Current Events > Twitter's Worth Went From $44 Billion to $8 Billion Under Musk's Leadership

(+) Yeah! (+)

Zeeak4444 posted...

its actually not. Everything points to the exact opposite but happy to see what you got to prove that if you wanna try.

what do you define as the exact opposite of a profit-maximizing entity. I would call that a loss-maximizing entity but Im guess you arent saying musk is trying to maximize losses.

just to clarify my side I guess. I see introducing the monetization of a feature of a social media site is an attempt to increase profit as profit maximizing entities do.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

I agree he didn't see this coming, but the 'nickel and dime' theory is in line with operating twitter as a profit maximizing entity as well.

*watches Twitter's value fall with every new nickel-and-dime scheme*

Yep. Sure doing a great job with that "profit maximizing" approach.

He's apparently as good a businessman as Trump.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

just to clarify my side I guess. I see introducing the monetization of a feature of a social media site is an attempt to increase profit as profit maximizing entities do.

I think people are taking his actions as a whole and seeing how he's making things far worse for the platform, thus devaluing the brand.

thronedfire2 posted...

I finally saw a Lucid Air on the road a few weeks ago and it did look cooler than all the Teslas I see

Ive seen a few Lucids (or the same one multiple times) and its a nice-looking ride.

Ryangrad posted...

We see a ton of Rivian trucks out here in Michigan.

Interesting. I see more SUVs because its mostly moms taking their kids to school.

hockeybub89 posted...

Musk blames the Jews for it

He is turning into quite the little Nazi

Gritty posted...

He is turning into quite the little Nazi

Starting to think he always was

hockeybub89 posted...

Musk blames the Jews for it

And with the way he has handed it over to white supremacists they'd be totally justified in doing so lol

https://fortune.com/2023/09/06/elon-musk-x-what-is-twitter-worth/

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Fine. Let's say I've been speaking gibberish, if its necessary to get you to self-reflect on this comment its worth it. What the heck does this comment mean?

It means the wealth Elon Musk has is just a fake made up number. If I have $10 million in gold, and I lose $5 million of it, somewhere out there is $5 million of gold in the hands of someone else or generally scattered around the world.

Elon "lost" $36 billion dollars of his net worth in Twitter and it didn't go anywhere. It just simply disappeared. Not only did it disappear, but the people who were depending on that wealth to exist are suffering. They're losing jobs and not necessarily getting hired by competitors. The lenders books can no longer ever be balanced even if they completely confiscate what's left.

This isn't the same as simple competition either. When Blockbuster fell, Netflix gained. When Sears fell, Amazon gained. No one is gaining anything here. They're just losing. And because it's private you can't even have bears betting on puts or short selling. The advertisers didn't go to another platform. No serious competition has risen to to fill the void where Twitter used to be. Existing competition hasn't changed significantly.

Because the wealth was never real.

Ryangrad posted...

Dude, he's right and you're wrong here

This is what you're saying is right:

Yawn_Master2 posted...

He transferred 44 billion in assets to Twitter to legally become the owner of it.

Tyranthraxus posted...

This is what you're saying is right:

I don't know if you're seriously misunderstanding what he's saying, or if you are just being incredibly disingenuous.

I wonder how the weirdo musk fanboys rationalize this. Isnt he supposed to be some sort of genius?

I do wonder why he isn't generally viewed as a brand risk at this point

It should also be reminded that the money he lost buying Twitter, he is making Twitter pay for. So he's making the company he just bought, pay for allowing itself to be bought by him.

Voidgolem posted...

I do wonder why he isn't generally viewed as a brand risk at this point

Same reason people keep being surprised when Trump stiffs them.

Voidgolem posted...

I do wonder why he isn't generally viewed as a brand risk at this point

He is. He was sued by one of the largest Tesla shareholders.

The_shibe posted...

I wonder how the weirdo musk fanboys rationalize this. Isnt he supposed to be some sort of genius?

