Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

One year after being bought for $44 billion, X is worth $19 billion

⁨1090⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨ijeff@lemdro.id⁩ to ⁨technology@lemmy.world⁩

https://arstechnica.com/?p=1980053

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • query@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Still seems way overpriced. Doesn’t even have name recognition anymore.

    source
    • Dave@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’d guess that $19 billion is the value where if someone bought it and did their best to undo everything and get it back on track, that’s how much it would be worth.

      The problem with measuring value is you have to quantify what that $19 billion actually is. Like you could say it’s the share price times the number of shares, except now twitter is privately owned we don’t have a market share price anymore.

      source
      • TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Theoretically what someone would pay for it. The buyer always has plans to make it better.

        Or the textbook definition, the present value of the sum of all future profits.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • perviouslyiner@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        it’s x’s own current valuation, to calculate stock options to give to employees

        source
    • Wermhatswormhat@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I wonder if that’s a portion of why it’s devalued so much. I mean I know there’s a dozen or more other reasons but brand recognition could very well be one of them.

      source
      • Crikeste@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Take a look at their user data over the past year with the name change date in mind.

        It’s is absolutely ASTONISHING how fucking moronic and empty headed Elon Musk is. A literal idiot with all the money.

        source
    • xkforce@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      People recognize it, just not as X lol

      source
    • Fogle@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      They surely still own the twitter name right

      source
      • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Can any trademark lawyer in the audience tell us how long before, if Musk lets the trademark lapse, some rando could come along and make a Twitter clone while literally just calling it “Twitter?”

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yeah it’s never going to be called just “X”, it’s always going to be “X, formerly twitter”.

      Just like Prince the whole time he changed his name to that symbol.

      source
      • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Prince wanted people to call him Prince. He changed his name to that symbol to get out of a shitty contract with Warner Bros.

        “Warner Bros took the name, trademarked it, and used it as the main marketing took to promote all of the music I wrote,” Prince once said in a press release. “The company owns the name Prince and all related music marketed under Prince. I became merely a pawn used to produce more money for Warner Bros.”

        www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590

        Elon changed Twitter to X because he’s a babyman who never got over the fact that PayPal didn’t like the name.

        source
      • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I really wish xitter had have caught on.

        source
    • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I thought it was valued at 15 billion when he bought it? Maybe that’s how much he received from the Saudis.

      source
  • iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I mean even Twitter sucked. I don’t get that platform. I just signed up for mastodon and am not sure I’m feeling that either.

    I feel like these Twitter-style sites are just …like… Keyboard warriors. It’s just smug post after smug post.

    source
    • finthechat@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      In its most ideal form, a microblog style site could literally provide an online version of a collective consciousness of society. It would be a live feed of normal people's thoughts.

      Except in reality it's porn, smug posting, corporate advertising, vitriol, and propaganda all fueled by algorithms written to keep mofos scrolling.

      source
      • TWeaK@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        It was good for two things: on the ground news, and speaking directly to businesses to resolve customer complaints.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • TheBat@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Porn, smug posting, and vitriol? Sounds like collective consciousness of society to me.

        source
      • OscarRobin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        You don’t get advertising or algorithmic crap on Mastodon, and they have reasonably reliable filters to hide most porn I think

        source
      • oce@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Would the collective consciousness actually be interesting to read?

        source
    • doublejay1999@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Any social media that involves Followers are destined to be bin fires.

      I tried mastodon, some of it is sweet, but eventually you voice a different opinion to someone with lots of followers, and get attacked by the tribe.

      source
    • AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Honestly the format is good for stuff like quick business headlines and rumors that you could use as an input to your trading (basically free “squawk”, given that professional squawk services cost a lot). It’s also good to quickly spread the word during protests or similar.

      But I agree that all of that is still offset with a huge amount of smugness and “ratio” competitions.

      source
      • PeachMan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Yeah that’s a fair summary. It’s brands doing announcements and ads, and people being assholes. Why would I be interested in either?

        source
    • akaxaka@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      All depends on who you follow. If you follow people who make stuff (art, software, etc) then you’ll find your feed a lot more upbeat.

      source
      • tias@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Still, on another platform (such as Lemmy) they could make more meaningful posts.

        source
    • scorpious@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I think the whole point is that it gives media companies something to pretend is “news,” and everyone else something to be pretend-outraged over. Full stop.

      source
    • Flamingflowerz@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I'm with you. Lots of randoms giving their opinions on something that other randoms can show their support for? Huh... alright, I guess.

      source
  • Twentytwodividedby7@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    To put this in perspective, they lost an average of $2B per month in value. According to HUD, there were about 582,000 homeless people in the US last year. $2B per month is enough to house all of them nearly 4 times over if you assume $1k per month in housing expenses.

    What a monumental waste of resources that could have made a difference. Musk just sucks

    source
    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It’s not real money, though. It’s all just speculative value based on estimates of future revenue.

