Musky
Comments
-
And here's Musk endearing himself to businesses who are daring to ask questions & pause advertising:
0 -
Unless his plan is to change the whole business and move to some completely different form of revenue, but there doesn't seem any sign of that.0
-
kingstongraham said:
Unless his plan is to change the whole business and move to some completely different form of revenue, but there doesn't seem any sign of that.
Nah, he's just doing Cabbage Truss. Chutzpah & hubris rolled into one.0 -
BTW, shoutout to @pinno for starting a new thread for this. Good to keep things organised!
1 -
A huge surprise that Musk's devotion to free speech only extends to matey chats with Russian politicians.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
It sounds like debt was around a quarter of the purchase price. A bit more of the value.rick_chasey said:Sure but it’s a leveraged buy out. It’s not his cash. It’s his borrowed cash.
0 -
Vanguard, Blackrock et al must be well happy to bank Muskrat's financial backers' cash. Ker-ching.
Is this S-IP individual one of the biggest con artists of current times? Here, I've got these increasingly rad ideas, c'mon gimme your money. Example, Tesla share price : actual earnings ratio history.0 -
-
Former shareholders who made a tidy some selling to Muskrick_chasey said:Sorry why are you talking about vanguard and BlackRock?
Edit terrible spelling0 -
Correctamundo, 2 of the largest % equity holders prior to the buyout.TheBigBean said:
Former shareholders who made a tidy sum selling to Muskrick_chasey said:Sorry why are you talking about vanguard and BlackRock?
0 -
-
Twitter co-founder and ex-CEO Jack Dorsey has addressed the mass sackings at his former firm, apologising for growing Twitter "too quickly".https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63527893
Half of the social media giant's staff are being fired, a week after Elon Musk bought it in a $44bn deal.
Billionaire Mr Musk has said he had "no choice" but to slash the company's workforce as the firm is losing more than $4m (£3.5m) a day.
Twitter staff took to the platform to express their anger at the firings.
In a statement posted on the microblogging site, Mr Dorsey - who quit as CEO in November and left the board of directors in May - said Twitter staff "are strong and resilient. They will always find a way no matter how difficult the moment. I realize [sic] many are angry with me. I own the responsibility for why everyone is in this situation: I grew the company size too quickly. I apologize [sic] for that."
"I am grateful for, and love, everyone who has ever worked on Twitter. I don't expect that to be mutual in this moment...or ever…and I understand," he added.
His statement appeared to endorse the need for dismissals at the firm. The 45-year-old Mr Dorsey has been supportive of Mr Musk's takeover.
Back in April when Mr Musk first began his purchase of Twitter, Mr Dorsey said the 51-year-old was the "singular solution I trust" and that the South African's takeover was "the right path...I believe it with all my heart".
Mr Dorsey created Twitter in 2006 along with Evan Williams, Biz Stone, and Noah Glass. He sent the company's first Tweet, writing "just setting up my twttr".
The cuts have come across Twitter's 7,500-strong work force, and there are fears it could damage the firm's content moderation efforts.
Despite the dismissals Mr Musk has said the firm's policies remain "absolutely unchanged".
A host of major brands have halted advertising spending with Twitter in recent days, including Volkswagen, General Motors and Pfizer.
Almost all of Twitter's revenue currently comes from advertising, and Mr Musk has been looking for ways to cut costs and make money in different ways from the platform, including plans to charge a monthly $8 (£7) subscription fee for users to be verified on the platform.
Sorry it's a long quote, but it is relevant.
0 -
If he does manage to kill Twitter, I wonder if he could be talked into buying facebook?4
-
At least he has a sense of humour.
0 -
I’m confused why he spent $44 billion buying something that’s losing $4 million per day (and, as far as I’m aware, has never made money).
Maybe the reason I’m destined to never be mega rich is I don’t see the opportunity in deals like this.0 -
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
0 -
I think it went like this:Pross said:I’m confused why he spent $44 billion buying something that’s losing $4 million per day (and, as far as I’m aware, has never made money).
