Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Breccia]

Memes aside

NEVER!

So Musk is emailing his employees at 2:30AM, you know, as one does. I'm sure it's great for morale of his remaining five employees.

Zoë Schiffer, a managing editor at Platformer, tweeted: "Elon Musk sent Twitter employees an email at 2:30am saying the 'office is not optional.'"

The Twitter owner said in his memo that the company's headquarters in San Francisco "was half empty yesterday," per Schiffer's tweet.

However, Musk has fired thousands of employees since taking control of the company in late October with the total now thought to be about 1,300, per CNBC.

Musk has previously sent emails to employees in the middle of the night. In November, he sent one at 2:39 a.m. telling employees they would no longer be permitted to work remotely.

Musk began the memo by saying that there was "no way to sugarcoat the message" about the economic climate and its influence on Twitter, which depends on advertising revenue.

I just want to remind everyone that Musk, as the owner of two companies, cannot possibly be in both offices at once. So he's a hypocrite.

But it's not just employees who aren't coming back. Advertisers aren't coming back, either. And the problem is Musk, both ways.

It’s been a rocky pairing since October, when Musk officially took over and many big-name advertisers paused spending on the platform. Almost five months later, the company’s standing with the advertisers that historically make up 90 percent of its revenue still hasn’t measurably improved.

More than half of Twitter’s top 1,000 advertisers before the acquisition have stopped advertising on the platform as of February, according to data from digital marketing analysis firm Pathmatics and shared with Vox. Out of Twitter’s top 10 advertisers pre-acquisition, only six still advertise on the platform, according to the firm.

The company’s revenue was down by 40 percent, according to a December report by the Wall Street Journal. Fewer people also appear to be visiting Twitter’s website where advertisers create ad campaigns: The number of users visiting Twitter’s advertising portal page was down 18 percent in February compared to a year before, according to data from digital intelligence firm SimilarWeb.

This is the WSJ article cited. I'm going with Vox because paywall.

Sources described a lack of confidence in Musk’s ability to keep his promises about stopping Twitter from turning into a “free-for-all hellscape,” high turnover in Twitter’s sales department, and confusion about the company’s policies regarding content moderation.

Chief among their concerns is a perception that Musk has turned Twitter into a place where people can post racist, sexist, or otherwise harmful speech without much consequence. Major corporations don’t want to jeopardize what they call “brand safety” by associating with offensive content. Musk has taken a lax approach to content moderation — such as allowing Neo-Nazis, white nationalists, and other controversial figures back on the platform in the name of free speech.

And Trump. Who is all of those, but deserves special mention. Musk specifically and directly put Trump back on.

Companies also worry about affiliating with Musk himself as he continues to post offensive tweets, including a recent one mocking a disabled Twitter employee (Musk apologized after facing widespread backlash). Making matters worse, some advertising executives say they no longer know who to talk to about their concerns because Musk has fired or laid off many key members of Twitter’s sales and brand safety teams. All of this, insiders say, has resulted in weaker trust in Twitter among a relatively small group of people who control major ad budgets.

In the end, Twitter needs advertisers more than advertisers need Twitter. Compared to Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram, Twitter has a much smaller, niche user base. Brands can easily shift their advertising budgets to the bigger players in social media. Whether or not Musk can win back brands — or figure out a feasible alternate plan to make money — will determine whether the company will ultimately go bankrupt. While Musk says Twitter is close to breaking even now that he’s drastically cut costs, he warned in November of the possibility of bankruptcy, and will see that risk increase if advertisers fail to return.

Yeah, the problem is Musk. People are leaving, including both customers and advertisers, because of Musk's changes. Adding costs to the people who stick around doesn't seem like it's going to be enough, and might also force people further away.

I also want to quote Musk verbatim:

What I’d say to advertisers and brands is: Use Twitter for yourself and believe what you see on Twitter, not what you read in the newspapers. Because what you see on Twitter is the real thing and what you read in newspapers is not

"I did say NEVER!"

Musk is a conspiracy theorist who is now telling people that only he holds the truth. Trump's rabid fanbase might go with that, I mean, if they're Trump supporters they're used to that shit being shoved down their throats. Generally speaking, multimillion-dollar advertisers are not. They saw Twitter had problems, they paused, they saw Twitter made more and worse problems, they are backing away slowly while maintaining eye contact.

Musk is cutting costs, by cutting employees and not paying rent. I don't think it's enough, and more importantly, neither does Musk, as we've just noted. Maybe Amazon or Wendy's will see $1,000 a month added to their advertising bill, shrug it off as chump change, and continue. Smaller businesses probably won't do that. Quite frankly, Facebook's business access is a lot better anyhow.

