unicorn. Given that Elon waived due diligence and even openly talked about the bot problem, this would probably still be a coin toss if he somehow proves that there are 90% bots.

[klyrs]

The outcome I'm rooting for is that Twitter's suit resolves quickly and they're granted specific performance, and Musk's lawsuit gets dragged out until he's suing the company he just bought.

[sgjohnson]

The time for due diligence on that was before he signed the merger agreement.