Elon Musk: Jurors see fraud in Twitter deal

Elon Musk is once again at the center of a major court case. A jury in San Francisco has ruled that he deliberately misled investors in connection with the acquisition of Twitter. The verdict could have significant financial consequences and sheds light on the events surrounding the Twitter deal in 2022.

When it comes to Elon Musk, the focus is often on grand visions and controversial decisions. However, the Twitter case reveals a different side: legal disputes and concrete allegations of market manipulation. This isn't just about individual statements, but about their impact on the share price and the resulting losses for investors.

Starting point: The takeover bid for Twitter

In 2022, Elon Musk made an unsolicited offer to acquire Twitter Inc. He offered $54.20 per share, valuing the company at approximately $44 billion. At that time, Twitter's market capitalization was around $36 billion.

The offer was initially seen as a surprising move and initiated a period of intensive negotiations and public debate.

Criticism of fake accounts and attempts to withdraw

In the following weeks and months, Musk repeatedly expressed doubts about Twitter's figures regarding the number of fake accounts on the platform. He claimed that the actual number of bots was significantly higher than officially stated.

At the same time, he repeatedly tried to withdraw from the already agreed-upon deal. These statements and actions created uncertainty in the market and influenced the share price.

Share price development

In July 2022, Twitter's stock reached a low of $32.52. This represents a decline of approximately 40 percent compared to the $54.20 per share offered by Musk.

This share price development played a central role in the subsequent accusations made by investors.

Completion of takeover despite conflict

Despite attempts to back out of the deal, the acquisition was ultimately completed. This followed a lawsuit by Twitter, which sought to enforce compliance with the original agreement.

After the acquisition was completed, Twitter was later renamed "X".

New lawsuit: Allegation of fraud

After the acquisition, Elon Musk faced another lawsuit. Investors accused him of deliberately portraying the company negatively in public to drive down the share price and thereby gain an advantage.

The central question was whether his public statements were deliberately used to influence the market.

The jury's verdict

An eight-member jury in federal court in San Francisco concluded that Musk intentionally misled investors. However, two of the four fraud charges were dismissed.

For the remaining points, the jury considered it proven that his statements had an influence on the share price.

Calculation of damages

The jury analyzed the extent to which Musk's statements influenced Twitter's stock price over a period of approximately five months. Based on this analysis, they calculated how much the price was depressed on individual trading days.

The exact amount of damages has not yet been determined. It will be decided at a later date when affected shareholders assert their individual claims.

Possible financial consequences

According to the investors' lawyer, Elon Musk could be held liable for up to $2.6 billion.

The actual payments could amount to hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, depending on the claims submitted by investors.

Response and further action

Elon Musk has not yet responded to a request for comment, according to Bloomberg. However, the WSJ reports that his lawyers have confirmed he will appeal the verdict.

This suggests that the proceedings will continue and may drag on for a longer period of time.

Elon Musk and the consequences of his communication

The verdict against Elon Musk represents a significant step in the legal proceedings surrounding the Twitter acquisition. At its core is the question of how much influence a powerful entrepreneur may exert on the market through public statements.

Even though the final amount of damages is still pending and an appeal is likely, the case already illustrates the potential financial and legal consequences of such developments. At the same time, it highlights the crucial role of communication and trust in the relationship between companies and investors. (Image: Shutterstock / kovop)