[Edge-]

"Trust me, the guy with a huge financial interest in keeping you spending money here because I'm an idiot, not the newspapers just reporting on reality"

Is Elom testing neuralink on himself and he forgot about it or something?

[D Luniz]

*snip*

It starts April 1st?
Anyone else feel this is a joke?

feel like they are putting April 1 so if the backlash is too high, they jump back the that old troll canard "it was a joke bro!"
and if people just shrug, they'll go through on the 1st as posted

[Breccia]

feel like they are putting April 1 so if the backlash is too high, they jump back the that old troll canard "it was a joke bro!"

Honestly, even on a Blizz-esque site where April 1st comes with its own gag, I think once you pass $1million/year you stop claiming your business ideas put out in public by you are just jokes. If they do jump back, Twitter should still be shamed and mocked. And no, making a joke in late March and saying "April Fools!" is not a joke. It's just juvenile.

[fwc577]

And no, making a joke in late March and saying "April Fools!" is not a joke. It's just juvenile.

WTF are you going on about? This guy is purely a professional and serious individual.

[Belize]

What's Twitter worth nowadays?
Less than half of what Elom payed for it? Oh. Also, lol @cutting your staff to less than 20% of what you started with and marketing it as a "Reverse Startup".

[Edge-]

What's Twitter worth nowadays?
Less than half of what Elom payed for it? Oh. Also, lol @cutting your staff to less than 20% of what you started with and marketing it as a "Reverse Startup".

Let's see here, he bought it on October 27 and for ease of calculation let's say it's now March 27 (close enough).

November
December
January
February
March

In just under half a year he cut the price of the company he overpaid for in half.

Don't worry, we'll still have people arguing he's actually a longterm genius and this was part of his grand ploy to save the future of humanity. Or something absolutely fucking stupid.

[jonnysensible]

What's Twitter worth nowadays?
Less than half of what Elom payed for it? Oh. Also, lol @cutting your staff to less than 20% of what you started with and marketing it as a "Reverse Startup".

i dont think hes can accept hes become the bagholder.

Twitter at 20bn is overinflated pretending that it could be worth 10x that with a bit of hard work is laughable.

burning a 5bn ad business for 11mil subscriber business is certainly a choice. All because a bunch of terminally online billionaire dweebs got mad that people on minimum wage called then losers.

[Breccia]

What's Twitter worth nowadays?

Before the buyout, Musk spent months trying to convince everyone that Twitter was worth less than he'd offered for it.

Be careful what you wish for.

As others and myself have noted, Twitter's revune is way down. Musk did say Twitter could be revenue-neutral soon, but I think "keep firing people and keep losing customers until your expenses match your remaining revenue" wasn't what most people thought he meant. Or, that $1000/month April Fool's joke either.

How much did Musk borrow to make this possible?

(searches online)

he used a tactic called a leveraged buyout and spent $13 billion of borrowed money on the acquisition

I didn't find a lot of information about Musk paying anyone back. For one, I don't know that such is public. For two, considering he can't make rent or pay his employees, I don't think he paid loans, either. The loaners include Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, who yes probably regret their decision, but are also in the "don't fuck with us in court" category. I don't think they drew up a contract with Musk that he can walk away from.

[D Luniz]

So you know what makes somethine worth even less according to wow mount collectors?
Everyone knowing how you did it
(gift link used, so no pay wall issues)
Twitter Says Parts of Its Source Code Were Leaked Online

[Breccia]

Twitter Says Parts of Its Source Code Were Leaked Online

We know, it's called Truth Social.

Kidding, kinda. Anyhow here's the first three paragraphs just to be on the safe side.

Twitter moved on Friday to have the leaked code taken down by sending a copyright infringement notice to GitHub, an online collaboration platform for software developers where the code was posted, according to the filing. GitHub complied and took down the code that day. It was unclear how long the leaked code had been online, but it appeared to have been public for at least several months.

Twitter also asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to order GitHub to identify the person who shared the code and any other individuals who downloaded it, according to the filing.

Twitter launched an investigation into the leak and executives handling the matter have surmised that whoever was responsible left the San Francisco-based company last year, two people briefed on the internal investigation said. Since Mr. Musk bought Twitter in October for $44 billion, about 75 percent of the company’s 7,500 employees have been laid off or resigned.

So...if you were one of the 75% of the employees that were fired, would "leak Twitter's source code" seem appealling to you? What's Musk going to do, sue an unemployed person for $44 billion?

[Breccia]

In the ongoing effort to remove bots from Twitter like he promised, Musk specifically and personally invites bots to Twitter.

Twitter CEO Elon Musk announced Monday evening that only tweets by verified users will show up in the platform's default main feed of "For You" recommendations from April 15.

Musk tweeted that the move "is the only realistic way to address advanced AI bot swarms taking over and voting in polls "will require verification for same reason."

