I’m no accountant, but I have to imagine when he’s talking about “value” it’s not exact loss of sales, but something more like “projected sales for the next 10 years” or something.
There’s no way Twitter, a company that was overvalued at $43 billion, was also making $40billion a year in advertising sales.
He seems to be saying that the market value of Twitter is $40B less than what it was before stuff happened. “Value destruction” tends to be applied to “stock” (like market cap) rather than “flow” (like revenues).
He’s basically saying Twitter is worth $4B, given that he paid $44B and seems to be saying $40B of values was destroyed.
Losing $40B in less than a year is, uh, remarkable.
What kind of mental gymnastics do you have to do to wind up there?
Remember, he grew up a rich white boy in full apartheid South Africa, and never matured beyond that. He has no ability for self-reflection or introspection. Which means he’s never wrong, so someone else must be to blame. So far, that’s included religious, racial, and sexual minorities. He’s only going to grow more deranged as time goes on.
The kind of gymnastics that apparently develop when you’re stupid rich and think you know better than everybody because you “made” some really smart-sounding companies.
Twitter stockholders collectively received $44B from Musk on October 27. So, yes, Twitter was worth $44B at that moment. And, yes, it’s also true that Musk grossly overpaid for a company probably worth around $10B because he made the most costly “420” joke in history. Both statements are simultaneously true.
So - Twitter has lost $40 billion in advertising revenue?
Sounds about right. Wonder how much more they can lose.
I’m no accountant, but I have to imagine when he’s talking about “value” it’s not exact loss of sales, but something more like “projected sales for the next 10 years” or something.
There’s no way Twitter, a company that was overvalued at $43 billion, was also making $40billion a year in advertising sales.
He needs to learn that just because he was stupid enough to buy it for $44B that doesn’t mean it was ever worth $44B.
He seems to be saying that the market value of Twitter is $40B less than what it was before stuff happened. “Value destruction” tends to be applied to “stock” (like market cap) rather than “flow” (like revenues).
He’s basically saying Twitter is worth $4B, given that he paid $44B and seems to be saying $40B of values was destroyed.
Losing $40B in less than a year is, uh, remarkable.
So he’s trying to blame Jewish folks for his retarded investment? What kind of mental gymnastics do you have to do to wind up there?
Remember, he grew up a rich white boy in full apartheid South Africa, and never matured beyond that. He has no ability for self-reflection or introspection. Which means he’s never wrong, so someone else must be to blame. So far, that’s included religious, racial, and sexual minorities. He’s only going to grow more deranged as time goes on.
The kind of gymnastics that apparently develop when you’re stupid rich and think you know better than everybody because you “made” some really smart-sounding companies.
AKA being a stupid entitled piece-of-shit.
If it was never worth $40B, it can’t have lost $40B in value. . .
Twitter stockholders collectively received $44B from Musk on October 27. So, yes, Twitter was worth $44B at that moment. And, yes, it’s also true that Musk grossly overpaid for a company probably worth around $10B because he made the most costly “420” joke in history. Both statements are simultaneously true.