It's somewhat wild to posit this given how much of his balance sheet is public knowledge. He doesn't have the liquidity, sure. But there's a wide gap between illiquidity and insolvency, and he's not particularly leveraged.
Sure, but given the facts on the ground, he has more than enough capital to personally fund the equity. (The debt, LBO style, is held on Twitter's books.) We know there remain commitments from other investors for the equity, so that alone should draw a line under such discussions.
Elon Musk absolutely can fund this deal. He may not want to. And that isn't true in every state of the world. But currently, and in any proximate world state, him not having the money isn't an issue.
These reports are wrong (Reuters is not reliable when it comes to leaks from Tesla).
Tesla intends to lay off about 10% of salaried workers, which make less than 50% of the company's headcount (mostly managers). The company confirmed they're still hiring and will have more employees by EOY versus the day they announced the planned layoff.
> The company confirmed they're still hiring
That's not accurate, for salaried workers. Similarly, there is a hiring freeze for salaried workers. They're still hiring hourly workers.
And the 10% layoffs were much misreported. The layoffs were only among salaried employees with the release simultaneously saying that they will be increasing hiring for non-salaried production employees. A 10% layoff of only salaried workers isn't that large of a layoff.
How many people does this amount to?
I thought he had to seek additional funds because tesla stock dropped.