The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

[Hotwired]

Yea well meta went down 75% from ATH, now its down 45% from ATH, businesses fluctuate due to investors being highly unstable.

That is "how this works", just because you take a short timeline in extreme events you cannot compare it to others so directly.

You can check out plenty of other companies, Uber is worth 60billion apparently but its not really, its just investors in uber are donkeys.

Twitter falls into that same category also, twitter was not worth 40billion, and it would simply decline, as uber has, as other trash companies have.

However buying it outright is a different thing, the changes he made are 100% positive in terms that, twitter run as it was run is worth £0, thus any change is a positive change.

The main point here is, prior to elon, twitter was worth zero as a business, the situation now is either equal or positive, but it certainly is not lower valuation than previously.

If you are, and you sound like you are, talking about the business separate from the share price, making a profit, then you've dodged the matter of Twitter's income.

I would expect 0.5s between Elon hearing that it's become profitable and him tweeting about it.

 

[platinum87]

If you are, and you sound like you are, talking about the business separate from the share price, making a profit, then you've dodged the matter of Twitter's income.

I would expect 0.5s between Elon hearing that it's become profitable and him tweeting about it.

Im explaining that, valuations are speculative not real, and that twitters valuation pre-elon is total nonsense, and that any news story attempting to get clicks saying from 40 to 20 lolz, is just that nonsense.

Elon will tweet plenty of nonsense also, this is seperate to that or him.

 

[Hotwired]

Im explaining that, valuations are speculative not real, and that twitters valuation pre-elon is total nonsense, and that any news story attempting to get clicks saying from 40 to 20 lolz, is just that nonsense.

Elon will tweet plenty of nonsense also, this is seperate to that or him.

Sure the valuations of tech companies are pulled out of a dark hole but you also said certainty in the real business being worth more now and I doubt the certainty.

 

[platinum87]

Sure the valuations of tech companies are pulled out of a dark hole but you also said certainty in the real business being worth more now and I doubt the certainty.

Erm no i didnt i said its either equal or more, its certainly not lower.

 

[Hotwired]

Erm no i didnt i said its either equal or more, its certainly not lower.

Ok certainty in it not being lower now and I doubt the certainty.

 

[Roar87]

I've said this several times before, yet apparently people still don't understand that he bought Twitter to be a platform for free speech, not because he wanted to make money out of it. He simply wants Twitter to break even in the next couple of years. He generally isn't running companies because he cares about earning money, he doesn't buy yachts or expensive cars or own a house, - I think the only lavish thing he does is have a private jet, which is for his business - yet people on here are obsessed with him losing money

 

[VincentHanna]

I've said this several times before, yet apparently people still don't understand that he bought Twitter to be a platform for free speech, not because he wanted to make money out of it. He simply wants Twitter to break even in the next couple of years. He generally isn't running companies because he cares about earning money, he doesn't buy yachts or expensive cars or own a house, - I think the only lavish thing he does is have a private jet, which is for his business - yet people on here are obsessed with him losing money

Doesn't want to make money

And yet:

"I see a clear, but difficult, path to a >$250B valuation,”

 

[Hotwired]

I think a lot of people have said there's this one person that compulsively tries to deflect the thread as far away from genuine criticism as possible any time it's posted.

 

[Roar87]

Doesn't want to make money

And yet:

"I see a clear, but difficult, path to a >$250B valuation,”

He is obviously trying to make the companies he runs a success, but the primary motivation to buy Twitter was to be a platform for free speech. Otherwise he would've bought it and done everything in his power to keep advertisers happy, which incidentally isn't letting people say whatever they want (with obvious exceptions) and unbanning Donald Trump.

 

[Werewolf]

He is obviously trying to make the companies he runs a success, but the primary motivation to buy Twitter was to be a platform for free speech. Otherwise he would've bought it and done everything in his power to keep advertisers happy, which incidentally isn't letting people say whatever they want (with obvious exceptions) and unbanning Donald Trump.

I think I need a new keyboard, this one appears to have got soaked in hot tea.

He bought it because he made what he thought was a joke he could walk away from, but signed a binding deal and was too arrogant to listen to legal advice.
If he's trying to make the advertisers happy he's done everything possible wrong, he's driven most of them away with his removal of moderators, legally required child protection teams, unbanning all the worst users, and getting rid of everyone the advertisers could have contacted with concerns or problems, whilst breaking the interfaces the advertises used to control their advertising (and having also got rid of the people that looked after those systems).

I mean just the whole blue tick farce was such a colossal and obvious mistake, and that will have annoyed the advertisers and shown the ones that were still giving him the benefit of the doubt an idea of the level of competency they were now dealing with (15 year olds could see what was going to happen, people in this thread who are not genius's with IQ's in the 150 range could see it coming weeks in advance).

 

[unwashed potato!]