Handing Twitter over to Nazis and Russian misinformation farms was the point and they love him for it

Tyranthraxus posted...

Yay! The new one is out!

It means the wealth Elon Musk has is just a fake made up number.

That is an interesting definition of wealth. I've seen it defined as: Wealth = Assets - Liabilities. So, his % ownership of his companies, their valuation, and his debt is meaningless? Let's move on to your example!

If I have $10 million in gold, and I lose $5 million of it, somewhere out there is $5 million of gold in the hands of someone else or generally scattered around the world.Elon "lost" $36 billion dollars of his net worth in Twitter and it didn't go anywhere. It just simply disappeared.

The shareholders of Twitter were paid. Then twitter went private (You have a problem with me saying this I know, but I can't help but feel it makes sense as to what happened).

Now (taking your word) The estimate today is $36 billion less than when Elon purchased it. Yes it got eliminated from the market value.

Not only did it disappear, but the people who were depending on that wealth to exist are suffering.

The lenders of the money? They just want the debt paid, the brand value only matters if it helps pay the debt owed to them. It's kind of you to be concerned for them, but there are risks to lending someone money when he goes around saying he's buying twitter only to promote free speech.

They're losing jobs and not necessarily getting hired by competitors. The lenders books can no longer ever be balanced even if they completely confiscate what's left.

Yeah, it is sad.I feel bad for them. They can work for other companies. Twitter wasn't created for them to have work as cold as it sounds.

Bringing things back to our discussion. How does this address your point: It means the wealth Elon Musk has is just a fake made up number.

This isn't the same as simple competition either. When Blockbuster fell, Netflix gained. When Sears fell, Amazon gained. No one is gaining anything here. They're just losing.

There are several direct competitors and indirect competitors to Twitter.

And because it's private you can't even have bears betting on puts or short selling.

Lenders, options traders. Your circle of concern is intriguing.

The advertisers didn't go to another platform. No serious competition has risen to to fill the void where Twitter used to be. Existing competition hasn't changed significantly.

Meta released Threads as a direct response to Musk buying Twitter

Because the wealth was never real.

The wealth was real for the twitter shareholders. Elon musk paid them (don't hit me!).

Ahh it is like a beautiful hike. We ended up right where we started. My goal was to end up at the destination where you explained why the wealth was never real but instead you led me in one giant circle.

If you want to take me to my destination. the one where it demonstrates The wealth was never real, that'd be cool.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

The wealth was real for the twitter shareholders. Elon musk paid them (don't hit me!).

Sure they got cash. See if I buy a box of $10 million gold for cash, the guy who sold it to me gets $10 million in cash and I get $10 million in gold. If I lose half the gold, the $10 million in cash and gold both still exist, the wealth in gold is simply allocated differently.

But that's not what happened to X. The wealth isn't allocated differently, it's just gone. It was mirage.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Meta released Threads

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/1/4/AARLwzAAE5uW.jpg

So now we have two multi billion dollar enterprises evaporating wealth that never existed.

Your argument: The fact that he can just piss away that wealth and nobody really even feels it means the wealth was never real in the first place

Elon "lost" $36 billion dollars of his net worth in Twitter and it didn't go anywhere. It just simply disappeared. Not only did it disappear, but the people who were depending on that wealth to exist are suffering. They're losing jobs and not necessarily getting hired by competitors. The lenders books can no longer ever be balanced even if they completely confiscate what's left.

*Contradiction alarm activated*

Tyranthraxus posted...

Sure they got cash. See if I buy a box of $10 million gold for cash, the guy who sold it to me gets $10 million in cash and I get $10 million in gold. If I lose half the gold, the $10 million in cash and gold both still exist, the wealth in gold is simply allocated differently.

But that's not what happened to X. The wealth isn't allocated differently, it's just gone. It was mirage.

Yeah, the market wealth got eliminated. It happens all the time.

Your argument: The fact that he can just piss away that wealth andnobody really even feels itmeans the wealth was never real in the first place

How does market wealth getting eliminated indicate the wealth was never real in the first place?

