Devin Nunez responded to the last rumor of Trump being reinstated with a pretty clear no on his behalf. If Elon did this stunt without discussing it with Trump or his team first it just looks sad and desperate. He's basically pissed off even more Twitter users/sponsors and gets no Trump in return.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Elon Musk Tw𝕏tt𝕏r Dr𝕏m𝕏 |𝕏T| Let’s keep it here. (Parody) 🔵 Official ꕤ
- Thread starter GK86
- Start date
Devin Nunez responded to the last rumor of Trump being reinstated with a pretty clear no on his behalf. If Elon did this stunt without discussing it with Trump or his team first it just looks sad and desperate. He's basically pissed off even more Twitter users/sponsors and gets no Trump in return.
That. Is. Incredible.
That. Is. Incredible. Musk's Trump card just dissolved with the same fervor as his repution did.
I'll say this about Trump, occasionally his enemies are my enemies such as Musk and DeSantis. Let them fight, indeed.
Of all the FF movies, 'Tokyo Drift' was selected. They have great taste.
I'm probably going to sound stupid here so how does Elon intend to keep Twitter afloat if most of the advertisers go away? Isn't that their bread and butter when it comes to revenue?
is it wrong to want to see Musk sued into oblivion so that we never have to see or hear from him again?
Even if Twitter was still a completely neutral site I don't think that Trump would be interested in coming back but why would he ever want to come back now and play 2nd fiddle to Elon on his platform?
You don't sound stupid at all. The "genius" who spent $44B on an enterprise without understanding how it functions, what its purpose is and how it made money is the stupid one.
This is why he's pushing Twitter Blue and mulling over the idea of making Twitter a fully paid service.
The whole thing is fucked with the amount of debt on it.
Thanks everyone for the explanation, I've been uh, sort of living under a rock when it comes to tech news like this lol. Sounds to me like Twitter is toast but will probably take a while. I'd give it another 5 months tops.
Subscriber and evolution to his wechat like app called X and also something about turning twitter to a bank and something with crypto.
Don't forget there's also been leaks suggesting going the only fans route too and letting people offer adult paid content.
I mean he's only saying it bc going back to Twitter would be admitting his own Twitter-clone is a cringey failure lol
Still an L for musk though. And that's hilarious.
I'm expecting a "jk bro. I just wanted to weed out bot farms" tweet from musk sooner than later.
He possibly wasn't going to say anything, then was told the poll moved from 60:40 to whatever it is now (53:47??) and decided to pre-empt any rejection or close contest.
Mind you, I'm not aware of the timelines in all this....I no longer have access to Twitter.
Actually that wasn't that bad of a idea, since it would be a patreon like system as far as I know.
For alot of my artist friend in Japan, they like the idea, since most of their audience is on twitter, and they take comission through Skeb.jp.
But they don't have a patreon like system, there's fanbox and ci-en and a few more. and they aren't friendly toward english fan, and Patreon isn't usable for most of them.
Yeah the idea of making Twitter to be another sub platform for creators isn't necessarily awful, but of course it's a matter of execution and I think at twitters scale it would barely be a blip in their revenue sheet
The US government still isn't sure about Elon Musk's Twitter
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23382327/VRG_Illo_STK022_K_Radtke_Musk_Twitter_Upside_Down.jpg)
The US government still isn’t sure about Elon Musk’s Twitter
The government’s reportedly looking into Twitter’s foreign investors.
www.theverge.com
The entire George Hotz diversion of this thread was utterly puzzling to read when considering the context that he is being hired as an intern. You might have assumed he was going to be senior director of software engineering with how some people were trying to frame his skills as a mismatch for the job.
I think these posts help to highlight Musk's biggest misstep with Twitter: he is seemingly making impulsive decisions without any sort of deliberation that's supported by a planned vision.
His firing of half of Twitters staff is something that could conceivably be weathered; at least in that case he had the luxury of choosing who would be leaving the company. His resignation offer last week was a strategic blunder of significant proportions, though. In the latter case, you have no idea who is leaving your company. You could be losing a massive amount of invaluable institutional knowledge, critical systems staff could leave, and you may be left with little ability to hire and train new staff if you have critical gaps to fill. The resignation offer was a move wherein you can't reasonably predict the outcome. It honestly feels like something that would be antithetical to fundamental strategic teachings in a book like The Art of War.
Imagine if an entire team/department at your workplace all resigned. Who would be left at the company that understood the role and responsibilities of those jobs? Who could make competent hiring decisions if managers who have a first-hand understanding of the role are all gone? Who could train new staff once they are hired? What if your payroll staff left? Or accounts payable? Or your legal team? Or critical infrastructure engineers? How long could you proceed if you're overwhelmed with problems and lawsuits when you're lacking the personnel who are equipped respond?
