1) Tweet things like "I should buy Twitter", "I'm working on moving money around, finding investors, and freeing up money I have tied up to buy Twitter", "Hate selling Tesla, but we need a free speech platform. People will be getting bargains on TSLA!"

2) Sell the Tesla stock he wanted to sell.

3) Make an insulting offer for TWTR at a low value with all sorts of contingencies.

He wasn't planning on finalizing the purchase? When you aren't planning on finalizing the purchase, you put in all sorts of contingencies. You don't waive everything.

I'd say he tried to back out after the market started turning. It became clear that a lot of ad-based platforms were going to be facing some hard times ahead and interest rates started climbing.

I mean, if he'd waited a few months to make his "I want to buy Twitter" play, he'd been able to have offered a ton less. I think Twitter's board of directors went from "we're going to fight Musk" to "Musk must buy us" because of how the market turned. Had Twitter's board "drunk the kool-aid" when they were fighting the buyout?

I think it's in part a case of bad timing. In April, people were paying $130 for GOOG. A month later it was only $113 and now it's $85. META was $210 in April and now it's $89 (their story does have some complications around metaverse stuff). In November 2021, people were paying $54 for TWTR. In January when Musk started buying shares, Twitter was in the $30s. Without Musk's stated buyout offer, Twitter shares probably would have sank like Google or Meta's. Musk probably realized that he wasn't getting Twitter for cheap offering $54.20/share (below their 52-week high), but actually way overpaying given market conditions that were rapidly declining.

Twitter's board of directors wanted to adopt a poison pill to prevent getting $54.20/share in a hostile takeover.

I think it's hard to argue "it was just a ruse to dump Tesla stock". You don't waive due diligence if it's a ruse. Twitter's board wouldn't have been so hostile to it if they thought it was a great price. It's more just that the market conditions shifted a lot over the Spring, Summer, and Fall this year. If Musk had waited 6 months to make the offer, he probably could have bought Twitter for $15-20B instead of $44B.

A major failure that can be reasonably attributed to his engaging in high-risk stock market manipulation while flouting prudent business practices such as retaining the right to perform due diligence will undermine his ability to move markets or sell products on the sheer strength of Musk being Musk.

Let me get ahead of you there. They would only pay for a quality product which Twitter is definitely not, as a ruiner of modern discourse. Of course there's also the catch that there are no quality products anymore. The whole world of products is devolving at almost the speed of Google Search. But definitely paying is the superior business model

Bootstrap comes to mind - and while that's not something I foresee them "selling", a company large enough to produce a F/OSS project of that size and complexity surely has any number of large, mature products that they could sell or monetize.

Also, the key part of the LBO playbook isn't making quick cash from selling off assets - it's divesting the company of cost centers and investing heavily in profit centers. If you're able to sell the things that aren't making you money, all the better.

It's a tax thing/way to move money, isn't it?