Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
what was the valuation when it was acquired by xai?
After X raised a new round of capital it was valued at approximately $45B but when debt is considered it was approximately $33B which then was executed as an all stock acquisition. Why are you treating me like someone who needs to dig up information like a puppet or student? There are values, they do matter. You don't have to be publicly traded to have one. End of story.
 
After X raised a new round of capital it was valued at approximately $45B but when debt is considered it was approximately $33B which then was executed as an all stock acquisition. Why are you treating me like someone who needs to dig up information like a puppet or student? There are values, they do matter. You don't have to be publicly traded to have one. End of story.

you were digging the information because you claimed that value has tanked. now your numbers do not reflect that.

or are you telling me that there was a 44b > 5.3b-9b > 45b journey within 30 month justified by financial performance?

seems that fidelity’s valuation of twitter was as worthless as claims about tanking.
 
That wasn’t global. Advertising dollars just moved to platforms which were less hate filled and far right wing because nobody wanted their product associated with X or its owner.
Given the way the past year has gone, probably a good decision and more things are moving away from the US as it gets worse.



Youtube's ad business shrunk for the first time since Google started reporting the division's earning separately in 2022.
 
you mean after those certain individuals broke the TOS many many times? Sure, I think Twitter staff were getting irritated at exceptions being made to keep some folks on the platform for as long as they were and happy to actually get their rules enforced

nope. ZubyMusic (right wing user) got banned for saying "ok dude". Love to see how you can defend this.

 
  • Like
Reactions: numberfive
Maybe a bit unrelated, please forgive me, but is your feed also just a bunch of reused post as well? Also you’ll have 2 post back to back seemingly on the same topic or subject.

That’s my feed now. I’ll see the same exact post over and over from different accounts. It’s really like the dead internet theory .
nope. my "for you" feed is actually pretty great these days.
 
Plenty are



considering it's still running after he fired 90% of the staff, shipped many features, and has had record active users time and time again, I'd say it's far from ruined.

a lot of people seem to think Twitter was all sunshine and rainbows when really it was a multi billion dollar sinkhole and that was before advertising dollars took a massive hit globally.
“Running” is doing some heavy lifting here.

Real record active users? Or spambots?
 
That’s good then.

I actually ended up just deleting my X account. Tired of post farming comments to make a profit.

Ahh yes .. I remember when I first got that feeling many years ago from "StripMallGuy" on there.

It was (maybe still is?) a whole "thing" to be "XYZGuy" on there and farm engagement by acting like you were giving out the behind the scenes info and secrets of whatever the business is.
 
Ahh yes .. I remember when I first got that feeling many years ago from "StripMallGuy" on there.

It was (maybe still is?) a whole "thing" to be "XYZGuy" on there.
Haha , I don’t think that’s as prevalent now , maybe so .

Just a lot of accounts there to simply farm engagement ever since Elon made pay outs a thing . Accounts from other countries pretending to be something totally different. If one tweet or meme goes viral, count on it to cycle around over and over.

I’m not even going to mention the ads . Trying to read comments and there’s ads. Same reason I left Reddit . Just nauseating.
 
Xai bought X at the same price Elon paid for which was overpriced.
But only after the value was boosted by a round of investment from people who were already trying to invest in SpaceX, which everything eventually rolled into. That is the crazy part about valuations, as long as someone commits to giving you money at your valuation, then you can claim that value. Then time determines if adjustments are made. You are correct about him overpaying and time adjusted the value. It was propped up by the investment to make it make sense for xAI to acquire it, then again for SpaceX to acquire xAI, all to cover both businesses that didn't have strong financial paths forward into the one business that has a massive financial future.
 
you were digging the information because you claimed that value has tanked. now your numbers do not reflect that.

or are you telling me that there was a 44b > 5.3b-9b > 45b journey within 30 month justified by financial performance?

