|
Top-level
 @malwaretech I will always advocate for people to find alternatives to twtr, at best it's an insufferable place flooded with annoying BS bluecheck accounts, at worst it's fundamentally unsafe without the use of a robust blocklist. But I still don't buy the argument that simply using the site enriches the platform (or Elon), because it fails to take into account how catastrophically dire twtr's financials really are. 4 comments
@malwaretech @ceremus @malwaretech It’s a straightforward argument. Since most of their revenue is from ads, they are selling your eyeballs. And if you post, that content draws in other views. One viewer doesn’t matter, but one million do. And if the right 10,000 people leave, it could be enough to send the platform into a clear death spiral. @birwin They are MASSIVELY over-leveraged, they have driven eyeballs away from their ads, they've probably lost ad partners, and they're not making that up through existing ad revenue and their lukewarm verified subscriptions. The debt Musk saddled it with is an albatross, unless he pays for it from his own pocket it'll go default. |
Gregory's Server
@malwaretech
Musk's leveraged buyout meant the company was on the hook to pay a debt bill of $1 billion every year just to keep the lights on. Twitter had only been profitable two years in its entire operation, in the before-times when ad revenues hadn't fallen across the board and the company's reputation was better than dog vomit. The way things have been going I'll be surprised if the company isn't repossessed by the banks before the end of the year.