Pivot - The Poison Pill, The State of Streaming and Guest William D. Cohan

Episode Date: April 19, 2022

Kara and Scott discuss the Twitter board's “poison pill” approach to fend of Elon’s bid. Friend of Pivot William D. Cohan joins to discuss whether or not Elon has the cash. Also, Alex Jones’ Info Wars has declared bankruptcy, and Tucker Carlson’s new documentary trailer is raising eyebrows... and other things, too. You can find William on Twitter at @WilliamCohan. Send us your Listener Mail questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or via Yappa, at nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London data, and a matching engine that helps you find quality candidates fast. Listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash podcast.

Just go to Indeed.com slash podcast right now and say you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need to hire? You need Indeed. Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher. And I'm Scott Galloway. Oh, you're quiet.

Why are you quiet? Did you have a relaxing weekend? Yeah, I had a nice weekend. I was with my boys on a boat. And whenever you're on a boat, you feel like you should do an ad for some sort of crypto currency. Because clearly being on a boat means you're smart and very successful. But it was fun. We went.

This is a nice boat. This wasn't a rowboat like I own, correct? Yes, it was fun. We went. This is a nice boat. This wasn't a rowboat like I own, correct? Yes, it was a very nice boat. But we went spearfishing and we did a bunch of stuff on water vehicles and all the kinds of things I could slip and break a hip doing that I do. Nice. As an older father to try and bond with my sons. But yeah, it was really, anyway, it was lovely. What did you do? I spent the weekend with the golden child. and we were stopped many times on the street.

She was, people were like, is this the golden child? You have made it. People would say that? They would say, is this the golden child? Yeah, it's crazy how many times I'm getting stopped now and here in San Francisco all the time. I'm in San Francisco. That's nice. Yeah.

I like that. I like it when people stop. They're always friendly. Yep, I was with Alex and Clara recently and they're like, oh, it's Gigantor and the golden child. They're like, they're like characters in our – That's funny. Speaking of characters, can we recall when you took me on a boating expedition? What happened?

Where did we end up? Make America Florida, and Trump flags everywhere. Wasn't that hilarious? Oh, my God. I literally was like, I can't even – I can't even. It was not hilarious. You're like, I'm not going in the water. And I'm like, no one asked you to go in the water.

No, I never go in the water. I'm like a cat. I'm like a cat. It's not because of the Trump people. I'm not a big water person anymore. But literally, we went and slapped into one of those boat rallies. It was quite active. People were having a good time and running around with their flags and stuff.

You know what I say? Let Florida be Florida, just like they should let everybody else be what they are. Thank you. Yeah. That is my speech. Speaking of TED Talks, there was one by Elon Musk, as you know. Anyway, we'll talk about Apple Unions, online shopping, and what CNN Plus launch means for the streaming market. And we'll speak with Puck's William D. Cohen about why he thinks Elon will buy Twitter, which a lot of people do, even though you do not, I have to say. There's a movement afoot saying there are no other, there can only be only one, and there is only one. But first, let's catch up on where Elon's Twitter bid is now.

This is our first big story, so let's do it. On Friday, Twitter's board adopted a poison pill to fend off Elon's bid. A lot of people don't like it. It's not shareholder-friendly. Under the plan, Twitter's stock will dilute if Elon or any buyer acquires 15% of the company's shares. Many think it's anti-shareholder and an entrenchment of current management and board. Elon took the news exactly how he'd expected. He tweeted a critique of the board and said their opinion doesn't matter because of their low number of shares, which is often the case with boards.

He also hinted there may be other potential bidders. And of course, all of a sudden, stories all over the place that he was joining with people. And on a quick call, a lot of the people I thought might be against him or for him and might be joining with him. I'm not going to say names, but it's the ones you would imagine. Anyway, these are hedge fund and private equity people. Of course, I think you've been talking to people, Scott, would be my guess. So weigh in on this idea of this poison pill, et cetera. So as someone who was in a past life an activist investor, you don't like poison pills. It's typically thought of as one of the weapons of mass entrenchment.

I remember when I was on the board of Gateway Computer. By the way, I acknowledge a very weak flex. Yes, it was. I was going to say nothing. People were aggregating shares. The company was – so if you go back 25 years, there was a debate on whether it would be Dell or Gateway. And they were both trading at the same price. Dell, better strategy.

They went SMB. We went consumer. We actually had stores. Imagine an Apple store, but if it was nothing like an Apple store. Yes, I recall. And a lot of poor execution. And Ted Wade, who was a visionary, but the company just didn't do – the company ended up going from $76 a share. And then when I got involved, I think it was at $2 a share.

Yeah. And I went in and said, we need to sell this thing right away. And they said, okay, smartass. We've been trying to sell a thing for two years. Sit down. And people started acquiring shares. And one individual started acquiring shares, including the person who was backing my adventures and activism. And the chairman of the board at that time, a guy named Rick Snyder, who went on to be the governor of Michigan, said we should put in place a poison pill.

And I'm like, that's just a weapon of mass entrenchment. Explain what a poison pill – like how – this is to, in order to not let people acquire too many shares. It was during Green Mail days and the Carl Icahn, those kind of things. So it's basically meant, it was invented by, I don't know, the guy, a lawyer in New York, who was on the board of NYU, I forget his name. It essentially blocks anyone from acquiring more than a certain stake. Because what happens is once they hit a certain threshold, in this case, 15%, the other shareholders are offered shares at a discount, thereby diluting that stake, that 15% stake that triggered it way down. They flood the zone with shares.

Yeah. But the net effect is it blocks you from acquiring more than that threshold. Right. And I usually have an adverse reaction to them because my feeling is if you're willing to show up and continue to buy more shares and push the price up, that in the short run is bad for shareholder value. So the reason why Twitter stock is 20% below his offer price is, one, I don't think people believe he can actually raise the money. And, two, when you put in a poison pill, it does kind of block them from acquiring the company. Now— Yeah. Or it moves it to—it moves it sort of a standstill so they can negotiate with him. That's another reason people do it, to, like, slow things down. Well, that's what I remember the chairman of our board, Rick Sainer, saying, you know,

if they want to come in, they have to come in through the front door. And I'm like, the front door? What does that mean, deal with someone who doesn't own any shares, i.e. you? And also, to Elon's credit, a really fair criticism is accountability should be linked to ownership. Yes. And this board doesn't own a lot of shares. No, nor do they use Twitter a lot, just FYI. And that is a really telling sign that maybe they're not great fiduciaries for other shareholders or their users when they don't use it and they don't own shares. I've always thought that every dollar you get in compensation on the board should be reinvested in stock in the company.

