With what money? Nobody's buying ads and the dollars from "Premium" subscriptions are needed to keep the lights on.
The world’s richest man owns it as a plaything.
People want Musk to fail so badly they literally make things up.
That's your retargeted ads.
From my experience, I haven't noticed any changes.
> Fidelity recently estimated Twitters value is ~25%
This is an entirely made up figure based on guesses and politics. Nobody, including Fidelity, have any clue to the internals of Twitter now that it's private.
The world's most important news still breaks on Twitter (including the sitting president's announcement to not run for re-election), despite all the Musk hate.
Nobody will know the value of Twitter until Musk sells it, if ever. That's par for the course of private business.
What we do know is literally all of the most important stories continue to break on Twitter. CNN and other MSM companies continue to write articles about specific Tweets, and more. Twitter remains - as it was before - the figurative public forum and no alternative offering has come anywhere close to overtaking it. Nothing has changed.
(Psst. You're not replying to a serious person.)
Ah, yes, I forgot investment firms receive standard-issue crystal balls.
They’re not. Valuation committees are notoriously deferential to PMs and issuers, particularly for private names.
Fidelity is an X shareholder. They absolutely have its financials.
On a quarterly basis their valuation committees have to value their holdings, including illiquid ones, in part to appraise how their managers are doing. In this case, their valuation committee wrote down the value of their equity in X to 25% of the original acquisition price. Given Twitter was about 1:4 levered on acquisition, that’s writing down the value of X as an enterprise to roughly half.
Given it's prevalence and importance, there is no way Twitter is worth 1/2 or 1/4 of what it once was. If given the opportunity to purchase Twitter - what would someone pay for it? What would someone pay for the single-most important and influential website/app in the world - the only one that has presidents and governments around the world make announcements and break news?
The mass exodus never happened - of either users and advertisers. This is flatly in fantasy land for Musk haters. It's amazing to witness.
So yeah, Fidelity is making stuff up.
Twitter has done amazing job at incinerating the value it once had as connective matter of society.
Also the algorithm now top-ranks a bunch of paid-for blue-check musk-ites and batshit-crazy-right-winger trash.
Straw man. We’re talking about the value of X, the company, not Twitter, the community. The former is what Fidelity and Musk own; the latter is what X ostensibly controls, but we’re getting into WeWork-style Narnia metrics when we start community adjusting numbers.
> given the opportunity to purchase Twitter - what would someone pay for it?
Not the purchase price! X’s minority holders have offered at a 50%+ discount. Nothing trading. The banks will sell you the loans at a haircut. Nothing trading.
We have a testably falsifiable level, and it’s somewhere below half what Musk paid. (Where, we don’t know, because the bonds are saying the equity is worthless while there are buyers of the equity at a positive price.)
Basically the subsidization flow: high engagement and advertisers > lower engagement > free users