3 ms·
[citation needed] It was profitable, and it's trivially easy to verify that it was profitable, because it was a public company before it got bought.
by VHRanger 3y ago
[citation needed]
It was profitable, and it's trivially easy to verify that it was profitable, because it was a public company before it got bought.
- tgma 3y agoYes, it is trivially easy to verify (yet you asked for a citation!) in the last 10-Q filing by Twitter, Inc. available to the public, the preceding three months of June 2022 their net income/loss per share is negative ($0.35) and was facing declining revenue. Citation: https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000141809122000147/twtr-20220630.htm https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/0001... Over the entire operation of the company up and until Musk's acquisition in aggregate, Twitter has spent more money than it made. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/delisted/TWTR/twitter/eps-earnings-per-share-diluted https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/delisted/TWTR/twitter/eps...
- acdha 3y agoThat shows they lost money that year only because of of a one-time settlement for a 2016 lawsuit. Without that they’d have had a profitable year as in 2019 and 2021, as per your own link. The problem they have now is that Musk’s instability cost them a lot of revenue but his poor management saddled them with significantly more debt. Now they need to make multiple times more profit than their best year just to pay his loan servicing.