+100. I have been agnostic about Musk owning the platform from the beginning. He's a wealthy guy with an ego and brain to match. Why didn't he just start his own platform and call it a free speech haven? Let's see what kind of real changes are instituted in content moderation before we call him the savior or the devil. As a rule, I am more skeptical of the so called "elites" than anyone I meet on the street.a fan wrote: ↑Sat Nov 05, 2022 1:29 pmDedication to free speech? How come Trump isn't allowed back on? Or anyone else that was banned?elonmuskrockefeller wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:55 amThat article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.
But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.
There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.
Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.
Why would Musk POSSIBLY need a committee if he believed in unfettered speech as the Fake-Right alleges? Reinstate EVERYONE, and let them post what they want.
You guys will believe ANYTHING someone tells you if you think they are on your team. It's both hilarious and terrifying.
Wanna know why Musk did all this? Because competition is on its way from companies who REALLY know how to run factories....... and Musk needs to make sure that Republicans don't get in , and turn the government subsidies off. Remember those? 10 minutes ago, every Republican on the board was complaining about subsidized electric cars.
And lo and behold on this very Musk thread, NOT ONE OF YOU is talking about subsidies anymore. Poof. Complaints are allllll gone.
Why? Because Musk (snicker) has managed to convince you that a card carrying lib that owns an electric car company is "one of you",. It's spectacular. So sure, he'll "vote for DeSantis", who isn't even running for anything yet.
All so he can get Republican voters to subsidize his company (and this is the best part) with THEIR MONEY.
So please, by all means, change your mind about electric cars and paying for them with YOUR MONEY, Pete (and others, for that matter).
All because you don't actually have values like your grandparents did. You'll allow our leaders and 1%er to do ANYTHING so long as you're convinced they're "one of you".
Why do you all think I keep bringing up Trump making government 66% larger in just four years? Because all the supposed conservatives on the board, save cradle (gotta love him) watched as Trump blew out the size of Federal government AND SAID NOTHING.
But sure. You guys are "conservatives".
Who needs to operate an efficient Car company when you fool a bunch of fake conservatives to talk about (snicker) twitter, as if it's PBS......and while they are fixated on yet another stupid, pointless, FoxNation fake issue...........simply run to Congress for more taxpayer money, fellas!
As far as the layoffs, based on what I have seen, Twitter employees were among the most pampered ever. How else would you explain the sense of entitlement evidenced in their list of demands to Musk? I am sure that, much like the Federal workforce, a 50% reduction in headcount would not result in anything near a 50% reduction in total productivity.