Microsoft, apple, google, meta, amazon, tencent what was preventing them to buy twitter?

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    For one thing, Musk’s offer was thought to be very generous. He was also a lone actor who didn’t need to worry about it blowing back on him somehow if the deal fell through, as opposed to a CEO who’s actually accountable to someone.

    Another billionaire could have done it, I guess, but there’s like ten guys who were rich enough and only one was Elon Musk.

  • venotic@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    Because there’s really nothing worth investing in, with people who just scream at eachother all day. The only social media platform that is probably worth acquiring in their eyes is Facebook because Facebook actually has more going for them and has acquired other companies too. Twitter was just…Twitter.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    musk was mouthing off in an official enough way that he got trapped into buying it. He lost tens of billions. It was basically a money pit and he has drove it to even more of a money loser.

      • Etterra@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Except he doesn’t really have unlimited money. Like most rich bastards he had assets - aka, hypothetical money (investments). They take out loans using that hypothetical money as collateral, and then have to pay that money back over time, which they can do by earning dividends (hypothetical money increases that they can access without penalties) or selling hypothetical money for real money (possibly with penalties).

        Musk borrowed an enormous amount of money, which saddled the loaners with hypothetical money that began to decrease in value, and were this unable to profit by selling it for actual money. They therefore have to trust that Musk will repay these loans or else sell them at a loss to some other dumb bastard.

    • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Doesn’t seem like he lost much, like you would expect by buying one of the biggest social platform in the world he got even richer and more relevant (enough to get a sit in the white house)

      • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Well he does get investors. Like the openai thing he is leading a group of investors and as other folks point out loans. so he does spread the losses out to other folks. Honestly this destroys the economy really. Its one of my arguments for higher taxes for the rich in a progressive way that should keep having brackets till you get to the highest. It means making more money takes more ability as it becomes a harder and harder thing to do. Makes sure the best are messing around at those levels or keeps those levels from happening to begin with.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 days ago

    It’s completely unprofitable and I remain of the opinion that Musk bought it to break Grimes’ toy and then lucked into the fact that he had a huge propaganda engine.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        These people are really fucking stupid. Musk said confidently that the government doesn’t use SQL.

        I don’t think you specifically are doing it out of praise and glorification but people love mythologize tech people. Jeff Bezos is actually incredibly smart holding multiple degrees and, by account a savvy businessman… Musk is a fucking idiot that lucked into money, has terrible ideas and acumen, won the lottery with PayPal and has built a castle of lies to sustain his wealth.

        If the purchase was done with intention to propagandize it certainly wasn’t that ass clown’s idea.

        He absolutely is a fascist though - but most of his ideas are probably just regurgitated from Peter Thiel.

  • lorty@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    Because its usefulness is not on the money-making side of business, so it wouldn’t make sense to buy.

    • communism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Imo it’s still very valuable even if not profitable. eg YouTube is quite famously a massive money sink for Google but I doubt Google would want to let go of its monopoly on online video sharing.

    • aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Nope. It got musk into the White House. Bad investment for the populace, but good investment for drumpf and musk

    • sibachian@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      watch musk turn the “savings” from “DOGE” efforts into a gov purchase of twitter at twice what he paid, with the argument that they plan to nationalize a digital platform for communication between politicians and voters, while tying a privatized transactions system to the platform where he siphons a small percentage of every transactions ever done by an american henceforth.

  • suoko@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    Sell, fork, start from scratch, climb the ladder, sell, fork, start from scratch, climb…

  • nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    i wish it would just go out of business already so that the rest of my loyalists can join me in bluesky