Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I take issue with your narrow definition of “good businessman”.
The entire purpose of a business is to make money. He makes money. That's all that matters. People who don't make money lose their jobs. There is no other criteria.

The cancer is advertising.
While advertising sucks, it's a necessary evil. Without it, everything becomes more expensive.

”Political reasons”, meaning…?
Are you serious on this question? Politics is the reason one side of the political spectrum opposed Elon buying Twitter and is the reason the other side is cheering his purchase. I'm not going to elaborate further because this is a tech site, not a political site.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SAN FRANCISCO — Two weeks after buying Twitter, Elon Musk painted an increasingly bleak financial picture for the company and outlined changes in a meeting with staff on Thursday and in his first companywide emails, amid an exodus of executives including the officials who oversaw content moderation and security.

At the meeting on Thursday, Mr. Musk warned employees that Twitter did not have the necessary cash to survive, said seven people familiar with the meeting who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The social media company was running a negative cash flow of several billion dollars, Mr. Musk added, without specifying if that was an annual figure. He mentioned bankruptcy.

Mr. Musk added that he had recently sold Tesla stock to “save” Twitter. He has sold nearly $4 billion in Tesla shares recently, according to regulatory filings this week.

Even so, Mr. Musk said Twitter remained over-staffed after mass layoffs of half of the company’s 7,500 employees last week. Remaining workers needed to be more “hard core,” Mr. Musk said.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: dysamoria and CarlJ
Do people really use Twitter to trade quips with friends and family?
A friend of mine made enough strong lasting friendships on Twitter that she and her husband went on vacation to England and spent much of their time visiting and staying with friends from Twitter. But then, that’s her nature. She started on Usenet news a decade before the web was a thing.
 
At the meeting on Thursday, Mr. Musk warned employees that Twitter did not have the necessary cash to survive, said seven people familiar with the meeting who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The social media company was running a negative cash flow of several billion dollars, Mr. Musk added, without specifying if that was an annual figure. He mentioned bankruptcy.
I’ve read somewhere that the interest payments on the money Musk borrowed to buy Twitter are going to be, IIRC, about a billion dollars a year, while it’s only bringing in something like 650 million a year.

It looks like from here like he a chartered a plane with a destination of “crashing into the ocean”.
 
While I have no opinion on Elon one way or the other, you have to admit the guy knows how to make money. He was co-creator of PayPal and is CEO of more companies than most people will ever work for. The second he goes public with SpaceX and Neuralink, he could very well be the world's first trillionaire. He's owned Twitter for a grand total of two weeks. Give it time, especially with so many people trying to sabotage him. I don't doubt his ability to make the company profitable in the long run.
I would have thought the Elizabeth Holmes case would have put and end to this kind of narrative. I would say she's a good comparison to Musk, really, because both of them thrive(d) in industries pushing technology to its limits. That is, new boundaries that are unprecedented and therefore difficult to prove a success or a failure.

Musk leverages image to appear more intelligent and capable than he actually is. He cultivates the image of an eccentric billionaire genius who will change the world, but his track record shows that this is not true.

With Neuralink, he wants us to believe that he's creating a brain-machine interface that anyone can get and we all think it sounds like an episode of Black Mirror, wow, Elon must be so smart if he's working on creating something like that.

In reality, he isn't "creating" anything, he's bouncing off the back of 50 years of research in this area, and he's failing. Actual scientists have built prosthetic limbs that can move in response to brain signals, literal life changing technology. Neuralink, meanwhile, doesn't seem to have successfully tested their tech on a living creature, because they keep causing infections with their surgical methods.

They're supposed to be the cutting edge of science, but can't even get surgical hygiene right, a hurdle the scientific community leapt over in *checks notes* the 1840s.

With SpaceX, he wants us to believe he's going to mars. But what has he actually accomplished? He's launched rockets, he's launched satellites, he's entered orbit, he's delivered to the ISS. All amazing accomplishments, don't get me wrong. But certainly in the same vein as what NASA and other agencies have been doing for the past five decades.

They've also created some new take-off and landing techniques. I'm certainly not claiming that they're not doing great work. But they are not leaps and bounds ahead of their competition and they are no closer to the goal of mars than anyone else is.

