SeaOtter

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

He did not borrow 44 billion to buy Twitter.

He put about ~13 billion dollars of debt on Twitter itself, so he had to come up with about 31 billion in equity. He was able to secure third party equity commitments of around 7 billion (Larry Ellison, the Saudis, etc.). He also held a minority interest of about 4 billion in Twitter. He funded the remaining 20 odd billion with a combination of cash (from cash holdings and selling Tesla shares in early 2022) and equity margin loans on his remaining Tesla shares. It is understood that he likely paid off most of his margin loans as he continued to sell further Tesla shares in late 2022.

The 1.5 billion interest expense you mention is just for the bank debt (that the banks still hold, and have been unable to sell), and is Twitter’s responsibility, not Elon’s.

This is a long way of saying that I think the banks will own Twitter within 6-12 months. They will not roll over like landlords, and its far more clear cut for a missed loan payment.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. I didn’t say it was

  2. I didn’t say it was

  3. I didn’t say it was

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I mean… the law itself is written in such a way that is intentionally ambiguous, and refers to delivery drivers as “workers” (rather than “employees” or “independent contractors”) and refers to the platforms as “third parties”.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I think delivery workers deserve a fair, livable wage, but I am not sure that this is the way to do this.

If this goes through, I could see this playing out in a couple ways:

  1. I would guess that fees go up to cover increased mandated wages. However, since the apps will not want headline costs to rise much more (already have a reputation for large markups, large percentage of fees, and consumer is getting more and more stressed), they could remove the ability to tip, and advertise that slightly higher fee is now “all-in” pricing, to keep headline costs similar on average. This is potentially detrimental to delivery workers depending on earnings/tip mix and shares that the apps skim from each.

  2. Adding an additional fee per order (on average $5 per order as quoted in a NYT article) on something that has relatively elastic demand, will likely be detrimental to all involved, as volumes could drop more than the increase in price. In this scenario, everyone loses: the consumer, the delivery worker, the third party, local restaurant.

  3. Adding an additional fee per order, and the apps experience little to no change in demand (relatively inelastic). This would only hurt the consumer, and would benefit delivery work and tech co’s. However, I have a hard time believing that demand for delivery is super inelastic given food inflation, state of the consumer, and generally perception on food delivery price already.

Not trying to be a corporate shill, but the economist in me is always hesitant when the solution is market interference. In reality, its probably somewhere between the extremes of 2 and 3, and determining where on that spectrum it ends up is quite nuanced.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Thanks for this! I have been using iCloud Keychain for a while and was generally satisfied. However, it wasn’t until I recently switched from desktop Safari to Arc that I considered a third party password manager, but was stuck in decision paralysis.

Given the overwhelming responses in this post, BitWarden it is!

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I understand what you are trying to do, and we’re probably of the same mindset. However, in my experience, there is no point reasoning with someone who is purposefully try to stir shit up.

Spending air time trying to convince OP that there are valid abortion scenarios takes away from women who simply do not want to carry a child. There should be no external justification needed: their body, their choice.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

That’s ironic

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

My understanding, it is reporting people who specifically elect to sign up for Threads using their Instagram account. On instagram profiles, they have been showing a badge with their Threads subscriber number that you only get when you elect to join Threads. This increases sequentially.

The highest number on the badge should give a good indication of how many Instagram users at least “claimed” their Threads account.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I remember the debate in /r/formula1point5 at the start of this year and last to determine where to draw the cutoff line.

I’ve changed my mind - removing Max alone, and it suddenly becomes very very exciting.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

What was Plan B, Ricci? I forgot.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Max topping the WCC with only his WDC points really sums of 2023 thus far…

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago
view more: ‹ prev next ›