Musk, the leader of Tesla and SpaceX, spoke in a broad interview about the Twitter deal with BBC journalist James Clayton. The discussion centered on the $44 billion acquisition of the social network and why Musk described the move as necessary given ongoing legal pressure. The discussion was later picked up by TechCrunch and several other outlets, which helped amplify the story for a wider audience in North America.
“I had to do this. I believed the court would compel me to close the deal, so I proceeded with the purchase for that reason,” Musk told Clayton. He indicated that the closing was driven more by legal realities than personal preference. The sequence of events suggested the acquisition would move forward whether or not the court mandated it, effectively making the deal the practical outcome within the existing legal framework.
During the dialogue, the billionaire reaffirmed that he had considered withdrawing from the agreement in the fall of 2022. Later legal counsel advised him to complete the Twitter purchase on his own terms, anticipating that a courtroom ruling would likely not favor his position in the dispute. This underscores how strategic legal considerations influenced the transaction and its timing, shaping public perception of the negotiations and their outcome.
In September 2022, Twitter filed a lawsuit to enforce the commitment to acquire the company for $44 billion, or $54.20 per share. Musk challenged the deal’s valuation, arguing that Twitter overstated user numbers while underreporting the platform’s bot activity. These concerns formed a central part of the litigation narrative and influenced how observers understood the stakes and potential risks of the agreement.
Earlier reporting noted a corporate restructuring in which Twitter Inc. became connected with Elon Musk’s X Corp. This shift changed the governance and ownership pathways for the platform, culminating in the parent entity becoming Nevada-based X Holdings Corp. and a reorganization that integrated Twitter into X Corp.’s broader corporate framework. The restructuring helped clarify how the platform would be governed going forward, reflecting the broader strategy of aligning the social network with Musk’s other ventures and corporate structures, as discussed in coverage by major outlets at the time.