Tesla is probably his most notable success, but it largely came from first mover advantage. Now every other car manufacturer has poured money into EV tech and they've caught up or surpassed Tesla. And while Tesla continues to promise self driving, while failing to actual demonstrate they're even close to making it happen, other companies are showing amazing results.

All of Elon Musk's companies are on-par with their competition at best, and falling behind at worst. But by pushing a particular image, Musk is able to mask that and deflect criticism. He develops underwhelming tech that doesn't surpass what his competitors can do, but he sells it as just one stepping-stone to something greater.

But now, with Twitter, Musk is for the first time running a company that isn't doing anything new. It doesn't have some big lofty goal. It's a clear business with clear KPIs and for the first time in his life, Musk has to demonstrate actual progress. He can't bluff, can't tell people his "digital town square" is a long-term project that no one's ever done before, that we should trust the process, that company will go on to great success and break new ground.

He inherited a lot of money, then he got lucky with timing during the dot com boom, and for the past twenty years he's been treading water, bringing in investment on promises of greatness and barely delivering bare minimum.

And that won't be enough anymore. He needs results, and he needs them fast. And it couldn't be clearer that he has absolutely no idea how to do that now that luck, timing, and eccentric charm are no longer working.

The Elon Musk Philosophy: Be average, but promise everyone you'll be exceptional in 10-20 years.
 
Little mad that he is more successful than you ever will be?
You mean jealous? At a person I never met? :p I have quite a nice life, thank you. I bet I am happier than he is, considering his mental status. I am not a liar, a narcissist, born into a rich family and not having anybody close telling me when I am wrong. I guess people who think lots of money is going to make you happy may be jealous?
 
Going great!
DB594BC9-A6DF-4F6F-8BB1-497E89E589DF.jpeg
 
Yes, but the problem with this was clearly stated by Stephen King's reply “**** that, they should pay me". Those public figures also bring money to Twitter by bringing followers and perhaps should be paid for it. As you say for the average user it is too much money. I wonder how many peasants want to pay $8 for a meaningless checkmark. Who here considers himself or herself a Musk's peasant? By the way, if anyone here sends me $8 I can email them a checkmark in return. It will be worth as much as the one from Twitter.

You make a good argument that they should pay public figures, but remember public figures also benefit from their followers. Something like the NFL has 30M followers on Twitter. If we assume $0.01 per follower, then NFL can generate at least $30K per ad/Sponsored tweet. So again, who should pay who?

People do not understand the point of the checkmark. Its not meaningless. The checkmark should mean that Twitter indeed confirms that this person is who he says he is and it is official and is not fake, spam, or parody.
 
Don’t waste your time or money
✔️ means nothing
Thing is though it's not about just the blue tick. it costs more than it should be things like edit tweets, undo tweets, having you higher in searches is more important than the tick imo
 
Didn't actually invent Tesla, from what I hear he bought it after it was started by two other guys.
..And then turned it into what it is today. The biggest EV company in the world.

But all these Musk haters here think they are so much smarter than him. 🤣🤣
 
I’ve read somewhere that the interest payments on the money Musk borrowed to buy Twitter are going to be, IIRC, about a billion dollars a year, while it’s only bringing in something like 650 million a year.

It looks like from here like he a chartered a plane with a destination of “crashing into the ocean”.

Yes.. the guy who brought a convertible electric car to market -> organized the building of rockets that land themselves -> then launched the car on one of those rockets into space to cruise around the solar system "chartered a plane with a destination of crashing into the ocean"

You are not smarter than Elon Musk. No one on these forums is, and thats OK.
 
...

With SpaceX, he wants us to believe he's going to mars. But what has he actually accomplished? He's launched rockets, he's launched satellites, he's entered orbit, he's delivered to the ISS. All amazing accomplishments, don't get me wrong. But certainly in the same vein as what NASA and other agencies have been doing for the past five decades.

They've also created some new take-off and landing techniques. I'm certainly not claiming that they're not doing great work. But they are not leaps and bounds ahead of their competition and they are no closer to the goal of mars than anyone else is.

