ADVERTISEMENT

Elon has broken so many liberals

In the neighborhood of $20 billion valuation…according to Elon. Is he lying? Is he trolling? Maybe, maybe not. How many on here have a paid blue check mark? Anyone? Bueller?

Fact is buying Twitter’s the dumbest idea he’s probably ever had, an even the most devout cuck should be able to agree with that. He’s even publicly admitted he’s ready to bail if a buyer comes along, but who’s gonna be dumb enough to spend 30-something billion on a 20-billion valuation? He’s paying interest on loans not much less than 20bil.






carry on
There is no doubt he overpaid. But that's more a product of timing vs. his personal management. The entire industry segment is down 50% thanks to the morons in DC and the Fed. As for the loans, they were organized back when rates were closer to zero so I imagine his interest isn't killing him. He has supposedly trimmed the workforce nearly in half which is way more than his competitors trimmed, which will rein in his expense base. He hasn't run off his user base (as some predicted). So his company is now leaner, has a wider audience base (liberals didn't leave and conservatives are now welcome there), and he's expanding the revenue streams vs. being tied to just advertisements which (as Google, Facebook, Pinterest, and others can attest) is shrinking.

Based on the above, I imagine Elon will make out just fine on his investment when he chooses to divest from it.
 
There is no doubt he overpaid. But that's more a product of timing vs. his personal management. The entire industry segment is down 50% thanks to the morons in DC and the Fed. As for the loans, they were organized back when rates were closer to zero so I imagine his interest isn't killing him. He has supposedly trimmed the workforce nearly in half which is way more than his competitors trimmed, which will rein in his expense base. He hasn't run off his user base (as some predicted). So his company is now leaner, has a wider audience base (liberals didn't leave and conservatives are now welcome there), and he's expanding the revenue streams vs. being tied to just advertisements which (as Google, Facebook, Pinterest, and others can attest) is shrinking.

Based on the above, I imagine Elon will make out just fine on his investment when he chooses to divest from it.

Cmon man lol



Try 6.5 percent





carry on
 
Cmon man lol



Try 6.5 percent





carry on
Wow, what a leftist rag of reporting that was. Who cares what the lowest bid on the debt was. What was the highest bid? That's what something is worth. I bid $20 for Amazon stock last week, but noone sold me any. The only statement that was of pertinence was the 6.5% rate. Even the statement referencing the rate being adjustable provided no details on that adjustment timetable. Is all of the debt adjustable? When is the adjustment period? Etc.

@davidallen Here you go. A leftist article that's poorly written and leaves out critical facts of the story while trying to frame a narrative. See I can call out both sides for crap journalism.
 
Wow, what a leftist rag of reporting that was. Who cares what the lowest bid on the debt was. What was the highest bid? That's what something is worth. I bid $20 for Amazon stock last week, but noone sold me any. The only statement that was of pertinence was the 6.5% rate. Even the statement referencing the rate being adjustable provided no details on that adjustment timetable. Is all of the debt adjustable? When is the adjustment period? Etc.

@davidallen Here you go. A leftist article that's poorly written and leaves out critical facts of the story while trying to frame a narrative. See I can call out both sides for crap journalism.

Talk about moving the goalposts lol

You just can’t take an L with any kind of manhood right now.



carry on
 
Wow, what a leftist rag of reporting that was. Who cares what the lowest bid on the debt was. What was the highest bid? That's what something is worth. I bid $20 for Amazon stock last week, but noone sold me any. The only statement that was of pertinence was the 6.5% rate. Even the statement referencing the rate being adjustable provided no details on that adjustment timetable. Is all of the debt adjustable? When is the adjustment period? Etc.

@davidallen Here you go. A leftist article that's poorly written and leaves out critical facts of the story while trying to frame a narrative. See I can call out both sides for crap journalism.
I think you miss the gist of the article. The secondary discounts on that debt were staggering. I don't believe the debt was offloaded - the banks still hold it at what now is a pretty terrible rate (11.75%) given the erosion of value in the underlying assets.
 
I think you miss the gist of the article. The secondary discounts on that debt were staggering. I don't believe the debt was offloaded - the banks still hold it at what now is a pretty terrible rate (11.75%) given the erosion of value in the underlying assets.
I didn't miss the gist of the article. I criticize it for highlighting the gist and not the facts. Just like the FoxNews article on the home loans. The gist was right in that article too but the facts were crap and incomplete. This linked Atlantic article is exactly the same. The gist is right, but the facts are crap and incomplete. Its just shoddy journalism that gets whitewashed because it sells the narrative that the reader expects. Just like FoxNews knows its readers are right-wing, The Atlantic knows its readers are left wing. They don't have to explain facts. They just need to tell the gist of the narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Wow, what a leftist rag of reporting that was. Who cares what the lowest bid on the debt was. What was the highest bid? That's what something is worth. I bid $20 for Amazon stock last week, but noone sold me any. The only statement that was of pertinence was the 6.5% rate. Even the statement referencing the rate being adjustable provided no details on that adjustment timetable. Is all of the debt adjustable? When is the adjustment period? Etc.

@davidallen Here you go. A leftist article that's poorly written and leaves out critical facts of the story while trying to frame a narrative. See I can call out both sides for crap journalism.
6 billion is SOFR + 4.75
 
You are wrong.
You mean to tell me Google is wrong to?

For individuals, the organization that owns the website must be Verified on Twitter. ID verification: Provide a photo of a valid official government-issued identification document, such as your Driver's License or Passport. This requirement applies to individuals, not companies, brands, or organizations.
 
You mean to tell me Google is wrong to?

For individuals, the organization that owns the website must be Verified on Twitter. ID verification: Provide a photo of a valid official government-issued identification document, such as your Driver's License or Passport. This requirement applies to individuals, not companies, brands, or organizations.
Yes.

 
You mean to tell me Google is wrong to?

For individuals, the organization that owns the website must be Verified on Twitter. ID verification: Provide a photo of a valid official government-issued identification document, such as your Driver's License or Passport. This requirement applies to individuals, not companies, brands, or organizations.

You’re not totally wrong as there are ID-verifed accounts, but you just don’t understand Twitter has several levels of account status…



You, me and Average Joe need only an email and phone number.




carry on
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
While I don't use twitter, other than what I read that is posted on here and a couple of other places, I think people paying $8 a month for the blue check mark are required to provide identification to verify their identity. Could be wrong but that's my understanding and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
This was a favorite of mine:
f5a709b3-32e5-4961-bf0e-d46b270e87a2.png
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Syskatine
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT