WEBVTT - Jef Feeley on Musk, Twitter (Audio)

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk has to hand over information about potential investors

0:00:04.600 --> 0:00:06.960
<v Speaker 1>in the forty four billion dollar buyout of Twitter that

0:00:07.040 --> 0:00:10.039
<v Speaker 1>he's now trying to cancel. Joining us to talk about

0:00:10.119 --> 0:00:14.520
<v Speaker 1>this more. Jeff Feeley, Bloomberg Legal reporter, So, Jeff, this

0:00:14.560 --> 0:00:18.360
<v Speaker 1>is the latest twist in this long running saga. Now,

0:00:18.440 --> 0:00:21.120
<v Speaker 1>what is the significance of this and who are these

0:00:21.120 --> 0:00:26.040
<v Speaker 1>potential investors we're talking about, Paul. These guys are folks

0:00:26.079 --> 0:00:30.400
<v Speaker 1>that are friends or colleagues of Mr Musk who have

0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:35.479
<v Speaker 1>discussed potentially throwing in with him in there set more

0:00:35.520 --> 0:00:38.559
<v Speaker 1>than seven billion dollar equity race he did for the

0:00:38.600 --> 0:00:43.800
<v Speaker 1>Twitter deal. Uh, these folks names. He's resisted turning over

0:00:43.840 --> 0:00:47.720
<v Speaker 1>these names, saying that they don't have any real substitutive

0:00:47.800 --> 0:00:50.319
<v Speaker 1>knowledge of the deal. But the judge says he's got

0:00:50.320 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 1>to hand him over anyway. That's one interesting angle. And

0:00:54.640 --> 0:00:59.680
<v Speaker 1>then this whistleblower complaint from a former executive, Peter z

0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:03.600
<v Speaker 1>Co is interesting too about deficient deficiencies. And we saw

0:01:03.600 --> 0:01:05.840
<v Speaker 1>a big drop in the in the share price down

0:01:05.920 --> 0:01:09.640
<v Speaker 1>seven point three percent in Twitter today. That's a long

0:01:09.680 --> 0:01:13.760
<v Speaker 1>way from the fifty four dollars that Elon Musk originally

0:01:13.920 --> 0:01:16.720
<v Speaker 1>was was offering to pay. Does this make it more

0:01:16.840 --> 0:01:20.880
<v Speaker 1>likely that Musk gets a gets more favorable treatment from

0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:25.000
<v Speaker 1>the judge. Well, it's too early to tell. We really

0:01:25.040 --> 0:01:28.280
<v Speaker 1>don't know at this point whether this gentleman has the

0:01:28.280 --> 0:01:31.119
<v Speaker 1>goods or it's just a case of sour grapes. He

0:01:31.200 --> 0:01:36.080
<v Speaker 1>was fired by Twitter over performance issues. Uh, we really

0:01:36.160 --> 0:01:38.640
<v Speaker 1>just it's going to take time to flesh this out.

0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:42.800
<v Speaker 1>So I think everybody needs to stay tuned. One of

0:01:42.840 --> 0:01:45.959
<v Speaker 1>the people that is getting sucked into this voltics as well,

0:01:46.080 --> 0:01:49.280
<v Speaker 1>Jack Dorsey, has been subpoenaed. Of course, he's a friend

0:01:49.280 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 1>of Elon Musk. He's a form of Twitter CEO as well.

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:54.800
<v Speaker 1>That might there be some split loyalties here for Jack Dorsey.

0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:58.360
<v Speaker 1>What's he likely to say? I don't think there is.