When an new CEO joins a company, there is typically a transition period where they learn all aspects of the business and current operations, have numerous meetings with staff of all levels to build a base of knowledge, and then map out an informed strategic vision throughout that process. Here, there are no indications Musk has done any of that. By all accounts, he has joined an existing large, profit-driven business that he knows very little about and has made immediate, sweeping, unpredictable changes without understanding the implications of those decisions. I also stress that Twitter was profit-driven because that's what presumably guided its business structure, staffing, etc. As a publicly traded company, it's illogical to assume Twitter was employing 300% more staff than it needed to effectively grow revenues and generate a profit.
You have to wonder how much of these decisions were driven by Musk's ego/personality and how much were because he understands Twitter was a terrible investment that he never truly wanted and he needs to quickly reign in the rate the company burns through revenues lest he risks destroying his personal fortune.
So are people here voting no on Elon's poll to reinstate Trump on Twitter? I know he may have said no, but do you really think he'd resist?
Jesus, lol. I haven't seen this one beforeElon: I love you Daddy Trump!
Trump:
No, we're saying no to Elon musk
Also, it's not a serious poll.
The US government still isn't sure about Elon Musk's Twitter
The US government still isn’t sure about Elon Musk’s Twitter
The government’s reportedly looking into Twitter’s foreign investors.
Maybe the United States Government should have thought of that before they allowed Twitter to be sold off. They had plenty of opportunity to step in and deny it. They don't get to come up now and pretend like they had no say in the matter. Fucking morons.
I agree they move way too friggin slow. However, ON WHAT GROUNDS could they have blocked Elon buying Twitter?
AFAIK, there's isn't a "rich oligarchs aren't allowed to buy large companies" law. Unless there's a conflict of interest or antitrust concerns with another one of the companies Elon owns / runs, there just isn't enough there to just put the kibosh on the deal. And Twitter is quite a bit outside the purview of Elon's other ventures.
Maybe there's an obvious one I'm missing, I just don't see how they could legally have prevented it.
Every media company on the planet will.
Viacom (now Paramount) sued YouTube so hard they had to build the copyright strike system to get out of it.
The fact you're asking the question and he didn't means you are smarter than the richest man in the world lol.
You're right, he's not going to be able to.
Potential use of insider knowledge about competitors as part of Twitter's ad and marketing data on rival car companies.
Yeah. GTFO with that. If you were worried about disreputable countries being investors and having access to very sensitive info, the time to act was before the sale. I agree this is a huge concern, but the horses are already out of the barn on this one.
As others pointed out, there's several grounds in which they could have used to stop the sell. But here's a question to think about as well: do they even really need a grounds to deny something like this? Like what is stopping their regulating board from just saying no? Like obviously if they did that it would open them up to legal challenges to force a sale or merger, but I actually don't think there is anything stopping them from just saying, 'Nah, dawg' initially.
Musk to lift Trump's ban
It would have been hard for the board to block the takeover without voiding their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. He bought it at such a ridiculous premium, at least 2x what the shares would have actually been worth had it collapsed. They could have some up with some reason but that's not the role of a board that represents shareholder interests. Their role is to return the best value for shareholders, and in many cases that means having the site make reasonable choices that are good for business. In this case it let meaning Elon make a near hostile takeover of all shares, take the company private, and perhaps drive it into the ground.
Don't forget 2 months ago the board was in the process of suing Elon to force him to buy it.
It's crazy to be that Elon bought this dumpster fire for what is the equivalent of line 15 NFL franchises.
Don't forget 2 months ago the board was in the process of suing Elon to force him to buy it.
It's crazy to be that Elon bought this dumpster fire for what is the equivalent of line 15 NFL franchises.
Likely what would have happened no matter what the results. I'd love it if he just never tweeted or he just deleted his account lol
They ABSOLUTELY need a reason. "Just cuz" isn't acceptable in the realm of business and laws. Also, "regulatory board"? Which one? The overworked and understaffed FTC? The deadlocked FCC that the Senate refuses to confirm a 5th member?
That's a slightly better reason, I can almost see that maybe getting some traction once Elon got the Saudi's involved. But it's still not a slam dunk, because exposing user data is not INHERENTLY a national security issue. They'd have to prove foreign powers would have access to private communications of government officials, which Elon could just pinky promise not to do. Whether or not a judge buys that defense to block the sale would be up for debate.
Trump will likely just post a tweet advertising Truth Social or whatever far right platform he's invested in....
There really aren't grounds for the government to block a company being taken private by a shareholder. Remember, Elon already owned a major stake in Twitter when this whole drama started to unfold.
This isn't like a merger of two public companies where the SEC has clear authority. It's the board deciding to take Twitter private, buying out shareholders, by one of them putting up a massive stake. There might be some times in the last 100 years where the feds have blocked a company from going private, but I don't know any.
Not to mention too that shareholders are being bailed out by this because Elon massively overpaid for it. Twitter shares were probably worth $18 or $20/share, Elon paid $54.20/share.