Maybe the reason I’m destined to never be mega rich is I don’t see the opportunity in deals like this.
He didn't like Twitter censoring Trump.
He made an offer to buy it, out of hubris.
He then thought he could either force the price down, or back out.
A US court held him to the deal.
He's ended up with something he never really wanted, nor has the skill to run.
He's screwing everything up.0 -
Pross said:
I’m confused why he spent $44 billion buying something that’s losing $4 million per day (and, as far as I’m aware, has never made money).
Maybe the reason I’m destined to never be mega rich is I don’t see the opportunity in deals like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdZZpaB2kDM
12:30 in. In his own words.0 -
I looked at that thread and it reminded me why I dropped Twitter 10 years ago.focuszing723 said:
At least he has a sense of humour.
It’s just a horrible medium of loads of noise. I find some interesting stuff linked through external sources that I will read, but I find myself wondering how (or why) anybody bothers sifting through the sheer volume of crap to find it.
Twitter is beyond my comprehension. I only ever used it for a while when club rides were being organised on it.
Mind you, it’s nice to be reminded that you haven’t changed your mind and missed out on something for years.0 -
I can understand that view point, I don't have an account myself, but I do find it useful to do key searches for bleeding/cutting edge info. To be honest the majority of tweets I see are from people quoting on here to backup their stance/argument.morstar said:
I looked at that thread and it reminded me why I dropped Twitter 10 years ago.focuszing723 said:
At least he has a sense of humour.
It’s just a horrible medium of loads of noise. I find some interesting stuff linked through external sources that I will read, but I find myself wondering how (or why) anybody bothers sifting through the sheer volume of censored to find it.
Twitter is beyond my comprehension. I only ever used it for a while when club rides were being organised on it.
Mind you, it’s nice to be reminded that you haven’t changed your mind and missed out on something for years.0 -
I was going to introduce this in another threadbriantrumpet said:BTW, shoutout to @pinno for starting a new thread for this. Good to keep things organised!
but I could already hear the discord in your head.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
0 -
Vanguard yes, but Blackrock offer a lot more than just ETFs.rick_chasey said:
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
0 -
What I was indicating was the funds have locked away gains made on their gamble investments thanks to Saudi / whoever's cash backing of the muskrat before the bubble bursts.rick_chasey said:
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
0 -
Oh come on I’m not an idiot. I have met the various heads of the business af BlackRock.Dorset_Boy said:
Vanguard yes, but Blackrock offer a lot more than just ETFs.rick_chasey said:
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
They’re not big winners in this.
Why not list all the asset managers? The only reason BlackRock and vanguard are the biggest holders is because of their monster passive businesses.
We gonna go mention the big Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Funds while we’re at it?0 -
They’re big shareholders because they have such monster passive businesses - they just buy everything for very low fees. It’s not so much a gamble as just holding everything.orraloon said:
What I was indicating was the funds have locked away gains made on their gamble investments thanks to Saudi / whoever's cash backing of the muskrat before the bubble bursts.rick_chasey said:
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
0 -
Your post clearly implied that Blackrock only offer passives and ETFs. That is incorrect and I was picking you up on the incorrect statement. Nothing more.rick_chasey said:
Oh come on I’m not an idiot. I have met the various heads of the business af BlackRock.Dorset_Boy said:
Vanguard yes, but Blackrock offer a lot more than just ETFs.rick_chasey said:
I mean they just offer ETFs and indexes so it’s hardly them gaining, right?TheBigBean said:
You saying it's not Mr Vanguard and Mrs Rock?rick_chasey said:Ah, you know it’s not their money, right?
They’re not big winners in this.
Why not list all the asset managers? The only reason BlackRock and vanguard are the biggest holders is because of their monster passive businesses.
We gonna go mention the big Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Funds while we’re at it?
Don't get so defensive when something you post is picked up as not being clear or quite correct.0 -
-
Unsurprising
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63534240
Small shift so far which will either Peter out or be the change people thought couldn’t happen.
0