seems that fidelity’s valuation of twitter was as worthless as claims about tanking.
The entirety of the process DOES show that. If you think they don't then maybe you just see the end result numbers without understanding how those numbers come to be? I know for the general public it can feel like companies just make numbers up, but they do not. They are formulated and granted many a business tries to use "optimistic" math. Many great "salesmen" can upsell their business but only people good at business can follow through and deliver value. In the end things tend to right themselves over time. Also the idea that a company can go from 44B (overpaid) to 10B in 30 months is really not even that shocking. Shocking is nVidia going from less than $400M to almost 3TN in the same timeframe you mention. Also the boost back up was due to a....you guessed it....new valuation based on investment and not due to the companies performance. Did you look at the presser announcement dates? Do you think it was coincidence? Do you think the xAI deal all comes together in days and the boost in valuation wasn't part of the plan?

The amount of money Musk paid for twitter was way more than he should have. He opened his mouth and then was caught in a legal issue where he had to make good. It was already a MASSIVE uphill battle since Twitter was not in good shape already. Despite slashing people and trying all sorts of things the company was losing money and value. He was able to stop the bleeding and bring things back a bit, but no where close to where he purchased it again, which again was WAY overinflated. There was no clear financial path forward which would actually pay back the investors and have any sort of return on his own investment, so the logical step was to consolidate. Standard business practice. But the value was so low that the purchase of X would not have paid back the investors, so how do you fix that? You do a round of funding to set a new value of the business. Then you can sell that business at a higher value. As long as the business you are rolling into can support that value then you get away with it. However, xAI didn't have that ability which is why it was done a second time into SpaceX. This is not some strange process, this is smart business and tactical moves to keep investors happy and to try and salvage some bad scenarios.

If you have more disagreement, I would just point you to learning how M&A's, VC investments, and the stock market works and likely those might be a better teacher than me. If you prefer your version of things rather than education, then 👍🏻
 
Last edited:
Youtube's ad business shrunk for the first time since Google started reporting the division's earning separately in 2022.
Nobody watches YouTube ads. Google have been making the platform worse and worse with higher ad to content ratio and pushing pointless shorts for a while. It’s unsurprising that their strategy is failing.
 
Definitely not a fan of what twitter has become, however, admittedly I am a biiiig fan of separating chat apps from content apps. It makes it possible to easily allow notifications on chat, yet block them on the content app. I wish other apps would do the same.
 
The entirety of the process DOES show that. If you think they don't then maybe you just see the end result numbers without understanding how those numbers come to be? I know for the general public it can feel like companies just make numbers up, but they do not. They are formulated and granted many a business tries to use "optimistic" math. Many great "salesmen" can upsell their business but only people good at business can follow through and deliver value. In the end things tend to right themselves over time. Also the idea that a company can go from 44B (overpaid) to 10B in 30 months is really not even that shocking. Shocking is nVidia going from less than $400M to almost 3TN in the same timeframe you mention. Also the boost back up was due to a....you guessed it....new valuation based on investment and not due to the companies performance. Did you look at the presser announcement dates? Do you think it was coincidence? Do you think the xAI deal all comes together in days and the boost in valuation wasn't part of the plan?

The amount of money Musk paid for twitter was way more than he should have. He opened his mouth and then was caught in a legal issue where he had to make good. It was already a MASSIVE uphill battle since Twitter was not in good shape already. Despite slashing people and trying all sorts of things the company was losing money and value. He was able to stop the bleeding and bring things back a bit, but no where close to where he purchased it again, which again was WAY overinflated. There was no clear financial path forward which would actually pay back the investors and have any sort of return on his own investment, so the logical step was to consolidate. Standard business practice. But the value was so low that the purchase of X would not have paid back the investors, so how do you fix that? You do a round of funding to set a new value of the business. Then you can sell that business at a higher value. As long as the business you are rolling into can support that value then you get away with it. However, xAI didn't have that ability which is why it was done a second time into SpaceX. This is not some strange process, this is smart business and tactical moves to keep investors happy and to try and salvage some bad scenarios.