0:01:58.400 --> 0:02:00.600
<v Speaker 1>I think Jack Dorsey is one of the folks in

0:02:00.640 --> 0:02:03.960
<v Speaker 1>this case who would likely be subpoenaed by both sides

0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:08.440
<v Speaker 1>to testify. He is basically one of the folks who

0:02:09.200 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 1>uh served as an advisor for Mr Musk when he

0:02:12.120 --> 0:02:15.360
<v Speaker 1>was considering whether to make the bid for Twitter. It's

0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:18.880
<v Speaker 1>pretty clear that Mr Musk would have preferred Mr Dorsey

0:02:18.919 --> 0:02:22.320
<v Speaker 1>stay on the board and served sort of as his

0:02:22.320 --> 0:02:25.720
<v Speaker 1>his proxy, his voice but that wasn't to be Mr.

0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:30.680
<v Speaker 1>Mr Dorsey has sort of moved on, so we're likely

0:02:30.760 --> 0:02:34.520
<v Speaker 1>to hear from Mr Dorsey at trial in October. I

0:02:34.560 --> 0:02:37.040
<v Speaker 1>wanted to go back to the whistle blower because apparently

0:02:37.080 --> 0:02:41.280
<v Speaker 1>it's serious enough that lawmakers have have vowed to investigate,

0:02:41.360 --> 0:02:47.000
<v Speaker 1>and even in our talking about national security implications in

0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:50.240
<v Speaker 1>terms of what this gentleman, the former executive, has said,

0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:55.720
<v Speaker 1>how subjective are some of the charges. Well, I mean, again,

0:02:56.240 --> 0:02:58.920
<v Speaker 1>it depends on which side of the hour you're standing on.

0:02:59.760 --> 0:03:03.920
<v Speaker 1>For were the Twitter side they've said that basically, you know,

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:07.480
<v Speaker 1>there's plenty of inconsistencies and inaccuracies in what he has

0:03:07.560 --> 0:03:11.160
<v Speaker 1>said that he has motivated, you know, by a desire

0:03:11.200 --> 0:03:13.840
<v Speaker 1>to hurt the company. On the Musk side, you know,

0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:16.440
<v Speaker 1>this guy is the former head of security for Twitter

0:03:16.600 --> 0:03:21.000
<v Speaker 1>computer security, so not a small job, especially for a

0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:26.560
<v Speaker 1>social media platform. And you know, I mean, it's really

0:03:26.560 --> 0:03:29.760
<v Speaker 1>going to come down to how this plays with the judge.

0:03:30.360 --> 0:03:32.840
<v Speaker 1>This is all a judge in Delaware is going to

0:03:32.960 --> 0:03:35.960
<v Speaker 1>make the final call on whether Mr Musk was justified

0:03:36.000 --> 0:03:39.080
<v Speaker 1>in walking away or not. Well, that trial now a

0:03:39.120 --> 0:03:41.760
<v Speaker 1>little under two months away. What are the chances that

0:03:41.800 --> 0:03:43.840
<v Speaker 1>it gets sailed in advance and we never make it

0:03:43.920 --> 0:03:48.280
<v Speaker 1>to court. There's some talk about that. You know, there's

0:03:48.280 --> 0:03:52.280
<v Speaker 1>the question as to whether Twitter really wants to have

0:03:52.400 --> 0:03:56.200
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk, you know, as its owner in the endgame. Uh.

0:03:57.080 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 1>Mr Musk has made it clear that he really is

0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:03.960
<v Speaker 1>not not all that interested. He's got buyer's remorse. I

0:04:04.000 --> 0:04:07.520
<v Speaker 1>could see a settlement. It's it's Uh, it's certainly in

0:04:07.600 --> 0:04:13.120
<v Speaker 1>both sides interests and j Jeff, is it Do we

0:04:13.200 --> 0:04:16.479
<v Speaker 1>know for sure that he wants out? It seems like it,

0:04:16.640 --> 0:04:20.320
<v Speaker 1>But it could be that a much lower price, um,

0:04:20.360 --> 0:04:25.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, has been the motivating motivating factor all along. Uh,

0:04:25.320 --> 0:04:26.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, what can you tell us on that front?