That's a really smart idea. In the shoes of shareholders, at least to a certain extent. Because some board members don't have a lot of money and they can't come in and buy millions, but they should at least put their fees back into the company. But what you have here is, so I've been, I'm telling you, Cara, the world of alternative investments and hedge funds is a flutter with this deal. I'm getting calls from probably a lot of the same people you're getting calls from saying, what do you think is going on here? Should we finance this? Is he serious? Is he serious? Is the question I'm getting. Well, that's the thing. Morgan Stanley. There's a lot of is he crazy? You know him, that kind of thing. Morgan Stanley is out

there trying to put together the capital for this thing. And the question is, is Morgan Stanley had honey poured on them and been sent hunting for bears? Is this just a fool's errand? Right. And someone, I think Matt Levine, who I continue to believe is just this incredible writer, has basically said it's very hard to deal with someone when you don't know whether it's a joke or not. You don't know whether it's a joke. And I also think there are potentially people lining up to come in and be the blocking move of the white knight. So, for example, Vanguard is now a larger shareholder. They might be on management's side.

If Twitter can find another 10% shareholder to come in and not be in favor of the deal, they're fine. They're probably, Elon's not going to be able to do the deal. What's their take? What's the one that wants to go up against Elon? Ooh, this is a choice target. Although looking at the business, it's not such a choice target, right? Explicitly, it could be, certainly.

I think people look at the influence and the position it commands and says, okay, you have one of the handful of social media networks that has global influence and it trades at a fraction of the value of anything else with that influence in social media. And if it can trade at 76 bucks nine months ago, it's just likely it's going to trade back there again. But the terms I've heard from people who

are contemplating investing in this behind Musk, they want their pound of flesh. And that goes to the next point. And the reason why I don't think this happened, because I don't think people are sketching out what I'll call the second-order effects. They're like, let's talk about a few things. Let's talk about what happens when this private company has a preferred convertible, some sort of preferred instrument or debt that wants 12% a year. I mean, you're talking about expensive debt. People look at this and go, okay, Ilan, if we're going to back you. Yeah, right now.

Debt's a big deal right now with the interest rates, but go ahead. And then what happens, this is the other question I have. How do you raise money when you have said publicly, this isn't about money, it's about free speech? I don't think people are going to spend billions of dollars to fund your misadventures in free speech. I think that's the most pertinent point. I think this is not about money for Ilan. I don't think he, if he wants to make a killing, he could do it in 10 to 12 other places so quickly. And he does build substantive companies. And so, and I think that's where his real interest is for the real wealth. Whatever you think Tesla stock, what he's doing is a massive thing and has a massive opportunity.

Here, the opportunity is dicier than even Tesla, if you think about it. Like, Tesla is such a complex product. This is a difficult product. But that's the other second order. There's two other second order effects, and we'll come back to Tesla. But the first, the next second order effect, what happens to the employee base the day they close? Yeah. Because I'm going to argue that the people there, as it relates to their view of First Amendment or censorship or free speech, they have decided whatever Twitter's doing is kind of where they're down with.

They aren't doing walkouts. Yeah. And they're saying, okay, this guy's coming in with this new vision of censorship, and all he's said is this isn't about money. said is this isn't about money. Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that a large number of people at Twitter are there for the money, that they're there to make a living. Well, yeah. And I think they also feel like they're under siege with this guy because he keeps insulting them. You all suck is essentially his message. I've lost confidence in management after saying I liked them a week ago. Yeah. Management, you're not running it right. You're not doing it right. And that's, of course,

a normal thing. But in this case, he's more influential. Whatever he says matters a week ago. Yeah, management, you're not running it right, you're not doing it right. And that's, of course, a normal thing. But in this case, he's more influential, whatever he says matters a lot more. And they don't, you know, I think they don't, you've seen them pop up in on Twitter quite a bit. And you don't see that often. They're like, fuck this, like, essentially. I think that's one of the things. They also, what's really funny about the poison pill, it adds up, Matt Levine was pointing out, it adds up to 420. Also, they're making a little weed joke back at Elon, which is kind of cute. What it will do, just for people to understand, this will slow Elon down. It will not stop him.

Correct? This is, right? Yeah, but you know what will stop him? What? He's going to find another shining toy. He's like a cat chasing a red dot. You keep saying that. This is a toy to him. This is shiny.

He's not going to hang in there. He's setting itself up so he can say, I tried to save it, and now I'm going on to Shiba Uno. I mean, I— He could buy something else. He could buy Gab. Gab is trying to get sold to him. That's by the way. They offered up an investment.

They're going to run out the clock on the guy. And specifically, they're going to run out his attention span, which is a 24-second clock. Well, we'll see. I know. I get it. You and I are at different points, and I think Bill's going to provide a different viewpoint than me. Also, what happens, he has not outlined a single cogent strategy for how he's going to actually increase value. Other activists have done that, including you, including Chris Saka, if you remember.

They had very serious, like, proposals to do that. So you're asking the employees, if this thing closes, to sign up for some Fox News misconstrued perversion of what censorship is or isn't from a new owner who says he doesn't care about money. And it's like, well, I'm supposed to sign up for your misadventures in free speech, and you've said it's not about money? Come again? Yeah, this is now, what are the odds there's another bidder, like a Google and the rest? You know, obviously Mark Cuban talked about that. I have not heard. There's some

private equity firms. I think it's Toma. Is that right, Toma? Toma Brava, yeah. Yeah. There's a couple that are sort of putting their feet in the water. And several ones I thought might give me no comments this weekend, not no fucking ways. So it's interesting that they've got it. I don't see another bidder. Who is the other bidder? Well, so this is the thing. I don't think somebody wants to take this private. I think what somebody does is come in and says, we think there's an opportunity here. Even at 45 bucks, someone could talk themselves into believing it's undervalued and says, we'll be a blocking move

here. If we buy 10 or 12% of the company, we effectively, it's sort of game over. Vanguard doesn't go along with Musk. That means that there's 22. I don't think he% of the company, we effectively, it's sort of game over. Vanguard doesn't go along with Musk. That means that there's 22. I don't think he can raise the money, Kara. We'll start there. Reddit's former CEO, Yashan Wong, who writes great threads, wrote a long thread about the challenges of content moderation. He's like, you don't want to catch this car, dog. And why Elon's free speech argument is all wrong.

