Not that I know.
Thanks. Thought that I was missing something.
It popped into his head at the moment.
I don’t understand how this guy has built any business. He seems as business smart as Trump. Both guys seem to get rich despite being moronic asshats. They fail upwards like no one else.
The main thing you have missed, in expecting a rational explanation, is that Elon Musk is not behaving rationally. Perhaps the stress of this situation is pushing him toward some type of break.
I met some angel investors who laid it out once for me. Basically - start with enough seed capital that you can make a lot of bets. You only need one to pay off to cover the rest and become profitable. When you’re starting out as rich as Musk, you can afford enough bets for a couple of them to pay off. Being smart helps a little (you can lay off the really terrible bets) but it’s not really necessary. If you aren’t that rich to start out with, it takes a bit of luck and a lot of work building up the capital to make more than 1 or 2 attempts.
After that, it’s a matter of being disciplined enough to avoid squandering your winnings. Which isn’t all that hard. Once you have a certain amount of money, it kind of builds on itself, no matter what you do. That is, unless you really mess up for whatever reason (congenital idiocy, hubris, arrogance, etc).
If I were, say, an Audi sales or marketing exec, I would love, love, love coming up with a proper response if Musk actually… what… does a mean tweet?
“Well, you know Jim…” the sales person says, serious now… "we at Audi have watched with horror for years as his cars blew up. And we wondered… for years, Jim… why he didn’t fix it. Well, watching him blow up Twitter, we now know why.
“You want to buy a car from that guy?”
That’s a shame. What The World Needs Now Is Suck, Sweet Suck.
Reminds me of the old joke:
A man asks if she would have sex with him for $1 million. She agrees. He then asks her if she would have sex with him for $10. She is offended and says, “Of course not! What kind of woman do you think I am?”
He answers that has already been established and now it is just negotiating.
If Musk can get King to commit to paying some amount then it is just deciding on a price.
I note that the population of Musk fans who insist that he’s a polymath genius with a brilliant plan for everything have become rather thin on the ground as he blunders drunkenly around the Twitter china shop in a stunningly public fashion.
The latest take I’ve heard is that the God-Emperor is destroying Twitter on purpose in order to own the libs or something.
This whole debacle is one of the funniest ongoing fuckups I can remember in my lifetime. The most glorious thing is that, unlike most colossal fuckups, the stakes are pretty high for the fuckup (Musk and his financial backers) and pretty low for everyone else (at worst, we lose a very replaceable social media site).
… excluding the thousands of people who are suddenly jobless going into the holiday season.
Good point.
One thing we haven’t noted re: the employee compensation issue is that the merger agreement itself has binding clauses on Musk/Twitter about how fired employees are to be compensated, both pre and post takeover.
Musk did not follow those agreements. Attorney Lisa Bloom explains here:
Except that for King, the difference between $8/month and $20/month and $2000/month is negligible. This is more like offering someone $3 to eat a bug, and when they said “eew, no!”, waggling your eyebrows and saying “what if i offered you . . . $3.01!”.
It shows how out of touch he is with people’s motivations.
Yes, but in this case, he’s charging them to eat a bug.
“If you pay me $20, I’ll let you eat this bug.”
“Ew, no!”
“How about $8?”
WEll, I have another theory.
Musk obviously overpaid for Twitter - it’s not worth $44 billion - so how does he get some money back to pay off his Saudi debtmasters?
The classic move with large corporations is to show some short term profits so you can make the share price go up. The easiest way to get some short term profit is massive layoffs to make expenses go way down, and if you can get a short term revenue boost, so much the better. It may not be sustainable, but that doesn’t matter; if Twitter shows a quarter or two of profit, the share price will go back up. Musk can then start selling off his stake at the new, higher share price.
The impact of getting rid of everyone who works there and pissing off the customer base might wreck the place in the long run, but that’s not the point. Musk has been forced to buy something he never wanted to own and doesn’t know how to run; his objective is to extract from it whatever cash he can.
And he’s probably delusional enough to think that he can.
IMHO, he’ll be very lucky if he manages to pay off the loans and investors, much less his own stake.
Laying off 3,700 employees might get him to short-term profitability, or pretty close.
Add in a bullshit “pay for a blue check” scam to mine profit from the verification system’s perceived exclusivity and… yeah, okay. I can see that.
All you’ve gotta do is not send your advertisers running for the hi-
Damnit, Elon! You had one job!