The Board of Directors of Twitter has decided to prevent shareholders from voting on Elon Musk’s acquisition bid. “The Twitter board is refusing to allow the company’s shareholders to vote on Elon Musk’s offer,” Jack Posobiec said. “Elon Musk’s offer must be put to a vote by Twitter’s shareholders!” Democracy!” Jack Posobiec made a point. He added, “#LetThemVote is trending.”
“Twitter’s board has now breached its fiduciary duties, and @elonmusk may and should sue them as one of their major shareholders,” he continued. “As well as every other stockholder.” “Titanic hazard.”
“Elon: I’m offering you a premium of 38%. Let’s vote, shareholders. There will be no vote on the Twitter Board of Directors. Shareholders: What are you talking about? Twitter Board: If Elon keeps purchasing shares, we’ll sell it at a severe discount to ourselves. Cernovich snarled, “This is what democracy looks like.”
He added, “Twitter, let them vote!” “Rather of accepting Elon’s premium to the share price, Twitter’s board of directors is intending to dilute the firm by providing insiders a sweetheart deal,” David Sacks pointed out. “This is a flagrant breach of fiduciary duty that should be prosecuted.”
“This poison pill (defense tactic to avoid a takeover) isn’t just any poison pill,” Kip Herriage explained. “It’s the ruling class’s elite regime defending one of its key propaganda instruments for brainwashing.” “Board members should be sued ‘personally’ for a BLATANT breach of fiduciary responsibility,” he said.
“Twitter’s insiders basically just opted to screw over their shareholders, wreck their stock, and expose the business to large litigation merely to prevent Elon Musk from operating Twitter in a way that won’t rig elections or censor their political opponents,” Greg Price observed. Adam Rizzieri stated, “Twitter’s Board of Directors and this #poisonpill are in breach of fiduciary duties to shareholders.”
"*" indicates required fields
“The corporation reported a $221 million loss in 2021. 2022: Because of @elonmusk’s assistance, they were able to increase their worth from $13.3 billion to $43 billion.”
Elon Musk has stated that not putting his offer to a shareholder vote is “utterly unacceptable.” To a query from Nick Short, Musk said, “Absolutely.” “It would be completely inexcusable not to submit this offer to a vote of the shareholders.” The firm, not the board of directors, is theirs.”
As previously reported, Twitter’s Board of Directors has implemented a “poison pill” approach to prevent Elon Musk from assuming control of the Big Tech platform and implementing free speech regulations.
“Twitter, $TWTR, has overwhelmingly accepted a limited duration shareholder rights plan (the “Rights Plan”),” strange whales reported. “Through the Rights Plan, all shareholders will be able to realize the full value of their Twitter investment.”
“Vital: The Rights Plan will reduce the likelihood that any entity, person, or group gains control of Twitter through market accumulation without paying all shareholders an appropriate control premium or providing the Board with sufficient time to make informed judgments,” according to the report, which cited the board’s statement. According to Axios, Twitter’s board of directors has decided to take the poison pill.
According to Axios, “Twitter’s board of directors implemented a defense move on Friday aimed at deterring Elon Musk’s $43 billion hostile takeover proposal.” “Why that matters: The ‘poison pill,’ as it’s known in corporate speak, provides Twitter’s current shareholders time to buy additional shares at a discount, diminishing Musk’s ownership interest,” according to the story.
Vanguard Inc., one of Twitter’s major corporate shareholders, increased its investment in the Big Tech behemoth, surpassing Elon Musk as the company’s greatest single stakeholder. The Daily Mail stated that “Elon Musk is no longer the largest stakeholder in Twitter,” after asset manager Vanguard Group upped its stake to overtake him.
“Vanguard now controls 10.3% of Twitter, while Musk owns 9.1%, making him the company’s largest individual stakeholder.” Jack Dorsey, the creator of Twitter. Vanguard has more than $7.50 trillion in assets under management (AUM), second only to BlackRock, Inc ($9.01 trillion AUM), which also holds a big interest (6.5 percent) in Twitter, according to Investopedia.
Vanguard is also the “world’s largest issuer of mutual funds and the second-largest issuer of exchange-traded funds (ETFs),” according to Investopedia. The Vanguard action is clearly aimed at thwarting Musk’s plan to take over Twitter and restore some kind of free expression.
On Thursday afternoon, Twitter’s board convened an emergency meeting to consider Musk’s $43 billion bid, priced at $54.20 per share. At the meeting, CEO Parag Agrawal discussed the offer with shareholders. Sheikh Al Waleed, a major Twitter stakeholder in Saudi Arabia, rejected Elon Musk’s offer, which was much greater than the Goldman Sachs target price of $30 per share. Musk, on the other hand, revealed at a TED conference on Thursday that he had a “Plan B.”
“Twitter has de facto become the town square,” Musk stated. “So it’s critical that people have both the reality and the idea that they can communicate freely… so there’s no type of manipulation going on behind the scenes, either algorithmically or humanly.”
“Having a public platform that is maximally trustworthy and broadly inclusive, in my strong instinctive sense, is incredibly crucial to the future of civilization,” Musk concluded. “I don’t give a damn about economics.” Musk said, “I’m very fascinated with truth.” Musk was asked what would happen if the Twitter board of directors rejected his bid to buy the company. “Do you have a backup plan?” he was asked.
During his TED talk in Vancouver, Musk declared, “There is.” Musk, on the other hand, admitted on Thursday that he’s “not sure” if he’ll be able to purchase Twitter outright. Although Twitter verified that his bid had been received, the board must still consider it. Musk stated that this would be his “best and last” offer.
Musk also stated that he is attempting to reclaim control of his Twitter account because he is a staunch supporter of free expression and feels that it is essential for the survival of civilisation. On Thursday, he added, “A good indication of whether there is free speech is if someone you don’t like is permitted to say something you don’t like.” “If that’s the case, we have the right to free speech.”
According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter’s board considered a “poison pill” tactic to prevent Elon Musk from dramatically growing his share in the firm. This defensive tactic, commonly referred to as a “shareholders rights plan,” makes hostile takeovers more difficult and costly for the acquirer.
One “poison pill” plan would allow current shareholders to buy additional shares at a discount, effectively diluting the hostile party’s ownership interest. The board of Twitter, on the other hand, has a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of shareholders. If Twitter fails to do so, it may face legal action. Following such a lawsuit, the price will plummet, making Twitter even more vulnerable to a hostile acquisition. For Twitter, it’s a lose-lose situation.