Essentially, he's like, this is an unmanageable situation, no matter how you slice it. And there's no way out of it and no way to make a lot of money. Of course, Elon tweeted his takeaway, we need long form tweets, which we do, by the way. He's good on the edit stuff, for sure. I thought that was a very thoughtful, whether you can get it or not is one question. Whether you can run it or not is another one, of course. Yeah, but that's manicuring. That's not a fundamental change in business model. I just think the employees... Twitter would

become the most... would be the most fertile hunting ground for recruiters in the last 10 years if this thing were to close under Musk's leadership. I think a third of senior level management would be out of there within 90 days. They're not going to sign up. He hasn't been able to articulate anything resembling a vision for how anyone there is going to make any money. Would you leave?

I don't think I would. I thought about this. Would you leave this service? Oh, no. I'm addicted. That's like saying I don't like my new heroin dealer. I'm still buying heroin. Okay. Another thing is Elon has a lot of lawsuits on all fronts, too. He's being sued. Now,

this is nothing new to him. He's been sued a lot. He's being sued by Twitter investors over his delayed disclosure. Those are the same investors he'll need to win over now if he wants the bid to succeed. He might have to settle with them. Tesla investors are suing him over his 2018 funding secured stunt. The judge ruled this month that those tweets were false and paved the way for a trial next month. And earlier this year, of course, the California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing sued Tesla, alleging racist treatment of black employees. That particular department is also controversial, but nonetheless, Tesla has said this was in the past and they fixed all the things. Tesla has said this was in the past and they fixed all the things. And so anyway, so that's where we are.

So again, go ahead. I'll just interject here. It's worse than that. Did you see the TED Talk at Vancouver that he just gave? Yeah. He called the SEC bastards. He does that. He did that at Code. What did he call them at Code?

He has a name for SEC. But go ahead. This is something, nothing new. Okay. Called them bastards. But worse than that, he said that he, in fact, did have funding secured, and the SEC bullied him into saying that he hadn't when he, in fact, had funding secured. And then just a few hours later, news broke, a district judge who has reviewed all the evidence goes, no, he was lying. So I think this is an individual who

is so detached from any sort of signals or advice or has no guardrails that he not only, quite frankly, is prone to falsehoods, he doubles down on them in the face of judges saying, there's no evidence here that you had funding secured. He could have just sort of politely walked back and said, not brought it up again. Instead, he's saying, no, I had funding secured. He could have just sort of politely walked back and said, not brought it up again. Instead, he's saying, no, I had funding secured. No, he didn't. He did not. Let me ask you a question because I got a lot of texts like this.

Why has Scott so mad at Elon? You saw some of them on Twitter. And I'm like, he's not. He just doesn't agree with him. That's like, what's the deal? He's definitely got... One of the things I hate about this is, I was going to tweet this because Glenn Greenwald had another asinine thing saying everybody who's against this wants to control all speech on all these issues.

And I'm like, oh, stop it. And then I got another one saying, Elon is a fascist. We don't know if he's going to be a fascist. I'm like, he's not. What are you doing? So both sides of this, on either of the strong sides, you're all assholes.

You're all fucking assholes. This is much more complex. And so I think one of the things that I did get that I was also pushing back on was Scott has a personal vendetta against you. I'm like, no, he doesn't. This is just—Elon's not a fascist, and Scott does not have a personal agenda. I own a Tesla. I have huge admiration for him. personal agenda. Iona Taslav, huge admiration for him. There is something about this that this situation epitomizes that really bothers me and scares me. And that is, I think, the fundamental,

the elemental foundation of societies is relationships. And I think one of the key components of relationships is guardrails. And I just think we're all so much better when we have somebody who is making sure we make some trains and miss others that says to us, no, you're not thinking correctly. And I think there are so many levels. The tribe, we're a herd species, not only because we need touch, but because we make much better decisions when we have other people and other agencies to provide guardrails. And let's other agencies to provide guardrails. And let's look at the traditional guardrails. There's regulatory agencies.

There's economics. So I just can't afford to do that. There's a board. There's your partner slash wife slash husband. There are your inability to just go out and buy an entire media company that's global. We haven't had that kind of wealth amassed before. media company that's global. We haven't had that kind of wealth amassed before. All of these guardrails, Cara, whether it's the SEC, other shareholders, a wife, friends, a board, they have all been blown by. And I think it's dangerous. And I think the founding fathers of America,

when they came up with three different houses of government, I think they realized the importance of guardrails and churns and making sure that no one individual became too powerful. That's great. But I think people overstating how powerful Twitter is, they're like, this is the end of... I was like, stop it. It's one...

No, it's not a national treasure. It's not... But it does have a lot of info. I do think... Did you read Shoshana... Actually, did you read Shoshana Zuboff's article in the Washington Post? No, I will. No, I will. No, I will.

She has a good point. She says these algorithms under the control of one person, there's only one case study, and it's Mark Zuckerberg. And that did not end well. I think they're very different people. I'm going to say that I would suspect this will be run a lot better under him. But nonetheless, I'm not an apologist for him at the same time. You know, we'll see what happens. We're going to actually get an expert on here too. We'll call in a second.

But just so you know, 420 is tomorrow. Enjoy yourselves. Both Elon on the board have been slipping these 420 jokes in their filings. And also SNL had fun with the news this weekend. Let's listen to that for a second. Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter for over $40 billion so he can loosen its free speech rules. That's how badly white guys want to use the N-word. Plus, I gotta say, Twitter's not even profitable anymore. It just feels like a bad business decision. And I say that as someone who bought a Staten Island ferry with Pete.

Well, that kind of encapsulated it, right? There it was, the bad business decision. White guys who want to say whatever they want. Although I cannot tell you how many of those there are. Every meeting I have now with a white guy or a powerful white guy is like, you know, I can't say what I want. And I'm like, oh, God, you're so fucking tiresome. I'm like, they're tiresome. I don't care if you can't say what you want. And it's not about, the whole wrapping it in the free speech First Amendment thing is excessive, as is the idea that this guy is going to somehow blow up the entire world. There are other people actually blowing up the entire world. That's my only point. I think that's fair,

but I'd flip on Fox and they're all there just with their hair on fire that thinking or saying, he's the William Wallace coming in to say free speech. And I'm like, free speech? What can people not say on Twitter? He hates them. So you not allowing Elizabeth Warren to respond in real time on your front screen, are you censoring her? I just, I can't get over this whole censorship false flag.