      The real barrier to ending homelessness is the large number of real estate vacancies that are held open to prop up the price of the housing market. Twitter’s lost value has nothing to do with that.

      source
      • Black616Angel@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        But the 44B was payed, so they do/did exist. Now he could have just NOT bought twitter and spent half of this money on the poor et voilà no more homeless for at least 4 years.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • tias@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        There is no “real” money. It’s all speculative based on what value people assign to it. For example, you may have noticed that the US dollar had become worth significantly less in recent years. Shares and fiat currency just have different volatility.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • Twentytwodividedby7@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        You’ve missed the mark on two counts:

        1. Musk raised $44B of real money to buy Twitter and bring it into private ownership. I’m saying had he just left well enough alone, he could have used that money for other purposes
        2. Your point on adding more supply to the real estate market to prop up prices is the opposite of Econ 101 - more supply, all things equal, will reduce prices. Mental health is a much larger barrier to receiving help for the homeless.

        I used to volunteer weekly with homeless and housing insecure people in Philadelphia and untreated mental health or substance abuse was an issue for many. There are also barriers to receiving government aid that would assist them because many programs require an address or the process is unnecessarily complicated.

        Housing is just one step. They would also require a great deal of counseling, job training, and medical attention to reintegration into society. Anyway, my point was simply to illustrate what a magnificent waste of resources it was to buy Twitter.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • timetraveller@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        all the people that imagine their home prices are as high as they are, will fight tooth and nail to prevent this. the empty house market is crazy, just look on a “social home sharing site”. houses are hotels for the few.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
  • Socsa@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Lol it’s not worth anything near that much

    source
    • Dkarma@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It’s all gonna fold once interest rates get high enough. Didn’t he borrow like 13 billion?

      source
  • Jackcooper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    WORTH 19 BILLION TO WHO??

    source
    • aplomBomb@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      No one willing to buy, so it ain’t worth shit

      source
    • lemmegogo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Aquaman might go for it

      source
  • stagen@feddit.dk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I was expecting much less than that. o_O

    source
    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That’s because it isn’t worth nearly that.
      It was estimated at around $20 bil when he bought it. Since then he has more than cut revenue in half. The value today is at most $ 10 bil.
      Except Musk has added a burden of $ 20 bil in debt, causing interest cost of $1.5 bil per year.
      Twitter was not earning money when Musk bought it, but now it operates at huge deficits, and has huge negative internal value.

      So the company has a net negative value. The only value may come from losses being tax deductible to a buyer. But that too is worth way less than the debt. Any value is completely speculative, based on a belief against evidence, that the company can still be turned around.

      source
      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        And tax deductions on a loss are still a loss. Tax write-offs are a partial mitigation. They’re taken off income, not directly from taxes.

        If your tax rate is 25% and you write off a $100 loss, you still lose a net $75. Yeah, if you make negative money you may avoid some taxes entirely, but not all. There’s still payroll tax, property tax, sales tax, and more that are isolated from corporate income tax.

        A write-off will never make a company that’s losing money before taxes profitable. They just soften the blow.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • cricket97@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        The value of twitter isn’t its revenue but rather its userbase. Which is still extremely strong.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
  • notannpc@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I mean that’s based on what Elon said, so that’s vastly over estimated.

    source
  • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Its funny how this headline keeps coming up every couple of weeks with a smaller number each time.

    I dont know how they generate these evaluations, and honestly I dont even trust they are accurate. Or care, my life is fully uneffected by the success or failure of that site.

    But it is always funny to read the new nearly identical headline with the number shifted down by 1-4 billion from last time.

    source
    • Apollo2323@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Companies such as Fidelity give an estimate on how much they are value after analyzing the finances of the company I think.

      source
      • BritishDuffer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Fidelity does this because they invested in Twitter alongside Musk, and as a bank they are required by law to disclose the current value of their assets. They come up with a value of their stake, then the rest of us divide that by the percentage Fidelity owns to get the value of the company.

        source
  • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Makes sense.

    Almost immediately after buying it, Elon emshittified the site - and not only that, but changed it's branding from one of the most recognisable names/logos in the world to a fucking "X" (almost always suffixed with "formerly Twitter" so people actually remember what the fuck it is)

    source
    • meco03211@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      almost always suffixed with “formerly Twitter” so people actually remember what the fuck it is

      This continues to bring me such joy.

      source
      • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Ditto - and I hope it angers Elon with every mention

        source
      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I will never stop calling it twatter

        source
    • EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It’s not even a unique X. The exact X they’re using as a logo already exists as a Unicode charcater 𝕏

      source
      • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Wow, that makes it even worse. Couldn't even be bothered to pay someone to make a logo, just stole it from Unicode

        source
  • Agent641@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Is it, though?

