NEW YORK, Oct 22 (Reuters) – Elon Musk’s public endorsement this week of a potential $3.5 trillion merger between SpaceX (SPCX.O), opens new tab and Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab has rattled some insiders involved in the discussions, who worry his comments could invite ​shareholder scrutiny and delay the process by several weeks, according to a person with direct knowledge of the talks.

The disclosure created a “mess” for the process, as it ‌could lead to questions about how well Tesla shareholders’ interests would be represented, the person said. The concerns reflect similarities some participants see with Tesla’s 2016 acquisition of SolarCity, which sparked years of litigation over Musk’s role in the deal.

Musk, who serves as CEO of both SpaceX and Tesla and owns significant stakes in each company, this week told investors that the two companies were examining what would be the largest corporate transaction in history and revealed that both had ​formed special committees to evaluate it. The backlash to those remarks is reported here for the first time.

The parties have hired advisers, but discussions are at an early stage, three sources ​familiar with the matter said. SpaceX approached Tesla in recent weeks, and the companies have been discussing a range of transaction structures, including a SpaceX ⁠acquisition of Tesla or a merger under a newly formed holding company, the person familiar with the matter said. They are weighing different forms of merger consideration, including an all-stock deal, the ​person said. These details of the talks have not been previously reported.

Tesla, SpaceX and Musk did not respond to requests for comment.

In related-party transactions such as a SpaceX-Tesla merger, independent board ​members typically oversee the process to safeguard public shareholders’ interests.

That issue loomed large in Tesla’s 2016 acquisition of SolarCity, which triggered years of litigation after shareholders alleged the world’s richest man had influenced the process to bail out his investment in the struggling rooftop solar company. At the time, Musk owned roughly 22% of both Tesla and SolarCity, which was founded by his cousins.

Shareholders argued that Musk’s involvement and public support undermined the deal’s fairness. Central to the case were claims that despite his minority stake, ​Musk was a controlling shareholder of Tesla due to his ties to board members and domineering style.

The Delaware Supreme Court later noted that plaintiffs’ contention of the absence of an independent committee, together with “certain ​other facts concerning Musk’s involvement in and public support for the transaction,” warranted the finding of unfair dealing.

The courts ultimately upheld the acquisition as fair, though it took several years for the case to be resolved and Tesla directors ‌settled allegations for $60 ⁠million.