They're driving me crazy. And the other part is some of the people who know better, they're like, and them not accepting this immediately, they are showing this. I was like, no, this is how deals work, people. What are you, 12? You never just say, okay, thanks for this. This is great. I'll take the first offer. Can we help you raise money? There were like 10 people who know better, who've done deals like this. And they're like, they need to accept it immediately. I'm like, are you kidding me? You greedy fucks. That's what I kept thinking. Like, are you crazy? Like, nobody accepts the first offer. You know, they hope they do.

Well, here's what's behind those people trying to promote the deal. Merge Arb is an entire category of investing where you take the offer price of $54.50, and you buy shares, and you bet on the fact that the deal's going to go through. And right now, even with the stock up a little bit today, the stated price is 20% above where the stock is right now. So there's probably a lot of people taking a position in the stock, and then we'll very publicly advocate to get their 20% two-week gain, which is an enormous gain. And here's the thing. I believe the board and a lot of shareholders would believe that if you sell at the 52-week average and less than where it was four or five months ago, you're not acting as good fiduciaries. So the X factor here, and I'm still holding on

here, I do believe in government. I think the SEC is going to pop up here. I think they're working very hard to show up and have a view here. They're like Godot in this. In any case, we have someone to talk to. Anybody, that was a really good literature. Very good. Very good. Speaking of white. Oh, my God.

Hello, Georgetown medalist. Jesus Christ. All right, Scott, I'm not apologizing for my incredible education. I had an incredible education. But let's bring in someone who actually knows how this works. Bill Cohen from Puck News is really good on this stuff and has been writing for lots of places. I've been reading him for years on all kinds of companies. Bill, welcome to Pivot. Thank you, Cara. It's great to be here. An honor,

in fact. So your latest piece, you argue, contrary to popular belief, Elon's bid is serious and it will likely succeed. So that's a conversation starter. It got me thinking, and you and I have been going back and forth on Twitter. It's actually moved me more to your side. I'm sort of in the middle, but I do think he's serious. So talk about why you think Elon's bid could work. And given all the things that's going against it, his offers below the 52-week high, the board is lined up against him. He said publicly he doesn't care about Twitter's economics, which could scare off potential partners, although I've heard a lot of people want to get together with him. So let's get your overview and explain what argument you were making. Look, first, I think it's important to say that, you know, what Scott has said last week,

I mean, you know, and you probably know better than anyone, Kara, is he is a bit of a flake. So it's not exactly clear. He's the world's richest flake. You know, it's incredible. He's worth, you know, obviously $275 billion. He could do this if he wanted to, but he's also a flake. So I'm not sure exactly what he has in mind here. But to me, it all comes down to proving out that he has the financing. That's it. If he can prove, I mean, I can't believe that Morgan Stanley and Scott worked there. I can't believe that Morgan Stanley and I worked at J.B. Morgan Chase, Lazard and Merrill Lynch.

I can't believe that Morgan Stanley would take this assignment without knowing in advance or being have be highly confident, as we used to say in the old days, that Elon Musk could raise the capital that he needs for this $43 billion deal. And if he can show Morgan Stanley and then Goldman Sachs that he has this financing, I think this thing's over. When I was talking to some of these possible partners this weekend, every single one of them, they called me, is he crazy? Was the question that every, you know him, is he crazy? Was the question that every, you know him, is he crazy? Is he serious? And it was a really interesting thing because

that was the opening question of some very smart people who usually could, would like run right over their mother to get whatever they wanted. So, I think I was really, I think that was their worry, which was interesting to me. Again, I don't know whether he's serious. I don't know whether he's crazy, but look, the guy's accomplished a lot. I mean, you can't argue with the fact that he's the world's richest man. He's created Tesla. He single-handedly revived the electric vehicle industry that was 100 years old and dormant for 98 of those years. SpaceX is an amazing accomplishment. I don't really know what the boring company is all about. But does he do some crazy things?

Yes, taking Twitter, taking Tesla private at 420, that whole thing, funding fully secured. That has really hurt his credibility on Wall Street, by the way, because everybody knew back then that that was a joke or whatever it was. It was not real, and nobody took it real. And I think that's definitely hurting his credibility. The merger with SolarCity, also between Tesla and SolarCity, basically made no sense except to bail out a bunch of friends and family investors. And so that made no sense. So he does lack credibility on Wall Street.

On the other hand, you know, the stock is done very well. He's the world's richest guy. He, you know, owns 9.1% of Twitter. He put up $2.6 billion of his own money. All that's real. First off, Bill and I are friends, and I'm glad. I just want to acknowledge that whenever we're on different sides of an issue, you'd be best served to kind of go with the guy with the good hair. So, Bill, always good to see you. And you, Scott. But we are on different sides of this issue. So, my sense is, and maybe I'm missing something here, but even this guy worth $240 billion, most of that comes from Tesla stock. And whoever – I don't see how he raises the money without borrowing a lot of money against his Tesla stock.

And a Tesla analyst says there's a scenario where if the stock went up fivefold, it can go down 80%, and we got to start doing margin calls on this guy. and we got to start doing margin calls on this guy. I think this ultimately puts pressure, even if he could come up with the money, on Tesla stock. And right now, I know Morgan Stanley is out there calling everyone that sits on multi-billions of dollars and the conditions that lenders are going to put on this. One, I'm not sure he can raise the money. And two, doesn't it ultimately end up being nothing but downside for Tesla shareholders? That's OPM, other people's money. That's what he's asking about. But go ahead, Bill.

Look, again, it comes all back to whether he can finance this one way or the other. And he's put it, you know, he only needs 40 of the 43, right? I can't decipher what of his Tesla stock is available to be margined or borrowed against or any of those things. I absolutely agree with you 100%, Scott, that this, if he starts leveraging up or margining all of his Tesla stock or more of his Tesla stock to the point where lenders are going to, well, it's really going to be the Tesla board that's going to say, no way. They have a board, Bill? They have a board?

Well, theoretically, they have a board. They never say no way. They never say no. If he wants to risk everything he has built at Tesla and all the wealth that he has created at Tesla through Tesla for Twitter to buy Twitter, I suspect he can do that. Why he would do that, I have no idea. Yeah. All right. So you wrote your piece before the board issued, The Poison Pill. Can you talk about your thoughts on this use of it? And has that changed your prediction? Or is it just takes longer and he's got to...