So now we have two multi billion dollar enterprises evaporating wealth that never existed.

Is your argument:
Entities arose from $0 to billions of dollars. Then some of the billion dollars went away. Therefore it was always $0?

If so.
Are you feeling ok? Like, do you need to go to a hospital?

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Your argument: The fact that he can just piss away that wealth and nobody really even feels it means the wealth was never real in the first place

*Contradiction alarm activated*

When wealth is transferred from Elon Musk to another source, Elon Musk's life diminishes and other's improves. No one is feeling improvements. They are only feeling the pain of the realization that they were lied to.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Yeah, the market wealth got eliminated. It happens all the time.

Not $36 billion in 1 year. That does not happen all the time. Especially not when the loss can be directly attributed to a specific person.

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Entities arose from $0 to billions of dollars. Then some of the billion dollars went away. Therefore it was always $0?

No. I didn't say he had no value or wealth, just that the quantification of it was made up. As was posted earlier, it's not clear that the value is even the $8 billion business insider estimated.

I cant tell if you suffer from schizophrenia or not at this point so Im out.

Cratering billions in worth to own the libs

Rexdragon125 posted...

Handing Twitter over to Nazis and Russian misinformation farms was the point and they love him for it

youre right.

musk looked up to Peter thiel since the PayPal days. Peter think can get him to do anything.

peter think is very close to some Russian and Saudi (especially Saudi) billionaires, who hate the western world.

thiel convinced musk to buy Twitter for freeze peach and got a bunch of saudis and Russians to loan him money for the purchase. All they want, his loaners, is to use Twitter to undermine the western world. That includes, of course, supporting the far right racial hate groups and the Russian disinformation agencies

The_shibe posted...

youre right.

musk looked up to Peter thiel since the PayPal days. Peter think can get him to do anything.

peter think is very close to some Russian and Saudi (especially Saudi) billionaires, who hate the western world.

thiel convinced musk to buy Twitter for freeze peach and got a bunch of saudis and Russians to loan him money for the purchase. All they want, his loaners, is to use Twitter to undermine the western world. That includes, of course, supporting the far right racial hate groups and the Russian disinformation agencies

Really?

Yawn_Master2 posted...

Really?

what?

Nice. 8 billion to go

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


If he paid $44 billion, then it was worth $44 billion. At least, to one very rich, but very stupid fool.

King_Rial posted...

It was never worth $44 Billion. He's just a moron who overpaid because he's a moron. Forced into a deal because he's a moron.

I reckon this.

There's a reason Twitter forced him to buy it and I don't think it's because he renegged.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Indeed, TWTR was trading at over a 20% discount to the merger price until three weeks before it closed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_Twitter_by_Elon_Musk#Revitalization_of_bid

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


All that doesn't matter. What matters is that Elon gave the previous owners of Twitter $44 billion. Which means that, at that moment, Elon considered Twitter equal to $44 billion.

Otherwise, he'd have paid out the penalty costs and kept the cash.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Look, if you want a Corvette, and a dealer is selling it at a 20% markup from MSRP, then it's valued at $133,000.

Despite it's invoice price being listed as $115,000.

Because $133,000 is the price you have to pay to get it.

I don't know What sulugnaz isn't getting but Tom_Joad makes sense to me.

If he paid $44 billion, then it was worth $44 billion. At least, to one very rich, but very stupid fool.

When you look at the max value of Twitter it was $44 billion. The shares sold at $44 billion. Market price is dictated by what the shares sell for.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Compare it to those modern art paintings.
It sold for hundreds of thousands dollars, so it's valued at hundreds of thousands dollars.
Yes, we all know it shouldn't be that price, but legally it's that value.

So you're just going to close your ears and go "na na na I can't hear you".

Ricemills posted...

So you're just going to close your ears and go "na na na I can't hear you".

What?

SaikyoStyle posted...

What?

Not you. They guy above that post

What is with people on this board. They are so adamant about their ignorance lol.