2 ms·
> Nobody can perfectly predict the future, but reducing expenses drastically seems like a good step forward in achieving their goal. Cutting expenses is one pa
by rchaud 3y ago
> Nobody can perfectly predict the future, but reducing expenses drastically seems like a good step forward in achieving their goal.
Cutting expenses is one part of the equation. The other is debt servicing.
There's $13 billion in loans used to buy Twitter, that now sit on Twitter's balance sheet. There's a minimum of $1.2 billion in annual interest payments on those loans.
- logicalmonster 3y ago> There's a minimum of $1.2 billion in annual interest payments on those loans. That's a big number, but in an of itself doesn't really say anything conclusively without knowing the rest of their expenses as well as revenue. Since X is now a private company, does the public have access to that other info other than making guesses based on past years' financial filings?
- pc_edwin 3y agoCutting expenses doesn't really put in perspective. Head count was cut by over 80%. Everything was switched to austerity mode. These are not minimum wage workers, these are thousands of people who on average got payed more than the president. Beyond that, we also have twitter blue. I'm guessing they have crossed one million by now. Thats bordering $100m ARR. Then there is the advertising revenue, Twitter made $5 billion in revenue with a total loss of 220m. Even if advertising was cut by half, thats still $2.5B in income. Honestly I'm surprised they are not profitable now, let alone next year.