4 ms·

It seems like loading Twitter up with debt servicing was always a bad idea, stock dip or not, considering what its revenues were like. It wasn't in great shape

It seems like loading Twitter up with debt servicing was always a bad idea, stock dip or not, considering what its revenues were like. It wasn't in great shape before but the amount of money it now has to spend servicing debt is a nightmare for anyone trying to make that company profitable. His strategy for buying it simply doesn't make sense.

fundad 3y ago
I think the influence is more important than revenue
Beldin 3y ago
Not if the endgoal is to arrive at a profitable version of Twitter, no. So maybe that's not the goal. Or maybe it is but the CEO is vastly more incompetent than those underwriting his bid anticipated.