I see a tweet by Elon Musk every single time I log on to twitter and I don’t even follow him. ugh
Musk seems to have a naive notion that the libs are ruining free speech and he will fix it.
I think he is naive about this.
I have seen a number of people post/tweet to the effect of “hoo boy, Musk doesn’t know what he’s getting into. Owning Twitter is way harder than it looks.”
And to that, I can only give the same answer I gave when people said Trump would certainly resign the presidency because it’s too darned hard for him. Or that Republicans would rue the consequences of finally killing Roe:
It’s only hard if you care about the consequences of screwing it up.
Musk does not care about Twitter as a thriving company. Musk does not care about free speech. Musk doesn’t care if the US turns into an authoritarian backwater. Musk is in this to spite his haters, for lulz, and reap attention from his fawning adolescent fanboys. If it causes any harm to his own interests, he’ll laugh it off while blaming gub’mint regulations, which will also redound to his benefit.
There’s also a significant chance his buy won’t go through at all, since Tesla stock has dropped precipitously and may no longer suffice as collateral for leverage. Musk will suffer no embarrassment. He’ll laugh and say “boy, I got you all riled up, which was my aim this entire time.”
Nothing is hard if you’re rich and don’t really give a shit about anything. Expensive and wasteful maybe, but never hard, not for a moment.
Musk’s views on free speech - and on pretty much everything else - begin and end with how it affects him.
Offering to reinstate Trump isn’t about free speech; it’s about garnering support for himself. And his views on actual free speech are “I get to say whatever I want without consequence”.
I would think that he would care about losing a $50 billion investment.
My hope from the time that he announced he was going to buy twitter is that it bankrupts him, forcing him to sell SpaceX and make it public.
There’s no way he could actually lose $50 billion here. Twitter controls too much data for its value to fall to zero. Most likely they’d part it out between different buyers, and Musk would lose a few billion on paper. He’d claim victory against the boogeyman of censorship, and would be rewarded with what he most prizes: the unending praise of powerful men and his adolescent fanboys.
It’s real value is in the users though. And if it becomes a Nazi encrusted porn site with questionable legality, people will move on to something else.
And the users are what is valuable, but it is various celebrities and influencers who bring those users. If they chose to start promoting themselves on another platform, then the users will follow.
Twitter has no intrinsic value outside of maybe a few hundred million or billion in data centers and property.
Well, I am a fan of SpaceX, and I do appreciate what Tesla has done to move the Overton window on EV’s, but I really detest Musk himself. If we could have SpaceX sans Musk, that would be the best of all worlds.
Elon Musk’s net worth is $237 billion. He literally would not miss $50 billion.
If he lost $50 billion he would still be the wealthiest person in the world.
$50 billion would sting a little, but as I said above, there’s no conceivable way he could lose that much on Twitter. He has many offramps before things get that bad.
This thread has me pondering what “censorship” means to different people…
For the " Murica! F!ck Yeah!" crowd: “I wanna say whatever I want, whenever I want, on whatever platform I want. If the snowflakes can’t handle it and try to stop me - that’s censorship! Freedum!”.
For the “Let’s be reasonable…” crowd: “I appreciate that people cannot just make-up stuff and say it without being challenged. Scrubbing misleading statements, dangerous opinion, or just plain lies from the public discourse is not censorship.”
I don’t know how we are ever going to close the gap there, but if Musk opens up Twitter to become the wild west where anything goes, I agree with the above posts suggesting that people who do not care to be part of that will look for alternatives, and Twitter will descend into a backwater where the other right-wing media sites are wallowing.
Funny thing is, if you go on those people’s websites and post something contrary, they will ban you real fast but with zero sense of hypocrisy.
Try the subReddit /r/Conservative or /r/Trump and post something that is not diehard red and see how long you last there.
(actually really try it…kinda fun and being banned is a badge of honor IMO)
I honestly think this board is one of the best examples of “free speech” on the internet. It is well moderated and good conversations can be had. It does not allow people to say absolutely anything but you can say a lot and get your message out (usually…even if Loony Tunes).
Well, he lost about $30 billion this week.
Half his net worth is in Tesla, which is somewhere between massively and stupidly overvalued. If it dropped to 5% of what it is, it would be more in line with car companies that produce far more vehicles.
Much of his remaining worth is in SpaceX.
Start losing a few billion here, a few billion there, soon enough you start talking about real money.
One of those offramps is to not go through with the sale of twitter in the first place.
So, he takes over, and removes all moderation, making it a utopia for free speech. It is immediately overwhelmed with hate speech, threats of violence, and child pornography. Everyone not into those things leaves, including the employees. How much is twitter worth now?
I can respect him putting his money where his mouth is, it’s just that his mouth is where it is stupid.
That value isn’t cash on hand. It’s based mostly on Tesla stock. And his Twitter shenanigans have had an effect on the value of that stock (it’s slid pretty fast down since the announcement). Should he run Twitter into the ground, there’s the real possibility it affects the value of Tesla stock even more, which I’m pretty sure he’d care about.
But all this assumes Musk is some kind of genius mastermind, rather than somebody perhaps a little smarter than average, good at influencing bros and investors online, and perhaps overconfident of his own ability based on the successes he’s had elsewhere.
No “wealthiest person in the world” is based on cash on hand. It is all investments for the lot.
I think it is safe to say it is nearly impossible for Musk to die a poor man. He will always be massively wealthy. If he loses 99% of his wealth he is still worth over $2 billion. That is still waaay more than anyone can reasonably spend in a lifetime without giving it away.
And surely he has bags of cash and/or gold stashed here and there just in case (I would).
Sure, but that wasn’t the standard given.
It was suggested at Musk wouldn’t care if Twitter tanked and he lost what he invested in it. That’s almost certainly not true because all that money is interconnected and will affect more than just the Twitter pile of money.
He almost certainly would care because even billionaires care about losing tens of billions of dollars. Also, he’s egocentric enough to care that he’s seen by others losing billions.
Not to mention, what advertisers will still pay to have their messages on the platform? I work at a marketing agency and hear major brands may drop it like a flaming turd if Trump is allowed back.
It is possible to lose more wealth than you own.
You are worth, on paper, say, $100 billion. You leverage that to borrow $50 billion to buy another company. Meanwhile, the assets you own decrease in value to $20 billion, and the company you bought is worth $10*. Now you owe other people $20 billion.
Spend on personal needs? Sure. Blow on investments that you are making for non-fiduciary reasons, well, sometimes having that money just means you can dig a bigger hole.
*ETA: I suppose that should be $10 billion, but it’s more amusing if twitter actually was shot down in value to actually $10.
I think Musk has his flaws but I don’t agree he does not care about Twitter at all. I think he will seek to uphold its value. Yes, he hopes Trump will post and wants that credit and influence FWIW. Yes, this is about lulz. But it’s also lots of free advertising, coverage and intangibles. And since a realistic competitor is not on the horizon, Twitter’s value will not soon plummet.
What about zero?
Not saying McKinsey is a super-reliable source, but, well, could be.
As for Twitter banning national leaders, whether of China, Russia, or the U.S., I’m a John Stuart Mill guy and think it a mistake.
The 18 years doesn’t mean go bankrupt. It also includes mergers and being bought out (like Twitter).