0:04:27.839 --> 0:04:30.560
<v Speaker 1>Does anyone really have any insight into the mind of

0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:35.440
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk? Uh, It's it's you know, it's just hard

0:04:35.480 --> 0:04:39.479
<v Speaker 1>to tell whether this has all been negotiation by lawsuit

0:04:39.960 --> 0:04:42.280
<v Speaker 1>or he really wants to put on his shoes and

0:04:42.320 --> 0:04:46.359
<v Speaker 1>make the move again. Only the future will tell us that.

0:04:46.960 --> 0:04:50.159
<v Speaker 1>You know, Jeff, from your from your commentary and from

0:04:50.160 --> 0:04:52.960
<v Speaker 1>your approach, it seems like you're a bit fed up

0:04:53.000 --> 0:04:55.560
<v Speaker 1>with this. I mean, is this a confusing and and

0:04:55.640 --> 0:04:59.960
<v Speaker 1>sort of frustrating story to cover? It's a very interesting

0:05:00.080 --> 0:05:03.080
<v Speaker 1>story to cover. It's one of the things that we

0:05:03.160 --> 0:05:05.080
<v Speaker 1>do a lot in Delaware, a lot of m and

0:05:05.120 --> 0:05:08.800
<v Speaker 1>a litigation in Delaware. But he's killing my summer, you

0:05:08.839 --> 0:05:13.720
<v Speaker 1>know what I mean? You know anyway, now now I

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:16.040
<v Speaker 1>I you know, I love it. But again he's skill

0:05:16.120 --> 0:05:19.359
<v Speaker 1>in my summer. One of the things he's complaining about

0:05:19.360 --> 0:05:22.960
<v Speaker 1>Elon Muska is being hounded about casual conversations that he

0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:25.360
<v Speaker 1>had about this Twitter deal. But he does say all

0:05:25.480 --> 0:05:28.080
<v Speaker 1>kinds of things as you mentioned there, you know, for example,

0:05:28.200 --> 0:05:32.520
<v Speaker 1>taking tessela private buying Manchester United. These these two seem

0:05:32.600 --> 0:05:34.760
<v Speaker 1>to be like trial balloons and thought bubbles a lot

0:05:34.760 --> 0:05:37.599
<v Speaker 1>of the time. So populating the world with all his

0:05:37.720 --> 0:05:40.840
<v Speaker 1>children guy, now there you go. So what kind of

0:05:41.040 --> 0:05:46.040
<v Speaker 1>right to these sorts of casual remarks carry in a corporom? Well, again,

0:05:46.480 --> 0:05:49.799
<v Speaker 1>you just don't know what is going to be the

0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:53.200
<v Speaker 1>key thing that rings with the judge. The key question

0:05:53.320 --> 0:05:58.680
<v Speaker 1>here is whether or not the Twitter folks were accurate

0:05:58.960 --> 0:06:04.320
<v Speaker 1>and robust and what they told Mr Musk and the

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:07.719
<v Speaker 1>rest of the world about these bots, the spam and

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:11.680
<v Speaker 1>robot accounts that are part of their their customer base.

0:06:12.440 --> 0:06:15.279
<v Speaker 1>If they were you know if they were accurate and

0:06:15.320 --> 0:06:19.320
<v Speaker 1>they were complete and telling people about that, they have

0:06:19.440 --> 0:06:22.159
<v Speaker 1>no trouble. Mr Musk is a big boys, the richest

0:06:22.160 --> 0:06:25.560
<v Speaker 1>man in the world, and he knows what a contract means.

0:06:25.560 --> 0:06:29.799
<v Speaker 1>But if in fact the Twitter folks haven't any way

0:06:29.960 --> 0:06:34.159
<v Speaker 1>been concealing the number of these accounts to pump up

0:06:34.200 --> 0:06:38.039
<v Speaker 1>the revenue numbers to be a problem, all right, Jeff,

0:06:38.040 --> 0:06:40.640
<v Speaker 1>thank you. Jeff Peely, Bloomberg Legal reporter,