Poison pill is a mere hurdle on the road to a deal. You know, every hostile deal ends up turning friendly if it gets done. So the fact that it starts off hostile, and I know last week Scott said, you know, he's saying this is his final and best offer, and who does that? Nobody negotiates that way. Yeah, so what he says in an SEC filing, it's his final and best offer. It's not his final and best offer if he really wants this company. Now, if he's trying to pump and dump, then maybe it is his final and best offer. I don't know why he would pump and dump for an extra $700 million when he's got $275 billion. That doesn't

seem very interesting, but okay, it's a win. At some point, again, Goldman Sachs has to do three things. Goldman Sachs that represents Twitter. One, they have to find somebody else, anybody else, but Elon Musk to buy this company. I don't think they're going to, number one. They have to decide whether $54.20 a share is fair. I don't see how any way in the world they do not find that this is fair from a financial point of view to Twitter shareholders. So that's number two. That's two things in Elon's favor.

The one thing not in Elon's favor, and it's a big thing, is, is his financing real? Okay, can he attract enough odd billionaires, you know, Silverlakes, you know, whoever else might be willing to finance this and giving them some sort of preferred return to put equity in here. Can he get enough of that? Can he go to SoftBank? Can he go to, you know, the Saudi Arabia principal investing fund? Who knows? Norway? I don't know who his friends are or where he's going to get this money. He does need to get this money. If he proves this is real, if Morgan Stanley can tell Goldman Sachs this is real, I think it's game, set, match, over. Can you talk, you mentioned Silver Lake,

which is on the board of Twitter, Egon Durbin, who's the co-CEO, is on the board of Twitter. He voted for the poison pill, which was just a slowing tactic, really, pretty much, from what I can understand from reading you. How does that play in, that Egon just says, I'm going with Elon? Or what happens there? I mean, first of all, I think it's important to note that basically the board of directors of Twitter owns essentially no stock, except for Jack Dorsey, who owns like 2.5%. So you look at the big shareholders, Vanguard, BlackRock, Morgan Stanley Asset Management, Elon Musk, those three asset management companies, they're all going to go for Elon Musk's $54.20

a share if it's real. Egon Durbin, he's a private equity guy. He'll take this money and run so quickly and ka-ching it and say that he's got this win. I mean, when did he make this investment? A year ago. That's a beautiful IRR. So he'll just use that to fundraise off the next thing. So why did he go along with it? This is easy. This is sleeves off the vest. This is nothing. case where an actual poison pill that was put in place was actually invoked, in other words, giving shareholders a chance to buy stock at a discount, I don't think that's ever happened. It's just a way for the board to get this guy's attention and to slow him down a little bit and force him to negotiate with the board, who, by the way, owns no stock. So let's assume he can secure the funding, which I don't think he can, but just for the purposes of argument, let's assume that he can,

and Morgan Stanley shows up with the capital. I actually don't agree. I think the board would be well within their rights. So use the term fair price. I think fair is almost a useless word in the realm of M&A. the term fair price. I think fair is almost a useless word in the realm of M&A. If I'm on the board, our stock was at this level in October. It's been as high as 76. I think they would be well within their rights to say this offer drastically undervalues Twitter, and we're going to keep plowing forward. Now, if you were to raise it to 60 or 65 and get within striking distance of the 52-week high or the five-year high, fine. But this offer right now,

Bill, is just at the 52-week average, and the company has only gained an influence. I think it'd be well within the rights to say you're dramatically undervaluing the firm. We can only sell it once, and we're rejecting this out of hand. I agree with some of that, but not all of that. I've given a lot of fairness opinions. I know what doing those is like. Again, without the financing being real and firmed up, I completely agree with you. This gets rejected out of hand. Goldman Sachs can just keep saying no. The board can say no. But the moment this financing becomes real, and I don't know if it ever will become real, at that moment, then Goldman Sachs is going to have a very difficult time saying this is not

fair. Why? First of all, on a good day, the EBITDA of Twitter is a billion dollars a year, on a good day. So this is 45 times EBITDA. Okay, that's number one. Number two, you can DCF cash flows all day long and not get to- Explain what that is. Discounted cash flow, you project out the EBITDA of this company, you discount it back. You know, if it gets to, 43 billion will absolutely be in the range of that discounted cash flows, bars on the PowerPoint presentation. The publicly traded comparables will be in the range. The privately traded companies, the multiples will be in the range. So I don't see how. And yes, so yes, it is below its 52-week high of last year. So is the whole market.

So it's below, it's down from last November. Rivian went public at whatever it was, 75. It went up to 175. Now it's at 40. So the market is correcting. Interest rates are on the rise dramatically. The party is over. The punch bowl is being taken away. So if I'm Goldman Sachs and I have to prove that this thing is fair and say it's fair, you're going to be hard pressed if the financing is real to say it's not fair.

In the old days, by now, we would have a letter from Mike Milken saying, I'm highly confident that Elon Musk could have the financing. And that would win it. What if he wins it? So what does this have to do? You're talking about not a very good business, is what I think you said. It's like not a very good business. It's never.

But it's influential, right, as Scott has often pointed out. I have spent a lot of time all weekend where everyone's like, you know, this is the end of the world. I'm like, it's not a very good business. Like, it's going to be hard running it. It's going to be hard. And also Yashan from Reddit had a nice tweet, a series of tweets about that. I mean, what does he get when he gets this? Does he have a debt-loaded company with all kinds of problems?

Like, that's what it sounds like to me. It sounds like to me like a poison chalice. Oh, poison chalice. I like that. Explain for the people. He's going to have a company that has a lot of debt on it that doesn't generate a lot of EBITDA. No, he could, he's Elon Musk, the world's richest man. He could pump more equity into it somehow if he's got any left.

But more importantly, you know, if he does any of the things that he's talking about doing, for instance, if he cuts out advertising, then that EBITDA is going to disappear, or a lot of it. If he brings back Donald Trump, forget about it, as we say in New York. I mean, he could lose two-thirds of the users very quickly, and then he's the king of nothing. He's paid $43 billion for something he just has to fold up and close, and it's a disaster. And maybe he doesn't care because he's the world's richest guy. But by that point, he will have margined and leveraged his Tesla stock, and it could be a total house of cards. Well, if you were advising him, what else should he buy then?

If he has an itch for this kind of thing? Obviously, he has an itch for Twitter. He loves it. But should he invest in Gab or they ask for money from him? I mean, I would not have done any of this if I were Elon. He had tremendous, or I would just stick it my 9.1% and, you know, see what happens. He has tremendous influence on Twitter without owning the company. He's got 81 million followers.

He doesn't need to do any of this. But you know him better than we do. I mean, he obviously has an insatiable desire to be the focus of attention. Yeah. And also, I think he sat up nights smoking the weed and thinking about what he could do to fix this, right? Smoking the weed. You're so down with the young people. Smoking the weed. Like the kids do. For shizzle, Kara. For shizzle.

