So an internal memo with comforting talking points for frightened advertisers says Twitter is doing great.
Your link is not reporting verifiable facts, and your link does not present them as verifiable facts. Your link is simply reporting on an internal and obviously biased (as all advertising is biased) memo that they got their hands on.
Twitter is private now. Internal communications giving data to advertisers is about the best we are going to get.
Anyone still want to bet that Twitter will be gone in a month? A year?
I’ll predict that a year from now Twitter will be healthier than it is today, with more users and more revenue. I could be completely wrong, though. The future is unpredictable, and we live in destabilizing times.
Musk also says that “activist groups pressuring advertisers” are behind the drop in the number of advertisers, even as the advertisers themselves had said otherwise.
MySpace is still around too.
Data is available:
https://www.comparably.com/companies/tesla-motors/morale
Seems okay to me. Not the best, not the worst by a long shot. Employee satisfaction does not translate to political satisfaction with Musk, or align with the left’s ideas over what should make an employee happy. Recognition by managers and peers, working on products you believe in, and work being aligned with education can be more important than job perks, salary differences, occasional long hours, etc.
I have worked in places where everyone worked their asses off and almost everyone loved the job, and places where the rules were lax, employees treated extremely well, but morale was in the tank because of bad products, bad managers and a feeling that what they were doing would make no difference.
There is also a huge difference between being asked to work long hours because the company is moving fast and changing the world (SpaceX and maybe Tesla), and being asked to work long hours because your manager is a doofus who promised his bosses a schedule impossible to meet without beating his employees like mules.
Okay, try this: In twelve months, will Twitter have more users or less? Will revenue be higher or lower? Will relative activity (non-bot tweets per day) be up or down?
I say they will have more users, more activities, and more revenue than they do today.
More than today or more than when Musk took ever? Because revenue is down like 35-40%. So can Musk “grow” that back up a bit? Maybe, although I still doubt it. I predict it will be about where it is right now, maybe a bit further down. Frankly, anybody who was going to leave Twitter has probably already left.
Number of users will be down. Probably by about 5-10% or so.
Activity. No prediction. There’s no reliable way to count bot activity. No doubt Musk will claim it is way down. But Musk is known liar, so I don’t trust him.
The prediction assume Musk doesn’t do something really dumb and absolutely sets fire to Twitter. But nothing Musk is doing is helping Twitter, and I don’t see any way to see it otherwise.
That’s all fair, and thanks for offering a prediction. I also think those are realistic and possible.
It’s very difficult to make fair comparisons, though. One issue with that particular site is that metrics like “morale” and “happiness” are not consistently present – some companies have those metrics, many others do not. Another potential issue is that the mix of employee job functions might heavily skew the results. Ford, for example, ranks lower in overall culture score than Tesla, but that may just be because such a large percentage of employees in a high-volume manufacturing enterprise are assembly-line drones.
One thing I did notice, though, is that Ford has a number of recent excellence awards, most notably “Best Engineering Team 2022”. Tesla has none.
You are right, Malwarebytes didn’t specify the page where the link was l located. Yesterday, I was notified when clicking on the youtube link for Simone’s Truckla video and it popped up again while scrolling through this same thread. Maybe it was a coincidence but I don’t typically have a lot of SMDB threads open at a time.
It might just be MWB trying to show how diligently it is securing my system, by reporting false (or fake) positives 
WTF? That “story so far” of Musk’s tenure is from 7th November 2022.
You’re really not trying too hard to change your reputation for willfully posting misleading information, are you?
You had a nice story there about the stock rally, but you just couldn’t help but gild the lily with some alternative facts. (You also “exaggerated” the low in the stock.)
Didn’t see the date. It came up at the top of Google News, and I assumed it was more recent. Google News sucks. I think the conclusions in the article hold anyway. Musk has recently said activity and user counts are up.
As for the stock price, I got it by rolling over the 30 day graph low spot on a financial site and reading the tooltip. I just checked another one, and it says the low was 105.67. It doesn’t change the point in any way, and I wouldn’t lie for the sake of changing the low by a measly 3 bucks. Maybe I misread it the first time - tooltips are small and my eyes aren’t what they used to be,
But if you think that matters, you’ll be happy to know that when I said Tesla was up $7.25 that was SO hours ago. Currently, Tesla is up $16.21 on the DAY. Almost 10% of its value. Elon Musk’s net worth has gone up almost $7 billion today.
As of the middle of December Elon apparently still had 423 million shares of Tesla. So the rise in January so far has earned him about $31 billion. He also sold his Tesla shares at an average of $243, so he’s way ahead of the game still. Twitter forcing him to sell Tesla stock when he did turned out to save him a lot of money - maybe as much as he’s lost on Twitter valuation vs purchase price.
Funny how these little oversights just keep happening though, isn’t it? To the extent there’s an entire thread devoted to your negotiable relationship with facts.
The TSLA stock is currently in a breakout, but it only hit that on Jan 23rd. Prior to that it was staying well within the channel that was formed. And honestly, a movement up was likely since there had been a three legged movement down. A stock cannot go down forever (well, isn’t likely to anyway). A first leg of an upward movement happened from the 6th to 19th. This is now the second leg movement upwards. There’s in sufficient data at this to really draw much of a channel (only two points of contact including today’s price). We’ll just have to wait and see what happens. I think part of it is people that were shorting hit their stop losses but $160 is a strange place for a short stop loss based on recent trends, so I may have that wrong. I personally think people buying it right now are going to be bagholders. TSLA is still VASTLY overpriced to it financials.
Funny how you keep nitpicking irrelevant details while ignoring the larger point. But I guess that’s what you have to do when you got nuthin’ but feel compelled to attack someone anyway.
You are fuckin hilarious, dude. Maybe start looking at the dates on things before you post them
Edit: even if you didn’t see the date, did you read your own pull-out quote?
(emphasis added)
The looky-loo factor of new ownership has already been extensively discussed.
If your errors were going in both directions–if sometimes you missed something that made Musk look better, and sometimes you missed something that made him look worse–it wouldn’t be so bad. But your errors are consistently in the direction of a hagiographic view of Musk, and that points to a deep bias on your part.
Sorry, I don’t buy technical analysis. I think it’s modern numerology. The reason Tesla stock is up is fundamental: They just released an insanely good and surprising earnings report, at a time when the stock had been quite degraded not just by Musk’s antics at Twitter but because of a belief that the car industry was in the toilet and getting worse, and EVs would be facing terrible supply issues.
As a growth stock, Tesla suffered more than the mainstream auto companies on the bad news, but now is gaining faster on the good news.
Is it actually up, or was it up in 2016? At this point, I figure I gotta ask about every claim you make.
I already granted your larger point about the huge rally in the stock.
It’s just hilarious that even when the facts so strongly support the point you are trying to make, you still just couldn’t help lying, twice.
Price action as an analytical tool for examining the past of a stock has a high degree of accuracy, and has for a long time across many different markets. The problem is that the closer you get to the present there are many signals that can make a prediction difficult to make, but again as an analytical tool for examining the past trading instruments tend to follow price action rules.
Not that I want to start a tangent on price action of course.
Umm, the “irrelevant details” aren’t the basis of your “larger point”? I mean, if you want to throw your baby out with it’s bath water no one is going to stop you but you.