Comment on Since Elon Musk’s Twitter purchase, firm reportedly lost 72% of its value
AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Look at the scale and number of massive mistakes that, many clearly born out malice, with many hurting a lot of people, one of our billionaires makes, while having ZERO impact on their tangible quality of life or lifestyle.
Remember that some pro-capitalism nitwit tries to shame struggling people for daring to get a latte, eat Avacado toast, or get an education based on learning and growing rather than insatiable greed.
People in the little club basically have to rape dozens of people to finally be permitted to fail, like Harvey Weinstein.
You aren’t poor because of “your bad decisions,” you’re poor because of small, insatiably greedy, powerful group people who demand and expect almost all of the capital value your effort produces to go directly to them.
Wasn’t the Twitter buyout for a significant portion of his wealth that he like, claimed he didn’t even have?
All those people say things like “well they’re risking their wealth!” he seems to be a pretty good example of someone who “risked a lot of their wealth”, objectively fucked up and should have lost at least most of it, and has come out essentially unscathed.
If you can collosally fuck up a whole company, and your wealth doesn’t even move, what are you even risking? At all?
Another part of being a billionaire is saying you have it when it’s prudent, and saying you don’t when it’s not.
He paid around $20 billion cash (by selling Tesla stock) and loaned another 6.25 billion personally (loan secured by more Tesla stock). The rest was funded by various bank loans that are now owed by Twitter itself.
One of the neat tricks you can do when you’re wealthy is loan billions of dollars to buy a company, then you put those loans in the name of the company you just bought, so you don’t have any personal risk. The reason he still needed to pony up $26 billion in cash is because banks thought it was too risky to loan the full amount. They might now regret loaning even this much, Twitter has a substantial debt burden and I understand ad revenues aren’t doing great.
Obviously, since the company is private now we don’t get as much insight into financials.
I can’t figure out why BlueSky never comes out of invite-only. It would absolutely crush Twitter in this moment when there is so much demand for a direct replacement.
I wonder why revenues aren’t great. /s
He sold a few shares to get the money, besides also taking up loans and gifts from others in his billionaire club.
The only reason it’s still alive is because we’ve got an election in 10
And that Nazis could scurry out from under their rocks, moving from fringe places like truth social into a major platform. Finally they could show up in normie feeds – until the normies catch on and leave them in their filth again.
originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 1 year ago
mush never intended for twitter to become profitable. his only real incentives here are:
a. use saudi money to help kill twitter with some plausible deniability (for legal reasons)
b. try my favorite 'business tactics' because i have nothing to lose
he has been very successful at these intended actions
Wrench@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Except it also impacted his other companies because of the public perception of his competence changing drastically.
originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 1 year ago
yeah, thats where he needs 'plausible deniability'. he can say, 'but i triiiied to make money, those damn libs canceled me'
800XL@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If it were that easy to cancel a billionaire, this world would be so much better.
Joker@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
I’m not buying that story. It gives him way too much credit and is simply implausible. I believe the reality is Elon has an incredible imagination, issues with executive functions, and lacks empathy. He’s not a mastermind James Bond villain and he’s not as smart as people think he is. Left to his own devices, he makes bad decisions and is easily carried away by ideas that are interesting to him at the time.