If you have more disagreement, I would just point you to learning how M&A's, VC investments, and the stock market works and likely those might be a better teacher than me. If you prefer your version of things rather than education, then 👍🏻
the company was not losing value.
you are again trying to use your feelings as an evidence of value tanking.
it doesn’t matter if any of the listed valuations were reflecting financial performance or not, fidelity’s numbers are still worthless.
 
the company was not losing value.
you are again trying to use your feelings as an evidence of value tanking.
it doesn’t matter if any of the listed valuations were reflecting financial performance or not, fidelity’s numbers are still worthless.
You are in your own little world bud. I don't have emotions on this. I don't use social media and could care less about Twitter, X, Tick Tock, and whatever else is out there. I don't have any personal vendetta against Elon. I think everyone knows his mouth can get him in trouble 😂 but that is about it, and honestly if anything it helps his businesses. I LOVE all things space and love SpaceX and am rooting for it to be as successful as possible. So whatever you think you know, you are....once again, wrong. My comments in this thread, and any emotions that go along with it, are to correct people who talk as if they know business when they clearly do not. I have spent nearly my career (and since I started my first business at 16, entire life) as an entrepreneur. I have done M&A's and equity raising for dozens of companies, both mine and consulting for others. I know what I am talking about and am passionate about clearing up false information and sharing what I know. Also, nothing I have stated has anything to do with Fidelity. I look at money in, financial reports, debt owed, press releases, acquisition numbers, etc... Nothing about Twitter/X is reinventing any wheels here. No "special" meanings, no bending economics to fit some different paradigm. They are a normal company doing normal things. I don't have to use emotions, I can simply understand the situation from knowledge and experience.

You also seem to ignore EVERYTHING about how I describe how businesses work, how evaluations work, how raising money works, and all the facts presented. But it's ok, as I said in my last post, you can either chose to learn or stay uninformed. I see you have made your choice. Conversation over.
 
You are in your own little world bud. I don't have emotions on this. I don't use social media and could care less about Twitter, X, Tick Tock, and whatever else is out there. I don't have any personal vendetta against Elon. I think everyone knows his mouth can get him in trouble 😂 but that is about it, and honestly if anything it helps his businesses. I LOVE all things space and love SpaceX and am rooting for it to be as successful as possible. So whatever you think you know, you are....once again, wrong. My comments in this thread, and any emotions that go along with it, are to correct people who talk as if they know business when they clearly do not. I have spent nearly my career (and since I started my first business at 16, entire life) as an entrepreneur. I have done M&A's and equity raising for dozens of companies, both mine and consulting for others. I know what I am talking about and am passionate about clearing up false information and sharing what I know. Also, nothing I have stated has anything to do with Fidelity. I look at money in, financial reports, debt owed, press releases, acquisition numbers, etc... Nothing about Twitter/X is reinventing any wheels here. No "special" meanings, no bending economics to fit some different paradigm. They are a normal company doing normal things. I don't have to use emotions, I can simply understand the situation from knowledge and experience.

You also seem to ignore EVERYTHING about how I describe how businesses work, how evaluations work, how raising money works, and all the facts presented. But it's ok, as I said in my last post, you can either chose to learn or stay uninformed. I see you have made your choice. Conversation over.
that’s a lot of words to acknowledge that company’s value wasn’t tanking.

there is nothing special or unusual in what musk was doing, indeed.

also, “valuation”, not “evaluation”. a bizarre mistake for an m&a expert, repeated multiple times.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Arsenikdote
But only after the value was boosted by a round of investment from people
the round of investment is an evaluation of the value of the company. no venture capitalist fund would gladly overpay.

