[flagged]
Twitter's valuation with investors was based on the idea of heavy growth. It wasn't even profitable when purchased, and when it did make a profit, it was on the order of $1B/year, nothing that would validate it's market cap.
Musk squashed all potential for growth. Twitter advertisers, users, and the hope of a brighter future are all gone now. A well-established brand has been abandoned for an amorphous X, on which it's pretty much impossible to establish a new brand.
Musk has destroyed so value much from Twitter with bone-headed moves that if he had to answer to investors, he'd be out in a second.
> You are the one bringing politics into this
No, that's not true. The person I responded to characterized the old, pre-musk twitter as "a place where decent human beings cared to gather" and contrasted that with the current twitter.
What possible non-political interpretation of that viewpoint is there? He is clearly saying that when twitter was run by people on the political-left, and (for example) Trump was banned, that was "decent human beings."
My rebuttal is to show a large list of verified accounts making hateful statements. My point is, those statements were allowed under pre-musk twitter. Hate was allowed before, and it's allowed now.
The only difference is that the person I responded to finds the former brand of it acceptable.
Which part of this analysis is incorrect?
> Even collecting that image is odd and strange
It's odd and strange to pretend that you believe I personally collected those examples. You're well aware of how the internet works. You know that someone else created that image.
Musk paid $44B and it is generally considered to be worth less than $10B today[1], though his open participation in political corruption has resulted in valuations all over the map, including $44B[2].
It’s kind of Schroedinger’s valuation; if he and Trump are having a spat it’s worth less because there’s a risk Trump orders it shut down or seized or whatever, if he and Trump make up the company is a a part of the ruling party’s government apparatus.
But as far as actual product value, outside of a clubhouse for red hats, it’s pretty close to zero. They have to literally sue companies to force them to advertise[3], which would be laughable if creeping fascism wasn’t so bad that it’s actually a successful strategy. Any attempt to claim free speech high ground while suing companies for declining to advertise is incredibly disingenuous.
1. https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/30/24258129/musks-44-billion...
2. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/mar/19/value-elo...
3. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/01/nx-s1-5283271/elon-musk-lawsu...
and they are usually massively off.