Resolves based on Sotheby's statements.
Update 2025-07-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has closed the market to consider how it will be resolved if the buyer's identity is not made public. They acknowledged that the original criteria did not specify what would happen in this scenario.
Update 2025-07-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator is considering resolving to NO after waiting for more information. They may reverse this resolution to YES in the future if it is confirmed that Elon Musk was the buyer.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ317 | |
| 2 | Ṁ97 | |
| 3 | Ṁ97 | |
| 4 | Ṁ85 | |
| 5 | Ṁ49 |
People are also trading
@ChristopherRandles I've closed the question to give myself time to think. My intial thinking is that Musk would let it be known, but I didn't specify that in the description, so I may have done a boo boo.
@ChristopherRandles One line of argument could be that based on Sotheby's statements we do not dispositively know that Musk bought it, so it should resolve as NO as Sotheby's statements was given as the resolution source. But also it could be framed that Sotheby's is silent on the matter.
@ChristopherRandles I am seriously considedring letting the dust settle, then resolving NO, with the option to reresolve in the unlikely case that Musk did buy it.