this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
845 points (93.9% liked)
Technology
59732 readers
2647 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So let me get this straight. Musk bought Twitter for 44 billion, fired most of the staff, destroyed bunch of features and functionality, scared advertisers away and now changed the brand's name. Wouldn't it be less hassle to just start a platform and pay people $100 each as a sign up bonus?
That's absurd! Assuming 4 billion in actual startup costs, at the purchase price they could only afford to do that for...
four hundred million people. LOL.
Jesus this was a dumb transaction.
Just for perspective, the U.S. population is 300 million. Add on the 67 million population of the UK and you still have plenty of change left over.
Jesus, this was a stupid decision.
Yup. Four hundred million is more than the entire daily userbase of twitter.
Damn, this comment thread was a level of enlightenment I was not expecting this morning 🤯
There are currently ~366 million Twitter users.
If Musk paid each person $100 to start using "X" instead, he'd spend $36.6 billion, leaving him with $7.4 billion to actually build the rest of the website and infrastructure.
Yup, he's stupid.
He could also pay his rent and other bills.
Copying my comment from another thread:
But they're not just re-branding. Twitter is now under some kind of corporate shell company. I haven't seen much coverage of that, but my suspicion is that it's intended to act as some kind of insulator to contain Twitter's debts.
Like when they break a company into pieces and put everyone's debts and no assets into a single part and then that part declares bankruptcy and all the debt magically goes away, leaving everything else with lots of assets and no debts and a future that looks really rosy. I can't help but think that this is something similar to that.