Disney's disastrous year

[AnotherGuy]

Elon Musk himself valued it at $44 Billion when he bought it, and now values it at $19 Billion.

I'm saying it was overvalued initially, and that includes the $44 billion price tag.

The site is losing major advertisers and has basically lost its function as the "front page of the internet."
Most articles still refer to it as Twitter, despite the name change.

Okay. None of that being as a reduction of the workforce.

Now maybe it's just me, but if I were looking for evidence that Musk was making a good business man who didn't just buy Twitter for his own ego, I'd look for evidence that the site was going up in value, attracting more advertisers, reducing bot traffic, or growing its audience.

Did Musk aggravate the Corporatocracy, all good guys I'm sure, and they took a dump on him? Sure, agreed.

 

[AnotherGuy]

It's easy to function without quality contol.
Until your customers notice the lack of quality, and go elsewhere.

Lack of quality is quite broad in this context as it includes his commentary

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm saying it was overvalued initially, and that includes the $44 billion price tag.

The only person who overvalued it was Elon Musk.

A little bit of history. Twitter shares traded at under $40 before Musk publicly announced his large ownership stake. Then he announced he would purchase Twitter outright for $54.20 a share. Why that amount?

Because he's a child, and he had to put "420" in the public announcement (the exact same reason that the first three Tesla models were ... S ... 3 ... X ... get it?). And because he was annoyed that Twitter wasn't putting him on the board. He didn't actually expect anyone would take him seriously!

Oh, but they did. Because any company would be a fool to not accept that offer. So when you say that twitter was overvalued, you're right! But not by Wall Street at the time. By Elon Musk.

I sure hope the 420 joke was worth it!

 

[billd91]

I mean, I tend to not believe in the 4D chess theories. I don't think he wants it to fail, because it will have a lot of terrible spillover effects- both in terms of his reputation and for his other businesses.

Although we live in polarized times, he's not a politician. He still has to run businesses, and it's not like he can use this to raise funds for a campaign. Success in business can largely immunize bad behavior, but failure tends to bring in the vultures. It's not like he's going to be out on the street or anything, but I don't think he wants it to fail. I think it's more likely that he's in a position he hasn't been in before, and he's not used to being held to account for his behavior.

It's hard to imagine he isn't trying to drive it into the ground given his tendency to dig deeper into his position when he's held accountable. I don't believe in 4D chess theories much either, but I can kind of see him risking Twitter to get his demagogue on with the techbros, possibly hoping for some kind of bailout. But I think as his antics continue, any value Twitter had as an international communication/media platform erodes, making any kind of bailout more unlikely.

I mean, it ultimately comes down to people trying to pin a rational explanation to Musk's immature behavior, when there likely just isn't any. And that's a bit unsettling because someone with his kind of economic impact should be a lot less stupidly petulant.

 

[AnotherGuy]

A little bit of history. Twitter shares traded at under $40 before Musk publicly announced his large ownership stake. Then he announced he would purchase Twitter outright for $54.20 a share. Why that amount?

Because he's a child, and he had to put "420" in the public announcement (the exact same reason that the first three Tesla models were ... S ... 3 ... X ... get it?). And because he was annoyed that Twitter wasn't putting him on the board. He didn't actually expect anyone would take him seriously!

Is the 420 a reference to marijuana? Shamefully I had to look it up.
Personally, I've never thought much of Tesla before this move, but that is me, likely because I'm not a car guy. Sacrilege I know.

Kit was the only car I loved.

Oh, but they did. Because any company would be a fool to not accept that offer. So when you say that twitter was overvalued, you're right! But not by Wall Street at the time. By Elon Musk.

I sure hope the 420 joke was worth it!

I hear you, my opinion was, it was overvalued with or without Musk. I didn't know about the 420 story - shocking.
I'm just glad he bought it for reasons that cannot be outlined on this forum - I really disliked the previous dude.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Lack of quality is quite broad in this context as it includes his commentary

I imagine amongst those people fired where the ones who advise execs what not to say.

 

[Mannahnin]

At one point not too many years ago researchers noted that over 60 percent actual traffic on Twitter , not bots, was from Politicians, News sites, and political entitites. I'll poke around and see if i can find that.

Yes, a huge part of Twitter's value has historically been more direct contact and communication with politicians (especially younger, more energetic ones EDIT: And LOCAL ones, I meant to say) and journalists. It sometimes sucked that unreliable info would be on it, in part because of the rush to post first, but it was the first wave for breaking news, and you could directly ask questions to and interact with people and reporting the news. That value prop has been fading.

It is nice that he is using his FU money to tell people FU for trying to force him into something. Likely not agree with half of what he says, but I side with more free speech.

I remember when the joke was he bought twitter just to ban the guy who posted about his jet

Yeah, right from the start it was clear that he never actually understood what free speech means, or believed in the idea of unfettered speech for everyone. Anyone critical of or mocking him has always been an exception to his alleged principle. He introduced his rule against "impersonation" as soon as someone used his ill-thought-out new checkmark scheme to parody him, which was darkly funny and ironic after he declared that comedy was allowed again on Twitter thanks to his purchase.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm just glad he bought it for reasons that cannot be outlined on this forum.

Well, here's the thing. I knew when he announced the purchase that it would be a disaster for twitter as we know it.

Because Elon Musk had no idea what he was doing, and what he was getting into. Still doesn't, apparently.

Here's an article published over a year ago. It should give you the gist of the problem-

Hey Elon: Let Me Help You Speed Run The Content Moderation Learning Curve

It’s kind of a rite of passage for any new social media network. They show up, insist that they’re the “platform for free speech” without quite understanding what that actua…

www.techdirt.com

You can actually see him repeatedly hitting all of these issues, over and over and over and over again, that people who are familiar with the problems all knew about. For example, the most recent one is just "Level 3" again.

Luckily, Twitter had a really good team in place that had the experience of dealing with this! Unfortunately, those were some of the people he cut first. Go fig, right?

 

[AnotherGuy]

Well, here's the thing. I knew when he announced the purchase that it would be a disaster for twitter as we know it.

Because Elon Musk had no idea what he was doing, and what he was getting into. Still doesn't, apparently.

Here's an article published over a year ago. It should give you the gist of the problem-

Hey Elon: Let Me Help You Speed Run The Content Moderation Learning Curve

It’s kind of a rite of passage for any new social media network. They show up, insist that they’re the “platform for free speech” without quite understanding what that actua…

www.techdirt.com

You can actually see him repeatedly hitting all of these issues, over and over and over and over again, that people who are familiar with the problems all knew about. For example, the most recent one is just "Level 3" again.

Luckily, Twitter had a really good team in place that had the experience of dealing with this! Unfortunately, those were some of the people he cut first. Go fig, right?

I never followed or indeed follow Musk's career. My issue is, if he was as bad as the MSM are currently saying he is (current = since his acquisition of Twitter), logically he would have been terrible before. So, my question would be, why was he propped up/celebrated before his Twitter acquisition by the media? Why wasn't this supposed ineloquent buffoon outed much earlier?

 

[Velderan]

Okay. None of that being as a reduction of the workforce.

Except quite a bit of it is a direct result of that. There's plenty of evidence that racist and sexist content has seen a huge upsurge since he took over and him trimming the amount of moderation that happens because of a lack of people to actually do it is one of the causes.