"That said, it's ok to have verified bot accounts if they follow terms of service & don’t impersonate a human," Musk added.

I think Musk's bitter that actual human beings in those polls voted for him to step down, and he's trying to pretend it was hired bot goons. It wasn't.

So, there you go. Bots are okay on Twitter. Kind of the opposite of last year when he claimed Twitter wasn't worth $44 billion because there were too many bots, but whatever. At least Trump will keep his numbers up with the help of his comrades, da?

[Sorshen]

In the ongoing effort to remove bots from Twitter like he promised, Musk specifically and personally invites bots to Twitter.



I think Musk's bitter that actual human beings in those polls voted for him to step down, and he's trying to pretend it was hired bot goons. It wasn't.

So, there you go. Bots are okay on Twitter. Kind of the opposite of last year when he claimed Twitter wasn't worth $44 billion because there were too many bots, but whatever. At least Trump will keep his numbers up with the help of his comrades, da?

This must be one of the top 3 dumbest changes, how the f does one even come up with that? He expects to boost his blue program that brought <$20m at the cost of hundreds of millions in advertising revenue?
Also, verified lost all meaning, idk why he keeps using that word.

[Shadowferal]

I guess the "bots" are paying their way...in crypto currency?

[solinari6]

So, there you go. Bots are okay on Twitter. Kind of the opposite of last year when he claimed Twitter wasn't worth $44 billion because there were too many bots, but whatever. At least Trump will keep his numbers up with the help of his comrades, da?

Well, there are different kids of bots. Russian bots are bad, but some bots are actually pretty useful.

[Belize]

I just remembered, wasn't Musk supposed to abide by poll results and step down?

[Breccia]

I just remembered, wasn't Musk supposed to abide by poll results and step down?

Yes, but he claimed he'd find a replacement first, a loophole big enough to drive a Tesla through.

As I am not an expert on corporate law, I don't know if he can be fired. I do know that he has large outstanding loans, and the banks that gave such loans should be nervous. It would not surprise me if there was a clause in the loan contract which said "If Musk intentionally tries to ruin Twitter, we banks may take this as a sign he does not intend to pay us back and may immediately sue in response while there's still a Twitter left to scavenge for our money back".

[Edge-]

https://www.businessinsider.com/twit...usk-aoc-2023-3

Twitter is secretly boosting the accounts of 35 VIP users over others, per a new report from Platformer.

Zoë Schiffer, Platformer's managing editor, cited internal documents from Twitter that listed 35 VIP users who have their posts monitored and promoted for greater visibility.

Schiffer published 14 of the 35 names on the list, which included Lebron James, the NBA star; Mr. Beast, a prominent YouTuber; Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the US politician; Ben Shapiro, the conservative commentator; and Twitter's own CEO, Elon Musk.

The list also included the pro-Trump commentator, catturd2, with whom Elon Musk has had many Twitter conversations.

So in addition to Elom forcing his tweets into your feed regardless of if you or anyone you follow follows him, he's still engaged in the exact same pattern of behavior he was so critical about prior to his overpaying $44B for Twitter.

Also, big ooph that fucking catturd is boosted by his buddy Elom and still cries about censorshit all the time.

And no, choosing to boost accounts with big engagement like AoC or Biden while president don't balance this shit out, either. He's just a loser hypocrite who doesn't know what to do with all this money if other people aren't making his companies successful on his behalf.

[Breccia]

Twitter bitchslaps Greene.

Twitter on Tuesday restricted Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) congressional account for seven days after she repeatedly posted an image of a poster about a rally called “Trans Day of Vengeance.”

Greene tweeted about the event after three children and three adults were killed in a shooting at a Christian school in Nashville. Police say that the suspect in that shooting, who was killed during the incident, identified as transgender.

Ella Irwin, Twitter’s head of trust and safety, said in a separate tweet that the platform was automatically sweeping to remove images of the poster over worries it could incite violence.

“We do not support tweets that incite violence irrespective of who posts them. ‘Vengeance’ does not imply peaceful protest,” Irwin said.

She's kicked off for seven days. Because Musk's Twitter is a different story now, intentionally instigating violence is basically a misdemeanor.

"Okay, but she got a strike, right?"

No.

[Edge-]

I'm glad there's anyone left actually doing any level of policy enforcement, to be honest. I'd mostly assumed it was down to Elom sending people DM's asking them to please stop being so overtly Nazi.

Real though, I'm glad that at the end of this day this incredibly low bar can still occasionally be met on Twitter. Even as their current owner signal boosts manipulative information pushing equally violent and hateful bigotry but whatever that's completely unrelated and different and also he'll post that fuckin tweet on your page no matter if you've blocked him or not PLEASE ENJOY YOUR FREE SPEECH FOR $8/MONTH