Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1000 posts

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#581

Post by lupire »

dekhn wrote: post #405
SamBam wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still confuses me that being part-owner of an old dot-com payment company, part-owner of a mid-sized car company (by number of cars sold), and part-owner of a (very good) rocket company make a person richer than anyone has ever been in the history of the planet, but that's probably because I just haven't looked into it enough.

It's confusing because wealth in this case is based on valuation, which in the case of Tesla is based entirely on what some people think the company will do, monetarily, in the future. In my mind, Bill Gates is truly richer than Elon, because he has a diversified portfolio and could convert more of his holdings into other, different holdings, with less friction.

Bill Gates would be straight up wealthier than Musk if he didn't donate half his wealth to his foundation. If you consider that part of his wealth (in the sense of total lifetime income so far, not figure spending power, so subtracting off personal consumption/spending), you don't have Musk being suprosinly more wealthy.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#582

Post by lupire »

lumost wrote: post #547
SamReidHughes wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really confused how you're confused. What is a better way to become the richest person than by owning and growing a series of hugely successful companies that provide products and services to people?

To my knowledge, none of these companies were run at a profit during Musk's involvement. While this is a normal part of growing a business, it leads to a bias on what people think could happen - rather than what does happen. How much money did musk really make? how much of it is an artifact of monetary policy.

80% of Musk's wealth is either confidence in Tesla's future, or memes, depnding on your perspective. It's not even pretending to be about completed work.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#583

Post by sounds »

next_xibalba wrote: post #149
Traster wrote: post #84

So there's two options right - the first is that Parag is for some reason making big strategic decisions about the direction of the company despite the fact that we all know he'll be gone if the deal closes. Or he's making big strategic changes at the behest of the acquirers before the deal closes. Neither of these things seem particularly kosher moves to make. The question is how to figure out which one it is. It wo…

> So there's two options right There are far more possibilities than those two. Here's just one off the top of my head (I assign no probabilities here, just pointing out this false binary): This person is being fired as a result of some investigation or process that began prior to the acquisition process and whose results have only just been reached. There are a whole range of process driving, "my hands are tied" sce…

There's more to this than just today's events supporting your theory that the wheels were in motion before Elon's bid -

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/21/technology/twitter-securi...

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#584

Post by ineedasername »

Traster wrote: post #84

So there's two options right - the first is that Parag is for some reason making big strategic decisions about the direction of the company despite the fact that we all know he'll be gone if the deal closes. Or he's making big strategic changes at the behest of the acquirers before the deal closes. Neither of these things seem particularly kosher moves to make. The question is how to figure out which one it is. It wo…

There's a third option, which is that Parag is doing what he things is in the best interests if the company under the circumstances.

Because regardless if whether the acquisition falls through or not, this whole thing has underscored the need for changes at Twitter. The top two execs may need to go in order to move forward no matter what.

Your options are reasonable guesses as well, just not the only two possibilities.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#585

Post by tmp_anon_22 »

lmkg wrote: post #433
jmyeet wrote: post #258

The two execs fired were: - Kayvon Beykpour, Head of Consumer Product (3 years, 11 months) [1]; and - Bruce Falck, Revenue Product Lead (5 years at Twitter, 3 years and 11 months in this position) [2] Kinda weird that both people were just shy of serving 4 years in their current roles. When I see moves like this my immediate thought is always, it's to save or make money. For example, there could be an options pool in…

Aside from that 3.93 is slightly less than 4, it's odd that both employees were in their current position for the same amount of time. I.e. they were part of the same cohort. What was Twitter doing in June-ish 2018 that resulted in them hiring multiple people in key roles? Was there an expansion, or a re-org, or executive turn-over? Or just overfitting two data points?

> What was Twitter doing in June-ish 2018

I think your timeline is off, wouldn't executive hires have a much longer timeline from inception to close such that the "event" predicating their hires could have been 5 years, 6 years out?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#586

Post by misiti3780 »

kyledrake wrote: post #189

I've been using Twitter since it's main novelty was that it was a successful Ruby on Rails app, and honestly I've been trying to figure out where the exit is for my personal use of Twitter lately. If the acquisition goes through, Twitter won't make enough money to service it's debt, and the things they will do to fix that are pretty much guaranteed to lower the quality of the platform, which frankly has never worked…

generally curious, what are some examples of disgusting things legal under US law (I'm not a content moderator)?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#587

Post by MisterBastahrd »

toyg wrote: post #432
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Did tesla open source key scientific innovations in the scaling of batteries? Don't think so. See e.g. The seres f5 from Huawei. I don't know wether it's great but about the main metric, it has a higher range than teslas (1000km)

This is a bit of a "why dropbox when i can rsync" comment. Tesla brought glamour and practicality to a field stymied by boredom and theoretical concerns. They pledged to build an EV people would actually want to use, bringing all the latest tech to drive UX with no regard for tradition. They set to solve consumer problems, and they are succeeding in doing that.

Glamor? Sure. Practicality? Eh. Maybe for daily commuting. When the IC companies convert over, Tesla shareholders are going to feel a ton of pain. The novelty will have worn off and the company will still pace at a mere fraction of its competitors. And at the very least, they'll all have vastly better QC than Tesla.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#589

Post by lupire »

paganel wrote: post #325
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the revolution? There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric. Even if tesla have an edge, it's evolutionary, not at all revolutionary.

> There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric It is my belief that those "competitive cars" wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for Tesla.

Nissan was selling the Leaf after the Roadster but before the S/X/3/Y.

The Leaf and the 3 basically met in the middle at the same time at about the $45K price point for similar cars.

Tesla was only first in the category of outrageously expensive cars for virtue-signalling rich people who fake-care about evironmentalism. And fake self-driving.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#590

Post by skrtskrt »

optimiz3 wrote: post #571
fny wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is not whether he's been successful. He has been, the question is whether this is the peak valuation akin to Cisco during dotcom and whether he is over leveraged at this point.

People have kept asking this question for the past 12 years. Meanwhile my TSLA shares bought in 2013 have been doing just fine.

Your shares did well in of the biggest untinerrupted market bull runs in history????
Post reply on HN