The 420. Fellow kids. Well, what do you think the role is or is there a role for a white knight here? Somebody who comes in and says, hey, Twitter board, we'll take 10% and basically be a blocking move. Is there a white knight here? I mean, I don't know if 10% is the blocking move, but sure. What is? 51%. You know, will be for sure be the blocking move. There's certainly a role for a savior here, an old-fashioned white knight. But it's $43 billion. It's 43 times EBITDA. None of the private equity guys are going

to play in this. Brava, Brava Toma all day long can talk about this, but 43 times EBITDA, and that's on a good day. You need Google or Apple or Microsoft to buy to come to the table. What about Salesforce? Well, Salesforce, maybe, yeah, sure. But I mean, I don't really see it. Actually, but just some nuance here, and that's a really interesting idea. What if Benioff just comes in and Salesforce comes in and buys 10% and a Vanguard? I got a bunch of calls over the weekend for people asking for thoughts around Twitter and Elon and its value. And I couldn't figure out whether they were lining up behind Elon or against him to block

him. And I disagree. I don't think it's 51%. I think Mark Benioff could come in and say, do the math and say, if Vanguard's not with Musk, I'll come in at 10%. And it's basically game over because they're not going to get to 50%. Only 80% shows up at a special meeting, meaning you need 40%. there 20 of this? I don't think a blocking move requires much more than kind of low double digits. And then Benioff gets to keep it out of the hands of Musk and see if he wants it at some point and gets to act like the hero and say- He likes that. He does like that. This should be a company with diverse sets of owners and a real board, and it should assign itself and acquit itself of more democratic input and good governance. And I'm going to be part of that. And then maybe we'll swing back

in a year or two years and talk about doing a transaction. And he looks like the white knight. Your thoughts, Bill, do you think that could happen? I think there's plenty of room for a white knight here. The only premise that I don't agree with is I think Vanguard, why would Vanguard stick around for this if they can get 54-20 cash? They represent retail investors who, this is a 38% premium to what it was trading at before he announced this. Do you know their cost basis? I guess that's the question. What did they get in? Well, I don't know Vanguard's cost basis, but. Because if they've gotten in in the last five months,

they're down. I mean, if they haven't gotten in in the last five months, excuse me, they're down. Yeah, I mean, but either way, 5420 in cash is real and a nice premium and you can have a victory lap. And it's not only Vanguard. It's BlackRock.

It's this Morgan Stanley asset management business. Which is going to be with Musk. Which is going to be with Musk. So I would say that 10 plus 6 plus 8, what's that? 24 is going to be with Musk pretty quickly. Yeah. Because that's retail investors. They're not going to stick around and wait for Mark Daniel. So you think you're still sticking with your guns on that one?

If the financing is real, only if the financing is real. Is there any important business stories the world's missed in the last two weeks because everything is Elon? That's a great question. That's a great question. Yes, of course there is. Of course there is. Pick one.

Well, the most important business story out there now is the end of quantitative easing, the end of the Fed subsidized free cost of money. That is, I mean, look at what's gone on in the high yield market since the beginning of the year. But since, talk about 52-week highs or lows. In last September, right around the time that Twitter was reaching its 52-week high, and every other company was, the average yield on a high-yield bond was below 4%, which was, of course, absurd, because back in the days of Mike Milken, it was 10%, 11%, 12% plus warrants, plus warrants, right, Scott? And then

now it's back up to about 650. So it's gone up 50%. Still cheap. I mean, still interest rates are still below where they need to be. So that yield curve is moving up. And that's going to cause a tremendous amount of pain in the bond market, which is four or five times the size of the stock market. Bill, you've dealt with boards. What I found most interesting that came out just in the last 30 minutes or came out over the weekend was Jack Dorsey, who is set to leave the board but is still on the board, came out and said something that violates what I call the code of the white guy.

And that is board members never publicly come out against each other. You just don't see that very often. And he wrote, Twitter board consistently been the dysfunction of the company. And it just struck me that a guy sitting on the board, what I think this means is that he was fired. I don't care. I've always said that as soon as Elliot showed up, they said, okay, this can be your idea, but you're out of here. But for a sitting board member to say that the board has consistently been the problem, he's clearly siding with Elon. Do you think he could be—

This is not a surprise, Scott. Do you think maybe—I mean, there's just so many fun scenarios here. He could block come in and give $5 or $10 billion and say, I'm the new co-CEO again? Absolutely. He could team up with Elon. He's got 2.25% of the company. He could vote that with Elon. I'm telling you, if Elon can firm up the financing, and if Morgan Stanley can convey that to Goldman Sachs, I think it's over. But that's a big if, because as you correctly point out, Scott, there's huge risk to Tesla for Elon Musk leveraging up or margining his remaining Tesla stock that's not already pledged to some loan or other.

Well, this is a developing story we got to get going, unfortunately. But Bill, should we start a subscription newsletter at Pivot? How's Puck doing? You enjoying yourself? I think if you get the right talent, Cara, you know about talent. That's the hard part. I know. That's the hard part.

I'm dragging this codfish around everywhere I go. Keeping up with you two is very hard work. And Scott had a great cameo in, the fake Scott had a great cameo in We Crashed. Go on. He's my new partner. Kelly, Kelly O'Kane. Bill, thank you so much. We'll be back with you soon.

You're fantastic. Thank you, guys. Congrats on Puck, Bill. Thank you, Scott. Thank you both for having me. All right, Scott. He is so smart, isn't he? He is, yeah.uck, Bill. Thank you, Scott. Thank you both for having me. All right, Scott. He is so smart, isn't he? He is, yeah.

I like Bill. He's also a really nice man. Yeah, he is. He's written some of the best things that Vanity Fair used to do. Everything. He's just really good. I like that he's shifted over to Puck. Boy, are they getting some really great stuff out there.

When we come back, though, we'll talk about CNN Plu, and we'll make some quick predictions. Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle. When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists. And they're making bank.

Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world. These are very savvy business people. These are organized criminal rings. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better.

One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize? What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim and we have these conversations all the time. So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other.

Learn more about how to protect yourself at vox.com slash zelle. And when using digital payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Uncertainty. Self-doubt. Stressing about not knowing where to start. In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out. Word art. Sorry, Live Laugh Lovers. In. Knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today.

Okay, Scott, we're back. It was the best of times. It was the worst of times for streaming media market. The tale of two companies, Discovery and Warner Media, has raised new questions about the industry. Will Disney finally buy out its partners at Hulu? Will Discovery fold everything into HBO Max? And of course, what will happen to CNN Plu? Because all I care about the industry. Will Disney finally buy out its partners at Hulu? Will Discovery fold everything into HBO Max? And of course, what will happen to CNN?

