Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

    (www.theverge.com)
    420 points rvz | 11 comments | 31 Aug 24 13:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.893s | source | bottom
    Show context
    toomuchtodo ◴[31 Aug 24 22:51 UTC] No.41412640[source]▶
    “Masterful gambit, sir.”

    (X is facing a deep decline in revenue, cutting its valuation from $44B to ~$12B [Musk’s stake is worth ~$7B], and Musk makes a choice that drives millions of users to an alternate site: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/twitters-revenue-collapses-84...)

    replies(3): >>41412734 #>>41413298 #>>41414746 #
    1. supafastcoder ◴[01 Sep 24 00:56 UTC] No.41413298[source]▶
    I strongly believe the potential valuation and financial performance was not the primary motivation for Musk to buy Twitter, it’s simply a toy for a man worth $200+ billion.
    replies(2): >>41413370 #>>41415474 #
    2. toomuchtodo ◴[01 Sep 24 01:10 UTC] No.41413370[source]▶
    I agree, but if he valued the soft power, wouldn't you expect to him to take the survival of the platform more seriously? Or maybe it's all for the lulz and I am just a dumb peasant. Certainly, to hell with the valuation if you're going to run it as your own personal forum, but if you scare all the users and revenue away, you are left with a very expensive CRUD system you alone are posting into (and paying billions of dollars for the privilege).
    replies(1): >>41413841 #
    3. wmf ◴[01 Sep 24 02:51 UTC] No.41413841[source]▶
    Maybe Twitter will become more popular and influential now that it's banned. It could be the place to find out what the government doesn't want you to know.
    replies(1): >>41414378 #
    4. thaumasiotes ◴[01 Sep 24 04:47 UTC] No.41414378{3}[source]▶
    Back in 2020, an acquaintance of mine started ranting to me about covid when I wished her a happy Chinese new year. She was at pains to point out that she got her information from unofficial sources.
    replies(1): >>41414790 #
    5. UberFly ◴[01 Sep 24 06:34 UTC] No.41414790{4}[source]▶
    This makes very little sense.
    replies(1): >>41418358 #
    6. kelnos ◴[01 Sep 24 09:27 UTC] No.41415474[source]▶
    Oh, true. But the problem is that Musk, rich has he is, can't run Twitter indefinitely without revenue (more than he's getting today, and it's likely declining). He needs it to perform financially if it's to continue to be a going concern.
    replies(1): >>41417861 #
    7. somenameforme ◴[01 Sep 24 15:48 UTC] No.41417861[source]▶
    He's going the other route - lower costs. He got rid of the overwhelming majority of staff, moved (or is moving?) the HQ out of San Francisco and California - meaning lower costs + lower tax, and so on. So while revenue has decreased, so have costs. In later 2023 he stated that it was expected for Twitter to be profitable early in 2024. Given there was no follow up announcement I doubt this goal was achieved, but it does suggest that it's probably quite close to being in the black. And that's quite good for a company which was only made profit 2 years in its entire existence.
    replies(3): >>41417956 #>>41419031 #>>41424864 #
    8. xenospn ◴[01 Sep 24 16:00 UTC] No.41417956{3}[source]▶
    Musk expects many things. Very few come true.
    9. thaumasiotes ◴[01 Sep 24 16:52 UTC] No.41418358{5}[source]▶
    It's a demonstration by example of exactly the effect described in my parent comment. What part of it didn't make sense?
    10. mplewis ◴[01 Sep 24 18:23 UTC] No.41419031{3}[source]▶
    And you believe him? The guy who took out loans to finance the purchase of the company, which drain the company of $1.5 billion a year? I’ve got some oceanside property to sell you.
    11. cowboylowrez ◴[02 Sep 24 12:27 UTC] No.41424864{3}[source]▶
    while twitter is no longer competitive with mainstream social media sites, it has a good chance of putting a dent in 4chans numbers.