Twitter vs Musk, the agreement is still in progress for the social media’s lawyers

After the ‘shock’ news regarding Elon Musk’s willingness to end the purchase agreement of the social platform Twitter, the global media continued to wonder how the story would evolve and we too tried to formulate a couple of hypotheses.

What we know for sure is that Elon Musk’s and Twitter’s lawyers are moving fast and the judicial battle is just around the corner. It is a battle for which Elon himself is preparing, not missing some spicy intervention spread via … Twitter:

We thus discover that the Twitter counter-offensive is already underway and the quartet of lawyers, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen and Katz, hired for the purpose, are already laying the foundations for the trial of the century. The lawyers have drawn up a letter specifying that the attempted termination of the contract put in place by Elon Musk is not acceptable, since there has been an intentional and conscious violation of the terms stipulated under negotiation and countersigned by everyone.

For his part, Musk explained that the desire not to conclude the transaction is linked to the intentional underestimation (by Twitter) of the bots present on the social network, one of the problems that he had proposed to solve himself once he would have entered possession of the platform. In essence, both claim that there has been a breach of the terms of the contract, it remains to be seen who will be right.

But it’s already there who maliciously claims that Musk’s operation is intentionalin the sense that it wants to take advantage of the media fuss that has arisen by exploiting the decline in the value of the shares (Twitter has lost more than 11% on the stock market in the last hours) to come to an even more advantageous agreement. However, there are some clauses in the original contract that could work against Elon Musk and one of them includes a breaking penalty quantified in about 1 billion dollars, which could force Tesla’s CEO to pay an even greater fine in the event that should he lose the judicial confrontation.

At the moment there has been no attempt at rapprochement and the two realities remain in contrasting positions, so we will have to wait a little longer to discover the evolution of this ‘onerous’ diatribe.