Twitter workers say no one’s in charge after Elon Musk terminates the deal


The general public was perplexed by ELON MUSK’s abrupt withdrawal from the $44 billion purchase of Twitter on July 8. This action may have violated the conditions of his takeover agreement. Chaos also ensued among Twitter’s staff members. An anonymous Twitter employee who isn’t allowed to speak to the media claims, “Twitter is a crap show inside; I can confirm that for you right now, without a doubt.”

They are not alone in holding this opinion. According to a second current employee of Twitter, who also wished to remain anonymous, “there is no real leadership at the time.” “The whole business is operating automatically.” A third person, who will soon depart the organization, is also irritated. They remark, “I anticipate it to be a disaster. “I believe it creates a hazardous precedent to allow Elon to interfere so much, drive the stock down, then get out,” someone said. “I’d like to see someone hold Elon’s feet to the fire.”

Staff members at Twitter claim they are being kept in the dark and have been warned not to discuss the takeover publicly on their own platform. The first employee claims that upper management has not given them any information. The only internal communication about the most recent events was a tweet from Twitter board member Bret Taylor, who said that the firm was “committed to finalizing the deal on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and intends to take legal action to enforce the merger agreement.”

The corporation has requested that employees refrain from adding their own commentary about what is happening there. The first employee claims, “Every time I learn anything about Twitter, I learn it on Twitter.” I learned about the Musk news via friends rather than my own firm, which has been a problem ever since. Twitter opted not to respond.

The problem seems to be headed toward the court. To ensure that Musk upholds his part of the bargain, Twitter has recruited the Delaware litigation law firm, Wachtell Lipton. Taylor tweeted that he was “sure” the firm will succeed at the time. Evan Williams, a former chair and CEO of Twitter, has said that he believes the company should sever relations and “let this entire unpleasant affair blow away.”

According to Dan Ives, managing director of the New York-based research firm Wedbush Securities, “this catastrophe is a nightmare situation for Twitter and will result in an Everest-like uphill battle for Parag [Agrawal, Twitter’s CEO] and Co. to handle the various obstacles ahead.” Employee turnover and poor morale, problems with advertising revenue, a loss of confidence with investors due to the yo-yoing share price, and embarrassing accusations about bogus accounts on the site are just a few of the difficulties Twitter is facing.

If a trial does occur, Ives predicts it would be drawn out and contentious, “throwing a gloomy cloud over Twitter’s head in the short term.” Twitter’s leadership, monetizable user base, and ability to disclose the number of bots on the network truthfully have all suffered knocks to the company’s image. It’s a flaw Musk is all too aware of and has made public by making fun of Agrawal in a series of tweets that cut through lengthy, meticulously crafted arguments on Twitter’s bot capabilities. Prateek Waghre, policy director at the Internet Freedom Foundation, claims that Musk, however, has created issues with his goals for the company, especially with regard to free expression. If the deal had gone through, he claims, “I believe it would have generated confusion about Musk’s view on that, along with uncertainty on many other things.”

Following Musk’s announcement of his takeover offer, a number of executives have already departed the firm, having an influence on countless others below on the corporate food chain. The first Twitter employee explains, “The sense inside is that people have been applying for jobs and they’re going to keep looking for employment.

Employees claim that when many staff members were the targets of Project Veritas sting operations intended to capture them publicly disparaging their possible new employer, they felt especially betrayed by the lack of management support. First employee: “I joined Twitter and wanted to remain.” “I enjoyed my work. Even if things went back to being precisely like they were, nothing would keep me here anymore.

Because existing workers are concerned that Twitter could withdraw employment offers to candidates and the effect it would have on future applicants, the brain drain is likely to continue. One job seeker whose offer of employment at Twitter this year was later withdrawn after the takeover says they would reapply to the organization, but not before inquiring of the manager to whom they would ultimately report about internal politics and future plans.

Others are not as certain that Twitter faces the same reputational problems as Twitter’s internal stakeholders. According to Cary Cooper, a management lecturer at Manchester Business School, “the underlying concern was he would democratize it too much and enable individuals to say things that would be unacceptable on it.” Investors would be concerned because of his business savvy.

Cooper does believe that the effect on investors might be greater, however. He claims that there is a drawback since Musk would have seen the purchase as both a platform and a business deal. In Musk’s absence, Cooper thinks Twitter’s senior leadership team will need to step up and provide a fresh business strategy to revive the firm.

However, according to Debra Aho Williamson, principal at market research company Insider Intelligence, there are few signs that this is going to occur. She claims that Twitter’s recent distractions have prevented it from concentrating on its core commercial objectives. Twitter will continue to face the same issues it had before Musk entered the picture even if he is able to end the agreement. Its user base is thinning down. Additionally, even while ad income is still hardly increasing, Twitter is now battling with a sluggish economy that may limit ad spending across all social media platforms.

The issue of personnel is another. Investors in Twitter are sure to be troubled by the mounting problems. When asked whether they believed Twitter should take Musk to a court or let the agreement fizzle out, The Vanguard Group, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, Kingdom Holding Group, and State Street did not comment. Ives thinks that investors would prefer a future for Twitter without Musk, with Agrawal in charge and Musk paying punitive damages. Legal experts predict that Musk will be required to pay a large sum even if he decides not to purchase the business. It virtually doesn’t matter to workers. The first Twitter employee says, “I can’t even begin to conceive what it’s going to be like in five years.” But I’m aware that nobody I know will be there.

The next several months—and Twitter’s ability to recover from the negative events of the previous three months—may depend on the path those investors choose. Since Musk’s role in the company was initially revealed on April 4, when he disclosed a 9 percent ownership in the business, Twitter’s share price has been fluctuating drastically. On the day his ownership was disclosed, the price increased 27% to $49.97. It subsequently reached a high of $51.70 on April 25 after Twitter’s board approved Musk’s offer, before plummeting as Musk started outlining the long list of problems he had with the platform and coming up with justifications to renege on the agreement.

Twitter’s stock price began today at $34.64, down 13% from what it was before Musk got involved with the business. It has now decreased much further. The first Twitter employee tells WIRED that Musk “essentially messed about with us, messed with the share price, accelerated a slew of redundancies and cutbacks.” Everyone is unwilling to be here right now since morale is so very low.

Source: WIRED


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here