The Elon Musk Philosophy: Be average, but promise everyone you'll be exceptional in 10-20 years.
Having worked with Elon for several years at SpaceX, I have to say your perception of SpaceX's innovation is off base. Reusable orbital rockets is not "some new takeoff and landing techniques" - it was revolutionary. NO ONE thought that could work, let alone pursued it. By every measurable metric, SpaceX is absolutely leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in space transportation. In terms of getting to Mars, again, SpaceX is so far ahead, there is no doubt that they will be the first to transport humans to Mars. NASA isn't even considering the attempt. I am speaking not just from publicly available information, but knowledge of the state of the engineering technology.
Your overall take on Elon's business approach is not entirely off base. He has used the same tactics at SpaceX (and Tesla) - pushing employees with threats of being fired for not being "hard core" enough, claims that the company was about to go bankrupt, etc. It's his hyperbolic rhetoric that pushes people to do more than they would for an average, non-charismatic CEO. Elon does sell the vision, but he often delivers (usually late), thanks to the talent of the employees.
Elon's an arrogant jerk, but I would never call Tesla or SpaceX "average".
 
  • Love
Reactions: compwiz1202
Having worked with Elon for several years at SpaceX, I have to say your perception of SpaceX's innovation is off base. Reusable orbital rockets is not "some new takeoff and landing techniques" - it was revolutionary. NO ONE thought that could work, let alone pursued it. By every measurable metric, SpaceX is absolutely leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in space transportation. In terms of getting to Mars, again, SpaceX is so far ahead, there is no doubt that they will be the first to transport humans to Mars. NASA isn't even considering the attempt. I am speaking not just from publicly available information, but knowledge of the state of the engineering technology.
Your overall take on Elon's business approach is not entirely off base. He has used the same tactics at SpaceX (and Tesla) - pushing employees with threats of being fired for not being "hard core" enough, claims that the company was about to go bankrupt, etc. It's his hyperbolic rhetoric that pushes people to do more than they would for an average, non-charismatic CEO. Elon does sell the vision, but he often delivers (usually late), thanks to the talent of the employees.
Elon's an arrogant jerk, but I would never call Tesla or SpaceX "average".

Okay, you clearly know a lot more about it than me, so this is my genuine question I'd most love to hear more on: returning to the moon was always part of the plan for mars, and a key milestone (correct me if I'm wrong) and a layperson would expect that after 50+ years of technological advancement, SpaceX would be able to reach the moon quicker than NASA managed to. But it's now been longer, and it's still not scheduled to happen for three more years, and it's only happening with the help of NASA and other space agencies.

Genuinely, what has prevented SpaceX from flying to and landing on the moon over their 20 years in business and why won't those obstacles apply to a mars mission?
 
Okay, you clearly know a lot more about it than me, so this is my genuine question I'd most love to hear more on: returning to the moon was always part of the plan for mars, and a key milestone (correct me if I'm wrong) and a layperson would expect that after 50+ years of technological advancement, SpaceX would be able to reach the moon quicker than NASA managed to. But it's now been longer, and it's still not scheduled to happen for three more years, and it's only happening with the help of NASA and other space agencies.

Genuinely, what has prevented SpaceX from flying to and landing on the moon over their 20 years in business and why won't those obstacles apply to a mars mission?
I only know a small part from my experience in SpaceX, but I have heard Elon talk about the moon several years ago - he was never interested in going there for his purposes b/c he felt like it had been done, and his focus is on Mars and human colonization. SpaceX is only going to the moon now because NASA is paying them to do it, so it's a business decision. Elon is still focused on Mars - it's his vision. It's also the reason he hasn't taken SpaceX public, since investors demand return on investment, and there's not much business case for Mars colonization.
 
Per Musk, they are tentatively launching Verified a week from today:

Gold check for companies, grey check for government, blue for individuals (celebrity or not) and all verified accounts will be manually authenticated before check activates.
 
The entire purpose of a business is to make money. He makes money. That's all that matters. People who don't make money lose their jobs. There is no other criteria.

Elon Musk has lost $100 billion in net worth this year alone​


 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.