7 ms·

What if he just loses a big pile of money while Twitter twists in the wind because there isn't much of a plan? That seems likely enough really.

merely-unlikely 4y ago
If that's the case, it won't be so different from when Twitter was run as a public co.
- _hypx 4y ago
  The social media bubble has burst (see stock prices of other social media companies). This is a quick path to having Twitter shut down or go bankrupt.
  - insanitybit 4y ago
    Given the state of the economy if you go by "look at other X companies" you can say that every industry was a bubble that popped.
    - maxerickson 4y ago
      US GDP increased significantly in the most recent quarter.
- eigart 4y ago
  Musk Twitter and Musk have way bigger loans than public twitter.
  - falcolas 4y ago
    Which also means Twitter has much bigger payments to make. That will have some impact on its path as well.
    - XorNot 4y ago
      The world is full of stories of companies desperately looking for revenue when their on the downswing and I can't think of any which have worked out.
      - andruby 4y ago
        how about Apple at the end of the 1990’s? They were almost ready to fold, got a new iCEO, and completely turned around to become the world’s most valuable company two decades later.
        DeathArrow 4y ago
        They wouldn't have succeeded without much needed cash from Microsoft.
        simondotau 4y ago
        It wasn't strictly cash, it was an agreement to buy $150 million of stock as part of a Judge-approved settlement of a lawsuit which Apple was winning. The settlement was a win-win for both sides, because it meant Apple remained a healthy company and Microsoft got to avoid paying out BILLIONS to Apple. Instead they bought stock which they sold for a tidy profit ($550 million) a few years later. (Fun fact: if Microsoft hadn't sold this $150 million investment in Apple stock, it would be worth $120 BILLION today and this shareholding would be Microsoft's single most profitable business unit.)
        sircastor 4y ago
        One of the important parts of that deal was Microsoft promising to develop Office for the Mac. There were definitely competing products out there, but the Mac needed Office.
        simondotau 4y ago
        It's really impractical to second guess history, but I don't think Office was quite as necessary as people say. Its absence definitely would have hurt sales on the margins, but it certainly didn't affect the majority of Apple's customers. The reasons why people owned computers was exploding in the late 90s, with the advent of the internet and the home digital media revolution.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  I feel we have a generic tendency of looking at downward trends and assuming that shocking radical change can’t make it worse. As history tells, it sure can. The old Twitter was a lost cow looking for pasture and moving very little in fear of getting more lost. For better and worse it had stability. We can assume that stability is now gone through the window.
- insanitybit 4y ago
  There's a massive difference because Twitter is now owned through a massive debt finance.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Except the previous owners, hated by the right, got their money.
Beltalowda 4y ago
Isn't that kind of the story of Twitter thus far already? Certainly on the financial front they never seemed to have much of a plan, and on the product side things always seemed like a bit of a mess to me as well. Some fresh leadership might not be a bad thing for Twitter. Whether Musk is the right person for that...
- tptacek 4y ago
  What these comparative analyses keep missing is that Musk Twitter is an LBO company with billions in loans on its books. It's private, which takes public shareholder pressure off, but it's also directly losing billions of dollars in debt service. The pressure to generate some kind of stable income, soon, is probably immense. It's worth keeping in mind that despite the brave face, Musk didn't want to buy Twitter. In fact: he desperately didn't want to buy Twitter. He's been forced to do so by the Delaware courts.
  - mechanical_bear 4y ago
    No, he just tried to use the courts to leverage a better deal. Imo, he always intended to buy Twitter, it was just part of the dance.
    - TigeriusKirk 4y ago
      I agree. We know they were meeting to discuss a lower price throughout the process, but no agreement was reached. Not surprising if Twitter felt they were very likely to win, why accept less? But they did discuss it. It's more accurate to say Musk didn't want to buy Twitter for $44 billion. His timing on his bid really sucked. He might have saved half or more if he'd waited a few months.
      - arlcode 4y ago
        What baffles me is that he would have just followed the tried and tested procedures of acquiring a company he would have paid less and would have had a chance to reconsider if he reaely wanted to during due diligence. Instead he made a take-it-or-leave-it offer with a ludicrously tight schedule and locked himself into an unfavorable deal without any obvious reason. I am certain there is a bad decision in there sometimes and I'm wondering what it it might be. A small part of me thinks that maybe he was uncertain and scared that he would back out so he took that option off the table preemptively.
grecy 4y ago
Looking at all musk has achieved so far - despite (or because of?) boards of experts adamant it couldn’t be done - I think it’s immensely clear a plan is something he clearly has and works very hard towards. Obviously many people will disagree with his plan, though I’m 100% certain he has one, and will make it happen.
- andirk 4y ago
  I'm 100% certain he is quite literally the biggest internet troll of all time. His words have caused volatility in crypto and stonk markets, and all as jokes to himself. He demanded his California workers continue working in large in-person groups despite a deadly virus pandemic without a vaccine at the time. His plan was to dangle a carrot in front of Twitter that he'd buy, then pull the rug out. He once again violated really commonsense ETF/FCC/whatever laws and once again got bit. He's a genius in many ways, and a playground bully in others.
  - insanitybit 4y ago
    Which ways is he a genius? I don't know much about him but as far as I can tell he's just an engineer who had a very rich father. Did he invent something that I'm not aware of? Genuinely asking, I would not be surprised to learn that I've missed something.
    - imgabe 4y ago
      Lots of people have rich fathers. Almost none of them found multiple multi-billion dollar companies and become the wealthiest person in the world. Do you think there's not anything different? If "having a rich father" is the only thing that matters, why isn't everyone with a rich father a billionaire?
      - insanitybit 4y ago
        > Almost none of them found multiple multi-billion dollar companies and become the wealthiest person in the world. Do you think there's not anything different? Lots of stuff is different. I know lots of people with very very wealthy parents. They don't want to run businesses... so they don't. The number of people who have the will and means is probably quite a lot smaller than the people who have the means. Anyway you've just dodged the question by implying "surely there must be something" but I'm asking what it is. To clarify further, I would consider the marks of a genius to be someone who is either a prodigy (ie: exhibits mastery of a subject at a very early age or with little experience) or who has made significant and particularly novel contributions to a field or multiple fields. Maybe that's Elon, I don't know.
jonas21 4y ago
That's certainly possible. But which of the following would you think is most likely to succeed? (a) a company trying to build electric cars at a time when there was zero consumer demand for them and the battery technology was nowhere near good enough (b) a company trying to launch things into space when the vast majority of nations in the world were unable to do so and even NASA seemed like it had lost its way (c) a popular social media app with 400M users and maybe some issues with product direction
- majormajor 4y ago
  You gotta look both at odds and also at returns... You bet on (a) and (b) because nobody else has pulled it off so if you can do it, you can win big, and you aren't just one of many players in a crowded sea. (c) is a rough bet since you're already huge but you still have a lot of competition and it's a crowded market and you haven't always made as much money per user as people would like...
posterboy 4y ago
Isn't that reminiscent of Bezos buying a news paper as public mouth piece?!
- newswasboring 4y ago
  I don't think Jeff had to take out loans to buy Washington post. That changes a lot.
  - posterboy 4y ago
    Kind of did, indirectly. Wasn't the shop operating at a loss to boot out the competition?

