Elon Musk attacks Twitter

Elon Musk yesterday launched a frontal assault against Twitter. Specifically he offered to buy all remaining outstanding shares at $54.20 per share. Twitter turns out to have many defenders, and all have rushed to defend Twitter, one way or another. But does Elon Musk have the right idea? Or should he partner with an established Parallel Society platform and out-compete Twitter?

Current state of the Elon Musk and Twitter war

Elon Musk declared war on Twitter last year, after they disallowed Donald J. Trump’s account.

This year he quietly bought shares of Twitter (NYSE:TWTR), until he owned 9.2 percent of the company. Twitter management then offered him a board seat, on condition that he limit his stake to 14.9 percent. Last weekend, Musk refused the offer, and the seat.

Earlier in the week he filed another Form 8K with the Securities and Exchange Commission to become an active investor in Twitter. Today he left no further doubt of his intentions:

The link he left is to his latest SEC filing, detailing his tender offer. In point of fact he wants to take the company private, presumably as a Subchapter S corporation. The new Twitter, under him, would have as many other shareholders as the law allows – not very many.

Twitter closed at $45.08 per share yesterday. To make a further point, Elon Musk tweeted Goldman Sachs’ recommendation, which is to sell Twitter.

Twitter staff, and many Twitter users, are aghast at the thought. CNAV mentions their reaction only to condemn it. This tweet typifies the mind-set of his critics:

Excuse us? Letting people say what they want is not the same as free speech?

Defenders of Twitter to the rescue – sort of

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia tweeted his definite refusal of the tender offer. In reply Elon Musk scornfully asked:

1. How much of Twitter the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia owns, and
2. What policy did the kingdom have on freedom of speech.

In fact Prince Alwaleed admitted that the “Kingdom Company” owns 5.2 percent of Twitter. So perhaps their refusal would be of no moment. Remember: one planning a hostile takeover need only buy a controlling interest, which is 50.1 percent, not 100 percent.

The Vanguard-Windsor Group offered a more substantive defense. They increased their stake to more than ten percent.

We then have a rumor from Dave Hodges, who runs the Common Sense show on YouTube. He says that Attorney General Merrick Garland has opened an investigation against Elon Musk.

CNAV cannot confirm this independently. But for Merrick Garland, who owes his appointment to Deep State action, to launch a bill-of-attainder-style investigation of Elon Musk, after Musk attacked one of the prime news organs of the Deep State, would make sense.

Elon Musk, are you wise?

Many conservatives, like Brigitte Gabriel, naturally are cheering on Elon Musk. But not all. J. D. Rucker remains skeptical of his motives. He also points out that even a “friendly” Twitter would come under attack from other parts of the Big Tech front, like Google Play Store and Apple App Store.

But the one “nay-sayer” to whom Elon Musk ought to listen the hardest is Andrew Torba, founder of the Gab Empire. He suggests that Elon sell out of Twitter, invest $2 billion in Gab, and take a seat on Gab’s board. In a lengthy letter, Torba points out all the ways that Big Tech can attack you, ways that he beat. Gab has its own infrastructure, and a quick way to put its shortcut onto people’s smartphones instead of an app. Nor does Gab operate in countries that try to order it to censor. With Gab you either allow free speech or you don’t get Gab services – it’s that simple. And now Gab has expanded to offer direct replacements for YouTube, Google News, and Google Trends. Lately it has installed its own payment processor and built its own marketplace.

The one thing Torba admits that Gab does not have, is its own Internet Service Provider. Andrew Torba wants a permanent contract with SpaceX’ Starlink service, so that no one could knock Gab off the Internet.

Andrew Torba’s message

What we are missing at the moment is an ISP. I fear that the next big leap of censorship is at the ISP level, with ISP’s blocking access to Gab.com. You solve that problem with Starlink. Together we can build infrastructure for a free speech internet.

Now that’s worth considering. Elon Musk would in fact do well to consider that, if he buys Twitter, he then owns a platform with a third-party infrastructure. That, as Gab and CNAV both know, is never safe. On the other hand, if ISPs do start blocking Gab, and Starlink doesn’t, that gives people a reason to buy Starlink they didn’t have before. So the combination of Gab, with its own server farm, and Elon Musk’s space-borne ISP, would be invincible.