Technology

There is no such thing as an airtight contract when dealing with Musk. He simply ignores it until you sue.

Never give these rich assholes credit ~~unless there is an airtight contract for payment~~.

Cash on delivery is extremely rare in the business world, especially when dealing with enterprise customers. While I have no doubt many of Twitter's vendors have recently switched to COD, that is not the norm.

These types of relationships typically work on anywhere from 30 to 90 day terms, depending on the vendor, client, and their history.

Payment up front, in non negotiable bearer bonds.

"Your honor, rather than pay his outstanding debts, this shiftless f***wit used 75 million dollars to fund a SuperPAC to bother people at their homes for the benefit of the Trump campaign."

Seems aligned with Trump's habit of shafting his sub-contractors.

Which is what Trump wants, as he also publicly admits he just doesn’t pay bills if he doesn’t feel like it.

Looking forward to all the lawsuits between the two should he lose.

X/Twitter has its own data centers, this is for physical equipment under X's control. They need to get a judgment (which the article indicates they're working on) before they can do anything. Presumably after months to years of litigation they can then repossess the servers, but then X would probably at the last minute pay the bill.

legally, you can't. It's actually worse.

They ship servers to customers, don't think they have access anymore.

You misspelled "harvest" and "organs".

Could you imagine how upset Republicans would be if some random Mexican immigrant used $61m of resources and didn’t pay? But if it’s a rich white guy that owes that much they are fine with it.

And yet the US throws poor people in prison for not being able to afford paying their debts.

When you read the article, it also points to another article that goes further into this case.

...in 2014 it contracted with Twitter to provide "unique, custom-designed IT infrastructure products including rack solutions."...

Seems it was already approved in 2014 for such a long-term relationship in writing. It seems that Elon just didn't want to pay for it even though Twitter was contractual bound to pay.

There was no purchasing contract in place when the suing company placed the $20 million dollar order they are claiming is all custom made and cant be recouped, "the social media platform had not made any firm purchase order when the server dealer went ahead with its purchases and deliveries."

You're leaving out that the paragraph you're summarizing starts off with "X claims that."

One side says there was a contract. The other side says it wasn't firmed up yet into a binding contract. Neither side has come forward with their evidence.

Also, Wiwynn is also suing for negligent misrepresentation and promissory estoppel, which don't require a contract.

There was no purchasing contract in place when the suing company placed the $20 million dollar order

You think that companies just slap down 20mil without a contract in place?