It's so much simpler: there was a priced offer of some kind to the board. Some board members disagreed and tried to fundraise. The total valuation was not a sufficient premium over the other offer. The other priced offer was withdrawn. Consequently those "some board members" were taken off the board, by hook or by crook.
All these other conspiracies are ridiculous and do not at all reflect much simpler, economics-driven realities that the board's backers - investors - are interested in.
It's like that Altman and Brockman wanted to take an economically positive offer now, say a complete buyout from Microsoft, and the rest of the board wanted to do an additional fundraising round that would be far less cash but a far higher valuation. Now that the private fundraising is probably signed, those guys are out.
It feels that in the case of fundraising disagreement, the language of the announcement would be different. It says Sam lied to the board. There is no need to lie if you have a disagreement about take it or leave it offer.
Okay well, an even simpler explanation is that the new lead shareholder wanted him fired. This is also why Greg is no longer chairman. Who knows what reason it will be.
All these other conspiracies are ridiculous and do not at all reflect much simpler, economics-driven realities that the board's backers - investors - are interested in.
It's like that Altman and Brockman wanted to take an economically positive offer now, say a complete buyout from Microsoft, and the rest of the board wanted to do an additional fundraising round that would be far less cash but a far higher valuation. Now that the private fundraising is probably signed, those guys are out.