merely-unlikely 4y ago

If that's the case, it won't be so different from when Twitter was run as a public co.

_hypx 4y ago
The social media bubble has burst (see stock prices of other social media companies). This is a quick path to having Twitter shut down or go bankrupt.
- insanitybit 4y ago
  Given the state of the economy if you go by "look at other X companies" you can say that every industry was a bubble that popped.
  - maxerickson 4y ago
    US GDP increased significantly in the most recent quarter.
eigart 4y ago
Musk Twitter and Musk have way bigger loans than public twitter.
- falcolas 4y ago
  Which also means Twitter has much bigger payments to make. That will have some impact on its path as well.
  - XorNot 4y ago
    The world is full of stories of companies desperately looking for revenue when their on the downswing and I can't think of any which have worked out.
    - andruby 4y ago
      how about Apple at the end of the 1990’s? They were almost ready to fold, got a new iCEO, and completely turned around to become the world’s most valuable company two decades later.
      - DeathArrow 4y ago
        They wouldn't have succeeded without much needed cash from Microsoft.
        simondotau 4y ago
        It wasn't strictly cash, it was an agreement to buy $150 million of stock as part of a Judge-approved settlement of a lawsuit which Apple was winning. The settlement was a win-win for both sides, because it meant Apple remained a healthy company and Microsoft got to avoid paying out BILLIONS to Apple. Instead they bought stock which they sold for a tidy profit ($550 million) a few years later. (Fun fact: if Microsoft hadn't sold this $150 million investment in Apple stock, it would be worth $120 BILLION today and this shareholding would be Microsoft's single most profitable business unit.)
        sircastor 4y ago
        One of the important parts of that deal was Microsoft promising to develop Office for the Mac. There were definitely competing products out there, but the Mac needed Office.
        simondotau 4y ago
        It's really impractical to second guess history, but I don't think Office was quite as necessary as people say. Its absence definitely would have hurt sales on the margins, but it certainly didn't affect the majority of Apple's customers. The reasons why people owned computers was exploding in the late 90s, with the advent of the internet and the home digital media revolution.
makeitdouble 4y ago
I feel we have a generic tendency of looking at downward trends and assuming that shocking radical change can’t make it worse. As history tells, it sure can. The old Twitter was a lost cow looking for pasture and moving very little in fear of getting more lost. For better and worse it had stability. We can assume that stability is now gone through the window.
insanitybit 4y ago
There's a massive difference because Twitter is now owned through a massive debt finance.
themitigating 4y ago
Except the previous owners, hated by the right, got their money.

