Elon Musk ‘still committed’ to Twitter deal after putting it on hold – business live | Business

Elon Musk has now tweeted that he’s “Still committed” to the acquisition….

Full story: Twitter takeover temporarily on hold, says Elon Musk

Dan Milmo

Elon Musk has said his $44bn takeover of Twitter is “temporarily on hold” after the social media platform claimed that less than 5% of its users were spam or fake accounts.

The Tesla chief tweeted on Friday morning that the deal was being frozen while he awaited details behind Twitter’s assertion.

Musk announced the move alongside a link to a Reuters article published on 2 May that referred to a filing with the US financial regulator, in which Twitter claimed that false or spam accounts represented less than 5% of its daily average users.

Musk has railed at automated Twitter accounts – which are not run manually – and said after announcing the takeover that he wanted to improve the platform by “authenticating all humans”. He has agreed to pay a $1bn break fee to Twitter if he walks away from the deal.

The news sent Twitter’s shares down about 23% in pre-market trading, on concerns that the deal could collapse.

The whole situation is ‘farcical’, and Twitter’s board must take some of the blame.

So explains Neil Campling, head of TMT research at Mirabaud Equity Research:

“The tragi-comedy continues and the Twitter situation is nothing short of laughable. We’d always said Musk may cut or run or change his tune at the 11th hour and 59 minutes and 59 seconds on the clock. We’re not even close to the 11th hour yet. Farcical.

Musk has never had the full funding – we know that from his constant attempts to get financial support – but he also held all the cards. The Twitter board have been held hostage and only have themselves to blame for this mess. No other buyer will emerge – if Musk decides he is still interested he can “name his price”… and it won’t be higher!

The board should have seen this coming. There was a specific performance clause in the merger agreement (section 9.9), which gave Twitter the right to “consummate the closing (of the deal)” but only if Musk had the financing – which, of course, he doesn’t.”

Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives says it’s “a full on Friday the 13th circus show”.

Speaking to CNBC’s SquawkBox show as news broke that the deal was on hold, Ives called Musk’s move ‘a shocker’.

He explained it’s not OK to simply put a deal on hold with a tweet. You’d expect a regulatory filing with a deal of this type, or something else more formal.

Ives explains.

To come out in a tweet, it sends this whole thing into a circus show.

Because now, the Street’s initial reaction is going to be, ‘he’s looking for a way to get out of this deal’.

Ives points to the big fall in Tesla’s share price (down a quarter in the last month). The deal’s finances included a margin loan secured against some of Musk’s Tesla shares.

Ives also points out that Twitter’s filing, stating false or spam accounts represented fewer than 5% of daily users, came out on May 2nd, so isn’t a sudden development.

Just in: Elon Musk’s $44bn deal to buy Twitter is “temporarily on hold” until he gets more information about fake accounts on the platform.

The billionaire has tweeted that the deal is on hold, waiting for details supporting the calculation that fake and spam accounts represent less than 5% of the users on its platform, as Twitter said in a filing earlier this month.

Musk linked to a Reuters report from May 2, which said Twitter estimated that false or spam accounts represented fewer than 5% of its monetizable daily active users during the first quarter.

The news has sent Twitter’s shares plunging around 23% in pre-market trading, on concerns that the deal could collapse.

They’ve on track to open at $34.60, down from around $45 last night, and away from Musk’s agreed offer of $54.20.

Musk has previously said that one of his priorities once he bought Twitter would be to remove “spam bots” from the platform.

But he also warned earlier this week that the deal would take at least another two months to complate, and was “not a done deal.”

That takeover has already led Twitter to announce a hiring freeze, and the departure of two top leaders in a major shakeup.

Factory output across the eurozone fell in March, as rising input prices and supply chain disruption due to the Ukraine war hit the sector.

Industrial output from factories, mines and utilities across the region declined by 1.8% in March – the first full month of the conflict – compared with February, and were 0.8% lower than a year ago.

Production of capital goods fell 2.7%, suggesting demand for heavy duty machinery, equipment, vehicles and tools declined as economic uncertainty rose.

Production of non-durable consumer goods declined 2.3%, while intermediate goods (used to make goods for sale) dropped 2.0%, and energy fell 1.7%. But production of durable consumer goods rose 0.8%.

Germany saw one of the largest monthly declines, with production down 5%, along with Slovakia (-5.3%) and Luxembourg (-3.9%), while the highest increases were observed in Lithuania (+11.3%), Estonia (+5.1%), Bulgaria and Greece (both +5.0%).

‘Golden era’ of cheap food is ending, says ex-Sainsbury’s boss

Kalyeena Makortoff

The UK’s “golden era” of cheap food is coming to an end, the former Sainsbury’s boss Justin King has warned, saying households should be prepared for higher grocery bills in the long term.

King claimed supermarkets could not be expected to absorb the extra costs entirely or protect consumers from rising prices, despite having announced higher earnings, as their net profit margins are only around 3%.

Instead, shoppers must making hard choices on how they spend their money, particularly as soaring inflation – made worse by the ripple effects of the war in Ukraine – pushed up prices on supermarket shelves.

King told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme

“We have been perhaps through a golden era. We spend much less as a proportion on average of our household budgets on food than we had almost any time in history, and that’s been [on] a long, gentle decline. So I suspect what we will see is a higher proportion, across the piece, spent on food for the longer term.

“It won’t actually be that high in historical terms but it will require adjustments in terms of how we all prioritise our family budget spending,” King added.

Here’s the full story: