3 ms·

I don't see how Fidelity is incentivized to make Twitter look bad, they invested $20 million in the company and their assessment is that their holding is now wo

I don't see how Fidelity is incentivized to make Twitter look bad, they invested $20 million in the company and their assessment is that their holding is now worth about $5 million. If anything that claim makes Fidelity look like chumps for putting their money there.

Alupis 2y ago
That's a tiny amount of money for Fidelity. Unless they have some secret insider information that can be verified - they are guessing along with everyone else. Nobody will know the value of Twitter until Musk sells it, if ever. That's par for the course of private business. What we do know is literally all of the most important stories continue to break on Twitter. CNN and other MSM companies continue to write articles about specific Tweets, and more. Twitter remains - as it was before - the figurative public forum and no alternative offering has come anywhere close to overtaking it. Nothing has changed.
add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
Why would an investment company have a fiduciary responsibility to account for the value of its holdings lol? (Psst. You're not replying to a serious person.)
- Alupis 2y ago
  Right, so Fidelity can derive information from zero data? Ah, yes, I forgot investment firms receive standard-issue crystal balls.
  - verdverm 2y ago
    The shareholders of X (which includes Fidelity) receive internal details because they are owners, they are entitled to that information as owners.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> don't see how Fidelity is incentivized to make Twitter look bad They’re not. Valuation committees are notoriously deferential to PMs and issuers, particularly for private names.