Elon Musk sued by Twitter investors over takeover offer

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, mikebike said:

No, what seems unreasonable to me is you using the logical fallacy of "argument from silence".

 

"Argument from silence"...??? That's a new one on me. Care to share a source for that one?

Anyway, even if there were such a thing in deductive logic, but has no place inductive logic. It's not all illegitimate to question a person's behavior or lack of it when we have such a long and extensive record to consult.

Anyway, as pointed out, if there were such document. Twitter would be in huge trouble for claiming otherwise in its proxy statement to shareholders. While Musk may be arrogant enough to ignore the advice of counsel, I doubt that that management of Twitter would be so foolish.

[Atlantis]

7 hours ago, mikebike said:

Nope. Same as buying a house. Offer made/accepted based on viewing by buyer and info provide by seller. Time between accepted offer and closing used for due diligence. If buyer finds serious flaw not disclosed by seller, price adjustment is one standard recourse.

 

It is standard procedure.

“If the buy finds serious flaw not disclosed by seller…” - except the 5% estimate with caveat has been publicly disclosed for dozens of quarters already.
 

Add to that Musk’s own public statements regarding wanting to solve the bot problem prior to his takeover bid and you have what looks like a dishonest attempt and passing blame due to his own impulsiveness.

 

As much as I admire the future owner of Twitter, Patrick Boyle is once again spot on about the mess he’s created: