‘Wow, with Jack departing,’: Elon Musk Publicly Slams Twitter Board

Daily Wire

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

Tesla founder Elon Musk slammed Twitter’s board for “objectively” not having their “economic interests” aligned with the company’s shareholders.

Musk’s critical tweets were posted after the board adopted a “poison pill” in an effort to thwart the billionaire’s hostile takeover of the company.

“Elon Musk is in for a bad time,” Laskie founder Chris Bakke posted. “I’m not sure he’s prepared to take on a couple PhDs, a few MBAs, and a Baroness who use Twitter once a year (to reset their passwords) and collectively own 77 shares of the company.”

A screenshot of Twitter board members’ ownership accompanied Bakke’s comments.

“Wow, with Jack departing, the Twitter board collectively owns almost no shares!” Musk reacted on Saturday. “Objectively, their economic interests are simply not aligned with shareholders.”

The same day, the tech billionaire agreed with entrepreneur David Sacks’ post claiming a rejection of Musk’s offer to outright buy Twitter would expose “corruption.”

“If the game is fair, Elon will buy Twitter,” Sacks tweeted. “If the game is rigged, there will be some reason why he won’t be able to. We’re about to find out how deep the corruption goes.”

“Indeed,” Musk replied.

The Twitter board on Friday announced the adoption of a “poison pill,” intended to stop Musk’s efforts to buy the company by diluting his shares. The Daily Wire reported:

The board has adopted a “limited duration shareholder rights plan,” which gives Twitter’s existing shareholders, except Musk, time to purchase additional shares at a discount, Axios reported Friday.

The desired effect is clearly to dilute Musk’s holding in the company, and make the cost of a takeover higher or even prohibitive.

“A poison pill, devised by law firms in the 1980s to protect companies from corporate raiders, essentially lets a takeover target flood the market with new shares or allow existing shareholders other than the bidder to buy them at a discount,” The New York Times explained. “That means anyone trying to acquire the company must negotiate directly with the board.”

You might like:

Stories You May Like