Well, that escalated quickly. Let's review, shall we?
In January, Elon Musk started buying a bunch of Twitter stock. In February, he kept buying. In March, he owned about 5 percent of the company. In April, he offered to buy Twitter for $44 billion. In May, he tweeted a poop emoji. In June, his net worth crashed. In July, he tried to back out of the deal—and Twitter countersued. It seems very clear from the company's lawsuit that Twitter is prepared to take this all the way, possibly to even force Musk to acquire the company against his will.
Big picture, Twitter is in an incredibly strange position. The company's lawsuit portrays Musk as if he's a wayward, flighty, bad-faith grown toddler. But Twitter is also is trying to force this very same wayward, flighty, bad-faith grown toddler to be the proud owner of Twitter. “You’re a jerk, and I hate you, now marry me!" is a weird message to send, even if it makes sense for the Twitter board to pursue this strategy, within the logic of shareholder capitalism.
So, who's got the best argument? How will this thing end? Today's guest is Boston College Law School professor Brian Quinn. We do a deep dive into the documents of interest here—what Musk is saying, what Twitter is saying, and who’s got the strongest case.
Host: Derek Thompson
Guest: Brian Quinn
Producer: Devon Manze
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