who were already trying to invest in SpaceX

this doesn't really make sense.
1. if X or Xai goes down in valuation before SpaceX buys X/Xai, that means they receive less shares than expected of SpaceX stock.
2. If VCs really wanted exposure to SpaceX stock, they would have participated in the round offerings that happened after Elon bought X anyways.
3. Cosmo fund, Ark Fund, and a few others already provide exposure to SpaceX stock.
 
the round of investment is an evaluation of the value of the company. no venture capitalist fund would gladly overpay.



this doesn't really make sense.
1. if X or Xai goes down in valuation before SpaceX buys X/Xai, that means they receive less shares than expected of SpaceX stock.
2. If VCs really wanted exposure to SpaceX stock, they would have participated in the round offerings that happened after Elon bought X anyways.
3. Cosmo fund, Ark Fund, and a few others already provide exposure to SpaceX stock.

Look at the bigger picture. The raising of money for X was completed within the same month as the acquisition by xAI. There is a zero percent chance that those investing in X didn't know about the acquisition. If it was withheld, legal action would have occurred. They willingly invested knowing the path forward. And as you mentioned, since it was an all stock deal, the value of the stock really matters. Again, why would the investment be made into X if the stock value proposition out the other side as not beneficial? But why not just invest into xAI if you know that is what the stock is turning into anyway? But if you are asked to boost the value of X which you are told will eventually turn into SpaceX stock, then basically Elon is allowing you to continue to maintain value by folding one company into the other. The final "reconciliation" of the false value is made from SpaceX purchasing xAi at a value of $250 billion while then setting a SpaceX value at $1 trillion with an expected IPO of close to double that. It is the only reason why investing in X makes any sense when it is going to be acquired a weeks later. Plus, given some pretty reliable sources, Larry Ellison and 1789 Capital all were a part of the funding. Those people don't deal with stock purchases at the scale of Ark Fund, etc... those are for "regular" people 😛
 
Nobody watches YouTube ads. Google have been making the platform worse and worse with higher ad to content ratio and pushing pointless shorts for a while. It’s unsurprising that their strategy is failing.

1. The question wasn't whether if someone watches YouTube ads.
2. YouTube ads were increasing before that time period.
3. YouTube ads have rebounded since 2022 and became the largest media company in the world https://www.entrepreneur.com/busine...ore-ad-revenue-than-nbcu-disney-paramount-wbd
 
  • Like
Reactions: numberfive
Look at the bigger picture. The raising of money for X was completed within the same month as the acquisition by xAI. There is a zero percent chance that those investing in X didn't know about the acquisition. If it was withheld, legal action would have occurred. They willingly invested knowing the path forward. And as you mentioned, since it was an all stock deal, the value of the stock really matters. Again, why would the investment be made into X if the stock value proposition out the other side as not beneficial? But why not just invest into xAI if you know that is what the stock is turning into anyway? But if you are asked to boost the value of X which you are told will eventually turn into SpaceX stock, then basically Elon is allowing you to continue to maintain value by folding one company into the other. The final "reconciliation" of the false value is made from SpaceX purchasing xAi at a value of $250 billion while then setting a SpaceX value at $1 trillion with an expected IPO of close to double that. It is the only reason why investing in X makes any sense when it is going to be acquired a weeks later. Plus, given some pretty reliable sources, Larry Ellison and 1789 Capital all were a part of the funding. Those people don't deal with stock purchases at the scale of Ark Fund, etc... those are for "regular" people 😛

Again, if VC really wanted to buy SpaceX shares, they would have just done it directly. SpaceX closed funding rounds in Oct 2023, Jan 2025, and Mar 2026. And there's also funds with exposure to SpaceX shares.

Why buy indirectly with X which still has billions of dollars in debt and Elon constantly saying **** you to advertisers which would devalue X/Xai when money is much safer by investing in SpaceX? Xai is also behind in many areas like coding, non stop cash burn with opening new datacenters. Lots of risk vs just investing directly into SpaceX.

X's valuation is properly valued with the last funding round and its the same valuation as when Elon bought it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.