Plu, because all I care about is you. Go on, do you? Do you mean that? Yes, I do. But you know, just as we started this, this morning, speaking of quick tweets, Chris Licht, who's running CNN, pushed himself off of Twitter.

He's like, I'm sick. I'm out of this pop stand. Probably because he's making a point that it controls too much of the news narrative, probably on CNN. He's saying something very significant, I think, there. So tell me, Scott, I'm just going to let you talk about, I think it was launched to get ahead of the merger. And it's going to be folded in any way by Mr. Zasloff, who was interviewed by Oprah Winfrey this weekend, their old friend. So it was a really tough interview, as you might imagine. So she didn't ask these questions, so I'm asking you.

There's a lot at play here. But generally speaking, you have an art form or a medium or a channel, whatever you want to call it, that's overinvested. $140 billion is going into streaming. There just aren't enough credit cards to support that. So you're going to see consolidation. As it relates to CNN+, you've read the same stuff I have, and that is downloads they say of the app have been really anemic or have not met expectations. I don't know how much truth that is, or I don't know if that's true or not. If it was doing really well, they'd release the numbers. You know that. You got that, right? Yeah. They would put out, they would counter it. They would make you dress up in some fashion.

Or would they make me undress, Kara? No, no. But you would be on the corner- Dad, get another three downloads. With a big swirling sign talking about it. But go ahead. But here's the thing. They have a lot.

I wrote a piece on this in No Mercy, No Malice. It is very difficult to start a streaming network when you're not all in. And that is, I think that the only way this works as a standalone streaming network is if at the end of every program, Anderson Cooper or Fareed Zakaria says, if you want to see this without commercials, it starts 10 minutes late and it's on CNN Plus, or slowly but surely they start to put their best programming behind a wall. It is very hard. There hasn't been a streaming network started that's worked that's been an adjunct to anything that hasn't been all in. Now, having said that, I think the potential for CNN+, and what I've told my team, is that if you make a great show, the distribution will find you. And that is, you could see CNN Plus becoming the R&D lab for Turner, Warner, Discovery, HBO Max.

The program, if it's good, if the content of it's good, will find distribution. And another interesting observation is that if you look at, for example, my program, No Mr. Malice, it's always 21 minutes. And why do you think they've decided to have it be 21 minutes? I don't know. Please tell me.

Because should they decide to put it on an ad-supported channel, it'll be exactly 30 with nine minutes of ads telling you you have restless legs or opioid-induced constipation. Do you? So that is clearly their plan B. They're setting everything up such that if this streaming thing doesn't work on CNN+, they can either go to other subscription, HBO, or they can put it on ad-supported, and maybe that's their little R&D lab. But you're going to see consolidation. I agree. I'm sorry, go ahead. Listen, here's the problem. I've been using it again this week because I watch you.

And I got to say, I don't necessarily want to hear Anderson Cooper talk about parenthood or Jake Tapper talk about books. And I think they're both really smart. Don't say that about Anderson. I know, but I just don't. Don't say that about Anderson. He's dreamy and he's a good father. That's great. That's great.

It's just, it's like least effort here in terms of, I think your show still remains one of the best. And the old Larry King lives, because I like to watch a dead guy. So, I think that's what's popular on that, which is really interesting. We'll see. I agree with you. Good content always finds a way out. And I like what you're making. The other stuff, I can't point to something that I love on that thing.

But you know what else has really hurt it, Tara? What? The bottom line is the two people running it, Andrew Morris and Rebecca Cutler, are both super talented executives. Fantastic. Fantastic. But you know what's probably to some extent didn't sink it, but dramatically increased the infant mortality or the opportunity for sudden infant death syndrome here, is they lost their cloud cover when they fired Jeff Zucker. Yeah. Jeff Zucker has the gravitas. His pals with Zasloff. Yeah. Yeah, he has the gravitas, the leadership, and he has the authority to walk into Zasloff's

office and say, okay, this is what's right, this is what's wrong, this is how we're fixing it, and hands off of it. We're going to keep going for this for two years. So, were they, was it, you know, they, I think quite frankly, dad's not home. I mean, is the way I would describe it.

We don't have any cloud cover. Yeah, and Zaslav's got enough things to do, including having lunch with Steven Spielberg and Oprah, stuff like that. Yeah, I agree. And they're big cost cutters at Discovery. They're tough mothers, as I recall. Is that right? Yes, they are. They're real good at it.

And you can make fun of them as cheapsters, but you know what? They know how to run a beeswax. So Netflix, Disney, Warner Brothers, Comcast, and Paramount Global, 70% of the audience demand. This is all these different brands. Consolidation is happening individually at these places and all over the place. You'll see deals aplenty, I think. Yeah, people are going to have to bulk up and cut costs.

Like I said, they've got to be bigger. Okay, so let's see what's else in the news this week very briefly. Staff at Apple, tell me what you like. I'm going to list them, and I think we'll know which one we want in a second. Staff at Apple's flagship store in Grand Central are collecting signatures to form a union. The organizers voted to affiliate with Workers United. According to the Washington Post, organizers say Apple has made efforts for months to convince employees unionizing is a bad idea,

including giving them fancy new t-shirts. No, I'm teasing. Complaints include Apple's pay, not keeping up with inflation, and inability to hold managers accountable. A lot of people who work at Apple stores are pretty happy. When I talk to them, they may be lying, but they seem happier than most, but still, unionization.

And then your other choice to talk about is Tucker Carlson's new documentary, which is raising eyebrows and other things. Trailer for The End of Men features shirtless men wrestling, chopping wood, a new man who appears to be tanning his testicles. Hard iron sharpens iron, as they say. And those hard times inevitably produce men who are tough,

men who are resourceful, men who are strong enough to survive. Pick one. Unionization at Apple or ball tanning? Oh, this is easy. This is easy. The Tucker Carlson take on masculinity. By the way, my episode this week on No Mercy, No Malice dropping Tuesday morning is on masculinity.

And I watched the opening scene for that. And all I can tell you is as a man, I have never so badly wanted to fuck other men as when I watched. Yes, that's what a lot of straight men said. I mean, Jesus Christ. I'm literally, I'm ready like, let's get down. Nothing screams masculinity like the bow ties and homoerotica that Tucker Carlson. Did you see that thing? I did.

