AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Tesla twitter1/17/2024 Twitter’s CEO and chief financial officer were unable to explain how these accounts were selected to be a representative sample. It said 100 accounts a day were sampled by human reviewers in order to come up with the less-than-5% figure. Musk is not happy with Twitter’s verification processesĪfter agreeing to buy the business with minimal due diligence, the suit says Musk was “astonished” to learn about how “meagre” Twitter’s processes for identifying spam accounts were. Twitter denies that the user change was a “restatement” (it describes the alteration as “updated values”) but admits it did not give the information to Musk prior to the deal being signed on 25 April. The suit says that Musk became alarmed about how Twitter accounts for its mDAUs when, three days after signing the deal agreement, it admitted it had overstated its mDAU total for three years, by between 1.4 million and 1.9 million users per quarter. Twitter has consistently stated that it estimates the number of false or spam accounts on the platform to be less than 5% of its mDAUs base, which stands at just under 238 million currently. As well as being a threat to the ad income on which Twitter depends, Musk said his plan to introduce a subscription service for Twitter would be affected because there would be fewer customers to target than first thought. He argues that the number of monetisable daily average users (mDAUs) – authentic, active accounts that can see adverts (hence monetisable) – is falsely inflated by Twitter miscounting the number of false and spam accounts on the platform. It is at the centre of Musk’s countersuit as well. Musk’s core argument is about user numbersįrom the moment the deal started to go sour, the focus was on the veracity of Twitter’s numbers. Strong words, but Musk will need strong evidence as well to convince the judge. Twitter’s complaint, filled with personal attacks against Musk and gaudy rhetoric more directed at a media audience than this court, is nothing more than an attempt to distract from these misrepresentations,” said the lawsuit. “Instead, they contain numerous, material misrepresentations or omissions that distort Twitter’s value and caused the Musk parties to agree to acquire the company at an inflated price. In the preliminary statement Twitter is accused of making financial disclosures to the US financial watchdog that were “far from true”. There is $44bn at stake and the language in Musk’s countersuit is just as punchy as Twitter’s in the original lawsuit, when the company described his behaviour as “a model of bad faith”. The relationship between both sides remains poor According to him: Twitter misled investors it breached the agreement by failing to provide enough information on spam accounts another breach occurred when Twitter failed to consult with him on business moves such as firing senior employees and its misstatement of user numbers constitutes a material adverse effect, which substantially alters Twitter’s value and therefore invalidates the deal agreement. In a countersuit released last week, Musk put his side of the argument. Twitter is suing Musk in Delaware over his abandonment of the deal and wants to make him buy the company.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |