The phrase, “the game is afoot”, was first penned by William Shakespeare. Nonetheless, most associate it with a famous fictional detective. The crafty Sherlock Holmes would exclaim, “Come, Watson, come! The game is afoot.” Literally, it means the process is underway.
It’s a rather catchy little exclamation, expressing eager anticipation for what’s about to happen next. When Elon Musk first announced his possible interest in dramatically changing the landscape of social media, it seemed “the game was afoot!”
Right out of the gate, Musk used a subtle inquiry to allude to what his real intentions might be. Some saw his first question, one that asked how Twitter could shed its reputation for censoring free speech, as a clear indication that he was going to go after the company.
Soon after he declined to accept Twitter’s invitation to join its board of directors, the game was afoot. Like clockwork, the SpaceX and Tesla founder made an outright bid for the company. His $43 billion offer sent the big tech and mainstream media world into an instant state of panic.
Suddenly, someone from outside their liberal elitist circle was trying to infiltrate their ranks. According to them, democracy was at stake. The wild-eyed rants from the radical left insinuated that Elon Musk was a “Bond villain” aspiring for world domination by taking over free speech.
It was comical to watch. Twitter’s board freaked out even worse than the media. The board of directors launched a policy decision that equates to a “poison pill” for the company. They’ve decided to tank the company financially rather than allow Musk to buy it.
At some point, this is going to constitute a breach of fiduciary responsibility. Experts insist that the Twitter board doesn’t grasp the severity of the situation they’re creating. There could be lawsuits for refusing to accept what amounts to an enormously lucrative offer for shareholders.
Musk’s $43 billion bid is 38 percent over the share value of April 1. That spike in value happened after Elon Musk made a simple investment in shares. The value of Twitter continued to climb ahead of his offer to buy the company outright and then take it private.
After refusing to sell, shareholders should be asking board members, “What’s the point of the company?” Isn’t that the business model, to make money? If Twitter is not trying to make a profit, what is the company trying to accomplish? What is Twitter’s end game?
When we look at what’s happened just over the last couple of years, it becomes pretty obvious what the issue is. Twitter doesn’t want someone to take their liberal-leaning, conservative-censoring company and make it an honest and trustworthy platform for free speech.
These left-leaning elites are fine with free speech as long as they approve of the speech in question. This is not about greed, or the board would have pounced on the massive profits from the sale. It’s about censorship and control.
If the liberal company sells the popular social media platform, they will lose one weapon in their arsenal for controlling public opinion. These giant big tech companies will lose their ability to influence elections, to influence thought, and to influence what information society receives.
Elon Musk’s bid for Twitter is a beacon of hope for free speech and democracy, not the opposite. The left’s embattled stance against it is proof enough. The censorship button is like a golden idol to the radical left. They are beholden to its power.
No amount of money can be allowed to steal it from them. It’s more valuable than money. But again, the game is afoot. Musk seems to love tweeting cryptic messages. This weekend, after his initial offer was refused, he tweeted, “Love Me Tender.”
🎶 Love Me Tender 🎶
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 16, 2022
This might not be as baffling as you might think. Bloomberg News doesn’t think so. Bloomberg reported that it could be a reference to a “potential tender offer to Twitter Inc. shareholders for control of the company.”
The only other viable explanation would be that Musk just added the famous 1956 Elvis Presley hit to his playlist. Of course, anyone who believes that earns high marks for naïveté. You know, someone who would actually believe that there’s a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.
After having his offer turned down, Musk is raising the stakes. The definition for a tender offer, according to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, is “an active solicitation by a company or third party to purchase a substantial percentage of the company’s securities.”
In other words, Musk can essentially assume a controlling interest in Twitter regardless of whether the board agrees to sell. Yes sir, Watson, the game certainly is afoot. As the meaning behind this cryptic tweet sinks in, we assume the eventual outcome for Twitter’s board.
They’re pretty much cooked. Each board member probably gets somewhere around $250,000 a year for what is essentially a part-time gig. If Musk takes a controlling interest, they’re cooked. This is a curious “end-around” type of play. It must have surprised the board.
Another interesting development surprised them even more. Musk responded to a tweet from Gary Black, the Managing Partner of the Future Fund LLC. Black hinted at the firing of the board if Musk purchased Twitter outright.
So, Musk replied, “Board salary will be $0 if my bid succeeds, so that’s $3M/year saved right there.” Talk about being forced in between a rock and a hard place. This ongoing saga is quite amusing. Each step by the multi-billionaire should impress upon anyone paying attention that “the game is afoot!”
