The Board of Directors of Openai categorically rejected a buy -back offer of $ 97.4 billion non -abundant Elon Musk, strengthening its position that the research company on artificial intelligence is “not for sale” .
Friday, the chairman of the board of directors, Bret Taylor, published a strong answer, declaring that the offer has been rejected unanimously and that any future restructuring of Openai will focus on strengthening its mission not lucrative rather than on individual interests.
“Openai is not for sale, and the board of directors unanimously rejected Mr. Musk’s last attempt to disturb his competitors. Any potential reorganization of Openai will strengthen our non -profit organization and its mission to ensure that AGE benefits all of humanity, “said Bret Taylor, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Openai, in a press release Friday published on X.
Register For TEKEDIA Mini-MBA Edition 16 (February 10 – May 3, 2025)) Today for early reductions.
Tekedia Ai in Masterclass Business open registration.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-INivest in large world startups.
Register become a better CEO or director with CEO program and director of Tekedia.
Musk, the CEO billionaire of Tesla, and SpaceX, and founder of Xai, had led a group of investors in order to take control of Openai, the company he co -founded in 2015 but left in 2018 at the Continuation of a power struggle reported with the CEO of CEO Sam Altman. Musk’s offer has encountered an immediate resistance from Openai management, with Altman rejecting him outright in a series of public statements, including at a top of the AI in Paris.
“There have been versions of Elon trying, you know, have taken control of Openai for a long time, so it is like, okay, here is the episode of this week,” joked Altman in a Interview with Axios, indicating his exasperation on the persistence of Musk tries to influence the business.
The rejection of the Musk’s buyout offer marks the last chapter of its tumultuous relationship with Openai. Initially, a key funder and co-founder of the organization, Musk had envisaged Openai as a non-profit entity dedicated to the open development of artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. However, his departure from the company in 2018 prepared the field for an in progress rivalry between him and Altman.
At the heart of their dispute is the passage of OpenAi from its original non -profit model to a profit structure. Musk has repeatedly accused Openai of moving away from its founding principles, alleging that it favors the profit of the public good and aligns too closely with Microsoft, which has invested billions in the operations of Openai. This tension turned into legal battles, with Musk pursuing Openai at the beginning of 2024 for having allegedly violated his mission statement. He then withdrew this trial, but continued to publicly challenge the management of Openai.
In his latest declaration concerning the rejected offer, Musk said: “At X.AI, we live according to the values that promised me that Openai would follow. We have made an open-source grok and we respect the rights of content creators. It is time for OpenAi to return to the open source force and focused on good. We will make sure that this happens.
Musk’s advocacy for Open Source contrasts with OpenAi’s current strategy, which prioritized the controlled versions of its models, citing concerns about improper use. His company, XAI, has positioned itself as an alternative to Openai, promoting his Grok chatbot as an open-source competitor for Chatgpt.
The group of investors claims “self-series” in Openai
While the Board of Directors of Openai rejected Musk’s offer, the group of investors who supported it did not leave the decision not to dispute. Marc Toberoff, a lawyer for investors led by Musc, accused OpenAi management of engaging in a “self-traced transaction”, suggesting that they were selling organization to themselves to a more evaluation weak instead of considering the musk’s offer.
“We are surprised to see the board of directors, which has strict fiduciary duties to carefully consider the offer of good faith in the name of the charity, uses the same type of double discourse.
He went further, alleging that the restructuring of Openai was aimed at enriching the members of the board of directors and key executives like Altman and the co-founder Greg Brockman rather than serving his mission for non-profit.
This accusation echoes wider concerns concerning the governance model of Openai, which was examined since Altman was briefly ousted by the board of directors in November 2023, to be restored following an employee and of an investor revolt. The reshuffle has raised questions on the question of whether the company leadership is really responsible for its declared mission or if it is led by private interests.
What it means for the AI industry
The Musk control offer and the strong OPENAI resistance highlight the growing marketing and power struggles within the AI industry. What started as a collective effort to democratize the search for artificial intelligence has now become a battlefield for the influence of businesses, intellectual property control and competitive domination.
With Microsoft deeply rooted in the operations of Openai and Musk aggressively pushing Xai as an alternative, the AI sector see a clear division between research on AI supported by companies and the vision of Musk of Open Source .
The implications of this fracture are important. OPENAI, supported by Microsoft’s resources, was at the forefront of AI development, in particular with its GPT models and its integration into Microsoft Cloud and Enterprise solutions. Meanwhile, the Musk XAI positions itself as a “purist” alternative, pleading for greater transparency and open source development, but confronted with challenges to reach the same level of market penetration.
In addition, the wider regulatory landscape could shape how these rival factions are evolving. Governments around the world are increasingly examining AI companies on ethical concerns, data confidentiality and economic impacts. If Musk’s claims concerning OpenAi’s deviation from its mission gain in traction, regulators may be more inclined to impose more strict restrictions on AI companies which operate under a non -profit hybrid structure.
Despite the persistent efforts of Musk to influence Openai, the last rejection suggests that the management of the company does not intend to give in to external pressures, even of one of its most eminent co-founders. However, this battle is obviously far from over. The ambitions of Musk AI remain aggressive and its criticism of OpenAi governance will likely feed the additional public speech on transparency and control in the AI sector.