    Its a digital message board on some overpriced servers.

    source
    • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Is this the wikipedia-argument back at him? The whole twitter post history could fit on a single hard drive, so why are people paying for it?

      source
      • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        That argument is unfair anyway, cause what fits on a hard drive gets bigger every year.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • ChrisLicht@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Considering that almost every public lib continues to use it, there is something to it, even if only the network advantage.

      source
    • Snonky@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      And a lot of consumers on it

      source
  • magnetosphere@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    …Yaccarino said that revenues grew in the high-single digit percentage…

    She should start her own line of perfume. Desperation, by Linda Yaccarino.

    source
    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Guaranteed to make you smell Musky.

      source
    • _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      She’s gotta be getting some serious compensation to throw her reputation in the garbage like this. I just can’t see how it makes any other sense for her in the long run.

      source
  • woshang@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Transforming Twitter into an ‘everything’ app is a terrible idea. Why? Take WeChat, for example. Initially a messaging app, it now incorporates a multitude of services including short video clips similar to YouTube, Twitter-like posts (for friends only), a wallet linked to a bank card, and more. One of my Chinese friends said, ‘You won’t find anyone in China who doesn’t use WeChat because it has everything we need!’ It seems that users are quite satisfied with the services WeChat provides.

    However, they may be overlooking the drawbacks of such centralized applications:

    • Privacy issues: Identity verification is required; without it, most features are inaccessible.
    • Censorship: I suspect that all communications are stored on a central server, with algorithms designed to detect sensitive content or keywords related to politics, NSFW material, etc. Since it’s linked to your identity, you could easily end up on a blacklist.
    • Account suspension: The developer has the power to suspend accounts at any time due to the centralized nature of the system.
    • Security risks: If someone gains access to your phone or passcode, they could access your money, your contacts’ information, and your personal details, since it’s an ‘everything’ app.
    • Manipulation: Show those news that the country or the company want us to, hide those that are not helpful to them.

    These issues and risks are inherent in centralized platforms and social media but consolidating them into an ‘everything’ app only amplifies the risks. My friend mentioned that WeChat hasn’t introduced a subscription fee yet, but Twitter and other services have.

    I mean, an ‘everything’ app might be feasible in a restricted country like China, in the United States? Hell not! But, Big Tech and governments have the monopolistic power to make these things happen, so we have to find alternatives. The sooner we migrate, the sooner we can reduce the risks that I mentioned above.

    The digital world is incredible, but also dangerous. It’s best that we start protecting our own privacy rights, our right to speak freely, and our right to control our own minds and discern the truth.

    source
    • Jagermo@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Wechat als always had the backing of the central government. They got funding and, probably more important, the government slowed or outright banned other apps. The Verge has a good piece on it.

      source
    • friedout@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
      [deleted]
      source
      • bitcrafter@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Pretty soon he’ll have so much control over his platform that he can practically cron kings and manipulate outcomes to fit his personal political agenda.

        Huh… do kings normally consist of commands that need to be run on a regular basis at scheduled times?

        source
      • Fisk400@feddit.nu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        When you say “not as fast”, what does that mean?

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • mint_tamas@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Why are people writing comments with chatgpt?

      source
      • Gestrid@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Wait, what gives away that this is a ChatGPT comment?

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • Nobsi@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      However, they may be overlooking the drawbacks of such centralized applications

      My guy it’s wechat. It’s china. The drawbacks are that they are chinese.
      Nobody questions the drawbacks of your entire life being on an app and you being valued on a social score.

      source
  • lorez@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’m so tired of Musk…Can we please shoot him into the immense vacuum of space aboard one of his precious Teslas?

    source
  • Krudler@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This guy has the attention span of a circus flea, doesn’t he?

    I’m high af and buying Twitter. Hate speech is lol because I feel unloved. Advertisers you go now, you damned J’s. We don’t need qualified staff for 2.0 I know how to paste code. Ok now we’re gonna make hella $ with “verified”. Shit. Ok I gotta unplug some servers and refactor. I know PHP. A child looked me in the eyes but he couldn’t see into me like I know the others do. Now we’re X for some reason. Now we’re revenue sharing. I like to lie. Now we’re subscriptions, babby. No we’re gonna facilitate financial transactions in a challenge to the banking sector now cuz they got my nuts in a fukkin’ vice here Linda!

    source
  • yoz@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    $19 billion is still a lot. Boys, lets try to bring it down to $19 million

    source
  • RalphFurley@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Elon Musk was born on third base but yelled everyone he hit a triple.

    source
  • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Who gives shit? Let it sink. Let it be forgotten. Stop giving it attention.

    source
  • JewGoblin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    it’s only worth what someone is willing to pay for it

    source
  • sagrotan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s called “eloning”

    source
  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Personally I am going to miss the random problematic tweets by famous people that they later blame on medication.

    source
  • dingdongmetacarples@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    elonmuskisaturd.com

    source
  • net00@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I thought elon was supposed to me smart

    source
  • LillyPip@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Lol. What a dumbass.

    source
  • rsuri@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That’s what X is valuing itself at, not what it’s worth. We’ll get a better sense of what it’s worth when it goes back on the market or goes bankrupt, whichever happens first. Right now I have a hard time imagining anyone would pay that much for it. For context Snapchat, which has had a lot more success with advertising lately, is worth about $14 billion.

    source
  • Fedizen@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    what is the tech angle here?

    source
  • thirstyhyena@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Higher than I expected.

    source
  • badbytes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Seems like the buyer was very dumb

    source
  • clot27@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I am so happy for that🥰

    source
  • netwren@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Is this just part of the playbook for him to not have to pay taxes by saying he lost all his money??

    source
-> View More Comments