Does anyone pick up on the subtle humor of X being the means by which illiterate people can put pen to paper and have their say
X may lose up to $75 mln by year-end on advertiser exodus - NYT
Submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
cheese_greater@lemmy.world 11 months ago
demosthememes@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
I doubt this is lost on Elon, as much of Africa was sold off to colonisers on treaties signed with an X.
cheese_greater@lemmy.world 11 months ago
K you better not have just unearthed the genesis and hidden meaning behind all this
Xbullshit…👆
Chozo@kbin.social 11 months ago
Excellent, let's keep that momentum going.
sebinspace@lemmy.world 11 months ago
we can beat that
viking@infosec.pub 11 months ago
Time to consider Xitter a hate group and ban them.
JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 11 months ago
…and unless you’re Elon, this is a problem why?
cheese_greater@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Why is it a problem for Elon? Has he ever explicitly conceded he needs
Xto be profitable? Isn’t it preferable to his investors to simply neuter it?Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 11 months ago
He’s said that he WANTS it to be profitable and as a clinical narcissist billionaire, he doesn’t cope well with not getting what he wants.
On a more practical level, the cesspit it’s become has increased scrutiny on his other companies and the main one, Tesla, is decidedly NOT weathering that well.
All in all, he’s lost over a third, maybe even as much as HALF of his still absurdly huge dragon’s hoard of wealth since he took over Twitter.
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Much of his wealth is held in shares of his publicly traded companies. If investors lose faith in his ability to manage and grow one company it could (and seemingly has) affect the value of all companies he’s involved with, directly decreasing his net worth. Making Twitter profitable would have gone a long way in demonstrating his ability to run a company, but he has done the opposite.
But technically no, I guess he doesn’t need Twitter to turn a profit. He could just watch it all burn.
GiddyGap@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Elon is probably one of the only people in the world to whom this is not too worrisome.
harry_balzac@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Let’s be fair, there’s also been a rise in CSAM, too, not just hate speech.
Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Well of course there’s more CSAM. They have to do something to attract more conservatives.
BongsForJesus@lemmy.wtf 11 months ago
I’ve been on the internet since the 90s, BBS services before that. Thankfully I’ve never stumbled upon anything remotely close to CSAM all this time. To think that I could open up a twitter thread linked from a news story and be subjected to it is repugnant.
Sunroc@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Especially since there are services like Thorne that would help you manage it. Also this is a direct result of gutting trust and safety teams.
lost_in_the_bewilderness@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
I love seeing some good news… really lifts my spirits.
RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Is Twitter not part of the three comma club anymore?
ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 11 months ago
He really made a bad deal on that website. Monetarily anyway.
Pavidus@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Sure, but at the end of the day, does it really matter? It’s like made up numbers that never run out. He’s still set for life, no real consequence. He feels this less than someone who misses a car payment one month.
squaresinger@feddit.de 11 months ago
That’s the really crazy thing. With the market value crash of Twitter he lost more money than the GDP of a small country. Yet, it practically makes no difference to him.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world 11 months ago
How much of his own money did he really lose though? Didn’t he have a bunch of people throw in with him?
dustyData@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Around $22Bn, that’s how much he had to sell on Tesla stock. The other half was a loan from several banks and investors that got saddled to Twitter itself.
jonne@infosec.pub 11 months ago
Yeah, he probably wanted it in order to influence the election, but the way things are going it might but be around for that. Not to mention, Twitter isn’t really used by real people, it’s basically just all journalists circle jerking.
GigglyBobble@kbin.social 11 months ago
Seems pretty obvious, right? Someone on Lemmy once argued, he did it to avoid taxes. Failed to explain how this is profitable in the end though.
BongsForJesus@lemmy.wtf 11 months ago
I remember reading an article speculating that his strategy was to bring down twitter because it was a left leaning platform, and that would appease the Saudis, or something like that. Seemed pretty far fetched. I reckon he made an ego driven power play without thinking it through and it is going about as well as anybody expected. No shenanigans, no strategy, just a more publically exposed failure than his previous business failures.
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 11 months ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Nov 24 (Reuters) - Elon Musk-owned social media company X could lose as much as $75 million in advertising revenue by the end of the year as dozens of major brands pause their marketing campaigns, the New York Times reported on Friday.
Musk backing an antisemitic post on the platform last week has led several companies including Walt Disney (DIS.N) and Warner Bros Discovery (WBD.O) to pause their advertisements on the site formerly called Twitter.
X has struck back and sued media watchdog group Media Matters, alleging the organization defamed the platform with a report that said ads for major brands including Apple and Oracle had appeared next to posts touting Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party.
X said on Friday $11 million in revenue was at risk and the exact figure fluctuated as some advertisers returned to the platform and others increased spending, according to the report.
Advertisers have fled X since Musk bought it in October 2022 and reduced content moderation, resulting in a sharp rise in hate speech on the site, according to civil rights groups.
The platform’s U.S. ad revenue has declined at least 55% year-over-year each month since Musk’s takeover, Reuters previously reported.
The original article contains 255 words, the summary contains 198 words. Saved 22%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
FaceDeer@kbin.social 11 months ago
X was sold recently for $40 billion. $75 million is 0.1875% of that. I'm sure X is quaking in its boots.
BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It wasn’t worth $44 billion when he bought it. That’s why he tried desperately to back out. The reason the company is in such a dire financial situation is specifically because it was bought at that price and now pays debt service far disproportionate to its actual worth.
You’re also confusing company valuation with operating revenue. $44 billion isn’t how much cash they have on hand and $75 million doesn’t get subtracted from that, so expressing that percentage makes no sense. One number isn’t a percent of the other.
Twitter’s ad revenue is already down more than 50% since the takeover and this is $75 million more of lost revenue on top of that. The company was maybe on a path to profitability at full advertising revenue and without the debt service, but now it is burning cash even as revenues tank.
squiblet@kbin.social 11 months ago
They have a billion of loan payments due each year. In order to pay that, someone has to come up with cash. Having a business that actually generates a profit would be the ideal way to do that.
FaceDeer@kbin.social 11 months ago
My point is that $75 million isn't a significant amount either way at the scale that X is operating on.
anlumo@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Part of that money was paid by X itself (as debt), devaluing it in that process.
qooqie@lemmy.world 11 months ago
That’s not as much as I would’ve hoped
EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Don’t forget how recently he really started driving away the advertisers and how close we are to the end of the year. I see it as a very hopeful start.
ramble81@lemm.ee 11 months ago
$75m in 5 weeks. That’s a run rate of $780m per year. That is not a small chunk of revenue.
SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 11 months ago
75 bucks is the minimum though. It could be like… 37 billion.
mihies@kbin.social 11 months ago
X is already worth less than half of buying price. And this is income loss, not net worth. Which will eventually lead to the later or if not to bankruptcy.
stifle867@programming.dev 11 months ago
I don’t think Twitter ever even had ad revenue that high right?
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Don’t worry, the company is no worth less than half of what he paid for it and his Tesla stocks are hemorrhaging value too 🙂