He is obviously trying to make the companies he runs a success, but the primary motivation to buy Twitter was to be a platform for free speech. Otherwise he would've bought it and done everything in his power to keep advertisers happy, which incidentally isn't letting people say whatever they want (with obvious exceptions) and unbanning Donald Trump.

That explains why he hired lawyers to get himself out of having to buy twitter. Bots or not, free speech still being the goal, he'd have wanted to buy it, especially as he had no primary goal to make money.

You've spent so much time up his ass you're starting to think you're in his head.

 

[Diddums]

He is obviously trying to make the companies he runs a success, but the primary motivation to buy Twitter was to be a platform for free speech. Otherwise he would've bought it and done everything in his power to keep advertisers happy, which incidentally isn't letting people say whatever they want (with obvious exceptions) and unbanning Donald Trump.

I'm pretty convinced you suffer from a mental condition, you should probably seek medical advice.

 

[Roar87]

I think I need a new keyboard, this one appears to have got soaked in hot tea.

He bought it because he made what he thought was a joke he could walk away from, but signed a binding deal and was too arrogant to listen to legal advice.

So you genuinely believe he went through the effort of signing a contract to buy Twitter, with the intention of walking away? He definitely does things as a joke, but I don't think he signs legal documents to that end.

If he's trying to make the advertisers happy he's done everything possible wrong, he's driven most of them away with his removal of moderators, legally required child protection teams, unbanning all the worst users, and getting rid of everyone the advertisers could have contacted with concerns or problems, whilst breaking the interfaces the advertises used to control their advertising (and having also got rid of the people that looked after those systems).

No, he isn't trying to keep advertisers happy, because what the advertisers want Twitter to be is not why he bought Twitter. What laws are there around social media companies having child protection teams?

I mean just the whole blue tick farce was such a colossal and obvious mistake, and that will have annoyed the advertisers and shown the ones that were still giving him the benefit of the doubt an idea of the level of competency they were now dealing with (15 year olds could see what was going to happen, people in this thread who are not genius's with IQ's in the 150 range could see it coming weeks in advance).

Yeah again, he isn't running Twitter for advertisers or celebrities, he's running it so people have a place they can speak. The blue tick thing could've been handled differently, but blue ticks were given out arbitrarily before, they were given out with no actual set criteria, how is that fair?

 

[Trusty]

He thinks it could be worth 250 billion in 10 years.

Hmmmm

Did Musk say this?

 

[mattx4]

Did Musk say this?

I think so but can't find the full pitch deck but he expects revenue to be 26 billion in 2028

Made up from 12bn in ad revenue and 10bn in subscription revenue and a bit more from data services

Elon Musk pitch deck for Twitter promises to nearly triple ad revenue, create $10 billion subscription business: report

Elon Musk is telling potential investors in his deal for Twitter Inc. that he will seek to triple the company's ad revenue and create a $10 billion-a-year...

www.marketwatch.com

 

[Roar87]

I'm pretty convinced you suffer from a mental condition, you should probably seek medical advice.

For quoting what he himself said? Yeah, could be that.

 

[Hotwired]

Did Musk say this?

According to Schiffer yes he did, in an email to employees.

https://twitter.com/zoeschiffer/status/1639736747616763905

So while compensating employees with stock valuing the company at 20B he's telling them that if they work real hard one day the company will be worth 250B for motivation

I've had these kind of schemes before, tend to be considerably less optimistic about future valuations mind you.

 

[platinum87]

Ok certainty in it not being lower now and I doubt the certainty.

Well i guess when you really break it down nothing is certain, essentially how they were running twitter is, there goals are not to make any money. Even the founder has a tiny stake.

While they might appear profitable, for a couple of years, that is not taking into account stock based compensation, its a lot actually, but not included in published figures, this is the situation for nearly 10 years since IPO.

If it was to change, it would already change, basically elon musk is the one who changed things, therefore why it cannot be worse.

In addition

Twitter is indeed doing brilliantly under Musk:

twitter]1639974628176306180

This is incorrect, meta is down exactly 1.98%, from the time of when he said it, pinterest is up 23.96%, and snapchat is down 65.17%

Edit: Have a look at snapchats finances, for what i was meaning above, twitter basically was the same but nowhere near as bad.

 

[Sankari]

Yeah again, he isn't running Twitter for advertisers or celebrities, he's running it so people have a place they can speak.

I thought he was running it to make money.

The blue tick thing could've been handled differently, but blue ticks were given out arbitrarily before, they were given out with no actual set criteria, how is that fair?

That is entirely false. Before Musk bought Twitter, it was actually difficult to get a blue tick.

The criteria were very specific:

* account must be authentic, notable, and active
* owner of the account must be a person or entity of public interest
* owner of the account must be government figure or entity, a news organisation, company, or prominent entertainer, athlete, company, activist, prominent content creator, or journalist.

Many people tried and failed to get a blue tick.

 

[Hotwired]

Woah now you've forgotten to mention the super impactful number of small boats crossing the channel people selling off their blue tick accounts and thus ruining everything.