A year after he bought Twitter for $44 billion, Musk thinks the company is now worth $19 billion, a 55 percent drop.

Let’s recap what he did to Twitter, I will go first:

  • Changed the original name Twitter to X.
    • yata@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      8 months ago

      A lot of journalists, politicians and influencers are really reluctant to let it go. I guess those are the ones still keeping it somewhat afloat.

      It should be more publicly shamed if you keep being a part of his insanity.

      • Fisk400@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s because no other social media platform currently meets their requirements. Other platforms either functions significantly different from twitter or it lacks the reach that a politician needs in order for it to be worth their time.

        • Eddie Trax@dmv.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          8 months ago

          “Worth their time” ? Copy\paste the text into Mastodon. Post Done

          I can empathize with the reluctance to completely jump ship but it costs nothing (both money and time) to cross post to another platform.

          • Fisk400@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Last time I was on mastodon during one of the many twitter migrations there was a long post saying that people should hold of on auto-blocking people that don’t caption the images they post because new user haven’t learned the cultural rules of mastodon. Is that a thing? I don’t know, could be a particular part of mastodon, I don’t know. Point is that serious public figures have been trained to be careful when adopting new social media.

            • Eddie Trax@dmv.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              8 months ago

              Hi. Nobody here 👋 I enjoy Mastodon and although nowhere near the same engagement as Shitter, I enjoy the content more. Some people like different things

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yep. I mean in the end it has no product. It’s just billboard/ad space, in the world of commerce. Sure, it’s a lot of ad space, but ad space in the digital world is also effectively endless, so the percentage still isn’t actually that relevant as it can shift in a moment’s notice.

      Say… if a neonazi buys the platform and brings all his friends with him.

      But beyond an office he’s not even paying for and so on, Xitter got… nothing. They have no actual product that can be liquidated, no supply chains worth any money, nothing to rent/sell out beyond said adspace. Like many digital companies they rely entirely on hype for all their perceived value.

    • donuts@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Honestly it’s probably not… Estimates aside, who would even want to buy Twitter in its current incarnation?

      • Fisk400@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It still has a big enough user base and brand recognition that they could put things back on course if they really went for it. The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter.

          That’s like saying “he suffered no permanent damage except the removal of his spine”

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          Brand recognition? That’s ironic. The Twitter brand had recognition. But you can’t say X, you have to say “X, formerly Twitter.”

          Otherwise you’re right, of course, But I can’t see it being resurrected.

          • Fisk400@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yes, twitter is the brand. The first action of a sane buyer would be to put the bird logo back. 20 billions of its current value comes from the fact that they still own that name.

            • MagicShel@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you’re saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees.

        • donuts@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I don’t know about the active userbase so who knows. Personally I don’t think the Twitter brand is as strong as it was a year and change ago.

          Even without the change to X, is there anyone who feels that Twitter is anything more than a shell of its former self? It’s not as simple as just bringing back the bird, in my opinion.