I can believe he used some of that logic to justify the decision to bid for it...
But in reality his ventures collect way more money than companies of those types normally get because he hit home runs in the early internet era, then started tackling some incredibly ambitious hardware engineering problems and built companies that actually started to solve them, complete with an exciting thesis about them being all being linked to Mars colonies. That's where the "Tony Stark" reputation comes from and why people bothered following him on Twitter in the first place.
Sure, some retail investors follow him on Twitter and end up buying his stocks (or some random crypto thing he has no financial connection with but thinks is funny...) because they think he's great, but if the difference actually owning the platform makes to his ability to raise capital isn't absolute zero, it's closer to zero than $44B. And not necessarily positive, because owning Twitter doesn't make batteries cheaper or ease the technical and regulatory challenges of self driving or LEO mesh networks, but it would take up a lot of his time and resources.