Beltalowda 4y ago

Isn't that kind of the story of Twitter thus far already? Certainly on the financial front they never seemed to have much of a plan, and on the product side things always seemed like a bit of a mess to me as well. Some fresh leadership might not be a bad thing for Twitter. Whether Musk is the right person for that...

tptacek 4y ago
What these comparative analyses keep missing is that Musk Twitter is an LBO company with billions in loans on its books. It's private, which takes public shareholder pressure off, but it's also directly losing billions of dollars in debt service. The pressure to generate some kind of stable income, soon, is probably immense. It's worth keeping in mind that despite the brave face, Musk didn't want to buy Twitter. In fact: he desperately didn't want to buy Twitter. He's been forced to do so by the Delaware courts.
- mechanical_bear 4y ago
  No, he just tried to use the courts to leverage a better deal. Imo, he always intended to buy Twitter, it was just part of the dance.
  - TigeriusKirk 4y ago
    I agree. We know they were meeting to discuss a lower price throughout the process, but no agreement was reached. Not surprising if Twitter felt they were very likely to win, why accept less? But they did discuss it. It's more accurate to say Musk didn't want to buy Twitter for $44 billion. His timing on his bid really sucked. He might have saved half or more if he'd waited a few months.
    - arlcode 4y ago
      What baffles me is that he would have just followed the tried and tested procedures of acquiring a company he would have paid less and would have had a chance to reconsider if he reaely wanted to during due diligence. Instead he made a take-it-or-leave-it offer with a ludicrously tight schedule and locked himself into an unfavorable deal without any obvious reason. I am certain there is a bad decision in there sometimes and I'm wondering what it it might be. A small part of me thinks that maybe he was uncertain and scared that he would back out so he took that option off the table preemptively.

grecy 4y ago

Looking at all musk has achieved so far - despite (or because of?) boards of experts adamant it couldn’t be done - I think it’s immensely clear a plan is something he clearly has and works very hard towards. Obviously many people will disagree with his plan, though I’m 100% certain he has one, and will make it happen.

andirk 4y ago
I'm 100% certain he is quite literally the biggest internet troll of all time. His words have caused volatility in crypto and stonk markets, and all as jokes to himself. He demanded his California workers continue working in large in-person groups despite a deadly virus pandemic without a vaccine at the time. His plan was to dangle a carrot in front of Twitter that he'd buy, then pull the rug out. He once again violated really commonsense ETF/FCC/whatever laws and once again got bit. He's a genius in many ways, and a playground bully in others.
- insanitybit 4y ago
  Which ways is he a genius? I don't know much about him but as far as I can tell he's just an engineer who had a very rich father. Did he invent something that I'm not aware of? Genuinely asking, I would not be surprised to learn that I've missed something.
  - imgabe 4y ago
    Lots of people have rich fathers. Almost none of them found multiple multi-billion dollar companies and become the wealthiest person in the world. Do you think there's not anything different? If "having a rich father" is the only thing that matters, why isn't everyone with a rich father a billionaire?
    - insanitybit 4y ago
      > Almost none of them found multiple multi-billion dollar companies and become the wealthiest person in the world. Do you think there's not anything different? Lots of stuff is different. I know lots of people with very very wealthy parents. They don't want to run businesses... so they don't. The number of people who have the will and means is probably quite a lot smaller than the people who have the means. Anyway you've just dodged the question by implying "surely there must be something" but I'm asking what it is. To clarify further, I would consider the marks of a genius to be someone who is either a prodigy (ie: exhibits mastery of a subject at a very early age or with little experience) or who has made significant and particularly novel contributions to a field or multiple fields. Maybe that's Elon, I don't know.

jonas21 4y ago

That's certainly possible. But which of the following would you think is most likely to succeed? (a) a company trying to build electric cars at a time when there was zero consumer demand for them and the battery technology was nowhere near good enough (b) a company trying to launch things into space when the vast majority of nations in the world were unable to do so and even NASA seemed like it had lost its way (c) a popular social media app with 400M users and maybe some issues with product direction

majormajor 4y ago
You gotta look both at odds and also at returns... You bet on (a) and (b) because nobody else has pulled it off so if you can do it, you can win big, and you aren't just one of many players in a crowded sea. (c) is a rough bet since you're already huge but you still have a lot of competition and it's a crowded market and you haven't always made as much money per user as people would like...

posterboy 4y ago

Isn't that reminiscent of Bezos buying a news paper as public mouth piece?!

newswasboring 4y ago
I don't think Jeff had to take out loans to buy Washington post. That changes a lot.
- posterboy 4y ago
  Kind of did, indirectly. Wasn't the shop operating at a loss to boot out the competition?