It was like Grindr meets Quentin Tarantino meets Cinemax. There were so many straight men who said, now I'm gay, I just can't. It's literally like, okay, maybe it's time to give it a whirl. Maybe it's time to give it a whirl. I mean, I thought it was a parody. Have you seen it?

I have not. I just, it's just too much fun to make fun of. You've got to see it. I saw the video. I've seen enough gay video. I live in the Castro. My goodness, I can just go down the street right now and enjoy myself. IRL, such things.

In any case. No, I'm in. I mean, you know. The guy, I did an interview with Tony Kushner today about Don't Say Gay and stuff like that. And his husband, I believe it was his husband, said, I'm a gay man who's sitting with my gay husband working on my gay book, and I'm not as gay as Tucker Carlson. I couldn't get over it. It was like, okay, Tucker, are you going to do a documentary on what it means to have a wide stance in public bathrooms and airports? It's just, it's so kind of oddly, strangely.

Men are ending, but they're not. I just have three of them. I just didn't get it. I'm raising, so they don't seem ending to me. Do you have any comments about Apple's flagship store? In light of this, we have some other things to discuss. I don't, I don't, I don't know. I think there'll be some very well-publicized examples of union victories where they sign up 10, 12, or dozens of people. And I think unions have been the perfect enemy for corporations who continue to suppress the wages of frontline workers. And I think the market has stepped in here.

I think Apple will pay up. Yeah, fine. I like the fact that for the first time the market is stepping in, and I don't see any reason why the federal government couldn't move minimum wage to $20 an hour over the course of the next three years. Yeah. Okay. A couple more things. Online shopping isn't as dominant post-pandemic. It's falling off. According to MasterCard data, online spending is down 3.3%, although it had a huge boom the first year. Year-over-year decline since 2013. Brick-and-mortar spending was up.

People liking to get out. Online, sorry, note, Amazon fell by 1%. The first decline since the metric was disclosed. So, this is not a surprise. People want to get out and about this weekend. Everyone was everywhere. That said, it's been a very secular move. People are very used to buying online now, too. It's part of the record. What this story misses is a nuance. And at Panera, what we found is over 50% of our orders begin digitally. So, what is online? What is offline? And I do think that you've seen what I'll call a little bit of a sugar high for people who want to go out to the mall and get back into stores. But I think the same trends. Essentially, pretty

much every year since 99, the percentage of online retail has grown by 1% as a percentage of all retail. And that continues. Now, whether we're going to, you know, obviously, it's going to check back from the pandemic, but I still think e-commerce marches on. Yep. Agree. I think it's just whatever. I think people will do, but people are thrilled to be out. The stores were full. The restaurants were full. I'm thrilled. I've been to lots of restaurants. Getting COVID. Yeah. I still didn't get... Me and the cold and shot are the only people that aren't getting COVID. It's weird. Yeah. And yours truly. It's the pivot vaccine. By the way, I got my second booster. So did I. So did I. Everybody go out and get them.

We're boosted. And I didn't feel anything. I felt loopy on the first three. I didn't feel anything. I did not feel bad at all. I feel fine. Anyway, it won't be for younger people. If you're older and you have issues, you definitely should get it. Otherwise, talk to your doctor. Anyway, Alex Jones InfoWars isn't just morally bankrupt. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection along with two other Alex Jones companies after several defamation suits, including his claim that Sandy Hook was a hoax. They had him up for it. He didn't show up at trials. We had Elizabeth Williamson on talking about this.

The judge found Jones liable for damages to relatives of students and teachers killed in the massacre. A trial decided how much he owes them was set for August. Elizabeth had been talking about this, but he was on the hook, so this is not a surprise. He remains a fucker to do this, of course, because he wants to get out of it and protect his wealth from selling shitty vitamins. Scott, any thoughts on this? No, look, we have corporations that create legal protection between corporate assets and personal assets. I would hope that they would be able to create enough legal arguments around slander and defamation that they would be able to go after his personal assets. I think what has gone on here is worse than being,

I don't think he's crazy. I think he knew what he was doing. And I think he was trading people's despair. And I think it was arbitraging and prostituting tragedy and people's pain for economic gain. And I think America, that's just not what America is about. And we have correctly hit back on things like that. And I hope we continue to do that here. Yeah, let me just say, it also does send a signal, though, of having to go bankrupt, is that it's not so, don't go as far as Alex Jones. This is where it ends up.

People do slap back, and now he's here. Nonetheless, you know, his involvement with January 6th, everything else is just, this guy is a toxic waste dump of a person. And anything that can take money away from him is thrilling. We'll see what happens here. He'll be protected, of course. But it's really gross that he's doing this to these people who he's caused so much enormous and incalculable pain. And whatever it takes to bring him low by them legally is fantastic. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for predictions really quick.

As a Fizz member, you can look forward to free data, big savings on plans, and having your unused data roll over to the following month. Every month. At Fizz, you always get more for your money. Terms and conditions for our different programs and policies apply. Details at Fizz.ca. All right, Scott, let's very quickly, some predictions, really fast. Two players are going to emerge in the Twitter battle. The SEC and Salesforce. Okay. Oh, wow. All right. Okay. I don't know, but that's an interesting thing to

say. That is an interesting thing to say. I'm not sure. Okay. Well, we'll leave it at that. That's a really good one. This was a really good show. And I'm taking human growth hormone and clipping, and I'm taking human growth hormone and clipping. And I'm in the next. I'm in season two of Tucker Carlson's Homo Erotica Adventures. I'm in. You'd like to be. You'd like to be. I'm so excited for the gay Scott.

I'm so happy. I'm like, what is this strange feeling? What are these feelings? Who would you ask out first? Who would you ask out first? Oh, George Hahn. G. Hahn. George Hahn.

And Anderson Cooper. I've always talked about this. I love your wife. I do. They don't have hangups around threesomes. Most of the women I've been with don't like the idea of a third person in it. I'm ready to mix it up a little bit. Okay.

Anderson Cooper and George Hahn. Oh, wow. That's my thruffle. The raconteur, AC, and the dog. And you will all be tanning your balls with Tucker Carlson. It's really a lovely scene. I love America. I love America. I love America.

There you go. As always, we want your questions. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit your question for us or call 855-51-PIVOT. The link is also in our show notes. Okay, Scott, that is the long show. We'll be back on Friday for more. Why don't you read us out? Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Evan Engel, and Taylor Griffin.

Ernie Jatot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Neil Saverio. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. We'll be back later this week for a breakdown of all things tech and business. Cara, I hope you have a wonderful week. Thank you, Scott. I will.