I've been involved in a couple of due diligence processes that were part of the conditions of the formal offer.

You don't open your books to a competitor or in a hostile takeover situation.

This would be more akin to the inspection period when buying a house.

The threat of the deal blowing up with so much on the line is what holds Twitter’s feet to the fire.

How do you know what due diligence was done and what new information might have come up? If the company misrepresented its users to Musk during negotiations that wouldn't be very reasonable.

I obviously don't know the details, but knowing the number of actual users on Twitter is probably the most important factor to base an offer on? He's not exactly new on Twitter, so if Twitter claims 5% bots he just accepts that? I find that extremely unlikely, unless he had another motive.

>How do you know what due diligence was done and what new information might have come up?

Based on the "Funding secured" or "Pedo guy" nonsense revealed in court documents, I have a pretty good idea how much due diligence was done prior to the offer: zero.

that's how it works in the bussiness world. you first make an offer, and then it enters the due diligence phase when information is shared and these matters are investigated.