←back to thread

543 points donohoe | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.41s | source
Show context
Hoasi ◴[] No.44511157[source]
X has been nothing short of an exercise in brand destruction. However, despite all the drama, it still stands, it still exists, and it remains relevant.
replies(23): >>44511323 #>>44511451 #>>44511453 #>>44511457 #>>44511712 #>>44512087 #>>44512184 #>>44512275 #>>44512704 #>>44513825 #>>44513960 #>>44514302 #>>44514688 #>>44516258 #>>44517308 #>>44517368 #>>44517871 #>>44517980 #>>44519236 #>>44519282 #>>44520336 #>>44520826 #>>44522391 #
mrweasel ◴[] No.44511712[source]
More and more I think Musk managed to his take over of Twitter pretty successfully. X still isn't as strong a brand as Twitter where, but it's doing okay. A lot of the users who X need to stay on the platform, journalists and politicians, are still there.

The only issue is that Musk vastly overpaid for Twitter, but if he plans to keep it and use it for his political ambitions, that might not matter. Also remember that while many agree that $44B was a bit much, most did still put Twitter at 10s of billions, not the $500M I think you could justify.

The firings, which was going to tank Twitter also turned out reasonably well. Turns out they didn't need all those people.

replies(14): >>44511868 #>>44512165 #>>44512334 #>>44512898 #>>44513148 #>>44513174 #>>44513350 #>>44514035 #>>44514544 #>>44514680 #>>44515018 #>>44516438 #>>44517692 #>>44518854 #
ahmeneeroe-v2 ◴[] No.44513350[source]
>A lot of the users who X need to stay on the platform, journalists and politicians, are still there

Twitter/X is the reason DJT became President. It happened accidentally (ie against the wishes of Twitter management) in 2016, they successfully suppressed him in 2020, and then Elon gave MAGA that platform in 2024, leading to DJT's successful election.

As long as X is seen a kingmaker, someone will find it profitable to own/maintain, even if it doesn't convert Ads like Meta/Google.

replies(4): >>44513482 #>>44513686 #>>44513978 #>>44518822 #
mvdtnz ◴[] No.44513482[source]
If you think twitter made even 1% difference in 2016 I urge you to go and touch some grass. This stuff doesn't matter.
replies(3): >>44513599 #>>44513735 #>>44521012 #
aaronax ◴[] No.44513599[source]
Way more likely that it was /r/the_donald. In my humble, biased opinion--since I was around there but never really active on Twitter.
replies(2): >>44513784 #>>44517044 #
JSteph22 ◴[] No.44513784[source]
But Trump won more convincingly in 2024 without it? That doesn't support your argument.
replies(1): >>44513835 #
1. lesuorac ◴[] No.44513835[source]
Trump won by <1% in an election against a candidate who lost her only attempt at a primary and during a time period where western incumbents saw a 10+% drop due to their handling of covid inflation.

2024 isn't a story of how Trump outwitted his opponents but one of how his opponents tied their shoelaces together.

replies(1): >>44519247 #
2. lynx97 ◴[] No.44519247[source]
That is so true, and needs to be repeated more. DJT didn't win because he was so great. DJT won because the DMC candidate was so hilariously bad.