▲ 561 ▼ X is officially worth less than half of what Elon Musk paid for it (www.theverge.com) submitted 2 years ago by woshang@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world 83 comments fedilink hide all child comments A year after he bought Twitter for $44 billion, Musk thinks the company is now worth $19 billion, a 55 percent drop. Let's recap what he did to Twitter, I will go first: Changed the original name Twitter to X.
[–] donuts@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Honestly it's probably not... Estimates aside, who would even want to buy Twitter in its current incarnation? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 11 points 2 years ago (3 children) It still has a big enough user base and brand recognition that they could put things back on course if they really went for it. The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter. That's like saying "he suffered no permanent damage except the removal of his spine" permalink fedilink source parent [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Brand recognition? That's ironic. The Twitter brand had recognition. But you can't say X, you have to say "X, formerly Twitter." Otherwise you're right, of course, But I can't see it being resurrected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, twitter is the brand. The first action of a sane buyer would be to put the bird logo back. 20 billions of its current value comes from the fact that they still own that name. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you're saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees. permalink fedilink source parent [–] donuts@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* I don't know about the active userbase so who knows. Personally I don't think the Twitter brand is as strong as it was a year and change ago. Even without the change to X, is there anyone who feels that Twitter is anything more than a shell of its former self? It's not as simple as just bringing back the bird, in my opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 11 points 2 years ago (3 children) It still has a big enough user base and brand recognition that they could put things back on course if they really went for it. The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter. That's like saying "he suffered no permanent damage except the removal of his spine" permalink fedilink source parent [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Brand recognition? That's ironic. The Twitter brand had recognition. But you can't say X, you have to say "X, formerly Twitter." Otherwise you're right, of course, But I can't see it being resurrected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, twitter is the brand. The first action of a sane buyer would be to put the bird logo back. 20 billions of its current value comes from the fact that they still own that name. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you're saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees. permalink fedilink source parent [–] donuts@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* I don't know about the active userbase so who knows. Personally I don't think the Twitter brand is as strong as it was a year and change ago. Even without the change to X, is there anyone who feels that Twitter is anything more than a shell of its former self? It's not as simple as just bringing back the bird, in my opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago The only permanent damage is the brain drain from firing a lot of people that has experience in running twitter. That's like saying "he suffered no permanent damage except the removal of his spine" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Brand recognition? That's ironic. The Twitter brand had recognition. But you can't say X, you have to say "X, formerly Twitter." Otherwise you're right, of course, But I can't see it being resurrected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, twitter is the brand. The first action of a sane buyer would be to put the bird logo back. 20 billions of its current value comes from the fact that they still own that name. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you're saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, twitter is the brand. The first action of a sane buyer would be to put the bird logo back. 20 billions of its current value comes from the fact that they still own that name. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you're saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago It was never actually worth what musk paid, but I get that you're saying the name was half the value. Looks like musk agrees. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] donuts@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* I don't know about the active userbase so who knows. Personally I don't think the Twitter brand is as strong as it was a year and change ago. Even without the change to X, is there anyone who feels that Twitter is anything more than a shell of its former self? It's not as simple as just bringing back the bird, in my opinion. permalink fedilink source parent