Live data from Hacker News

Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

theverge.com

721–730 of 1000 posts

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume revolutionary in that other companies have only really started taking EVs seriously due to the success of Tesla.

Nissan and Renault took EVs seriously before Tesla came out with the Model S - Renault was working on the Zoe since before 2008.

Renault were working on the since before 2008 (2005 apparently), yet they only brought a product to market in 2012.

The Tesla Roadster was developed around the same time, yet deliveries started in 2008. By the time Renault got around to actually making the Zoe available to customers, Tesla had been selling the Model S for 6 months. I don't think they were taking EVs particularly seriously if they took that much longer to put out a less sophisticated product despite having vastly more resources at their disposal.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The term originally referred to an adult gradually influencing a child to make them vulnerable to sexual abuse. Now it's commonly used to refer to teaching children progressive values, which I think is hateful. The problem is, you seem to be intentionally misconstruing the definition of the word "hateful" in order to categorize words you don't like as "hate speech". There is no other way that the thing you described…

Saying teaching a child progressive values is similar to teaching a child to be vulnerable to sexual abuse is accusing progressives of being like sexual abusers of children. That's hateful. (I deliberely didn't say hate speech)

teaching a child progressive values

We aren’t talking about lectures extolling high marginal rates.

Some parents object to exposing children to inappropriate sexual themes for the purpose of conditioning them to accept the same as normal, i.e. grooming.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would firing someone who's on paternity leave be an issue at all? We're talking multi-millionaires who will get multi-million dollar severance. It's pretty hilarious to see the pearl clutching of techno-bourgeoisie over something like this, pretending other tech-lords are getting mistreated over some supposed breach of decorum. The mere fact that he gets to take parental leave puts him head and shoulders above mo…

That there is high compensation attached to this job is unrelated to the principal of firing an employee on family leave. Companies are having to hold the line on what we value in this country, as legislation from environmental to health is not keeping up. Twitter is specifically of note because the CEO recently had a child and rightfully took paid leave himself. Whatever your personal opinions are on Elon Musk, he i…

Why would that be? Surely the badness in being fired is tied to the sudden loss of income, which is less bad if you’re super wealthy.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expensive cars in the emerging EV market. 1.4% is great.

Tesla has 14% of the EV market, VW Group has 12% - and closing fast. They also have a much larger dealership network.

dealership network eats their margin, plus vw has to discount all of their own legacy sales they cannibalize

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tesla has plainly kicked the ass of the European and Asian auto giants Tesla had 1.4% of all cars sold in 2021, by number of units. Going by revenue it's somewhere around 1%. It is kinda hard to see that as kicking the asses of the competition. Kicking ass would be more like what happened with smartphones, where iOS + Android went from 0 to >90% market share in the space of five years, leaving Nokia, Palm, Blackber…

You're comparing apples to oranges. "iOS" market share is iphone market share, which is still very small but with a huge profit margin, android market share is the market share of dozens of phones brands. Nokia and Palm both sell android phones in 2022. I don't see how that's comparable to Tesla VS old automakers

Palm and Nokia both used to sell hardware with their own locked in OS, and saw that as critical. Both were big names once.

It would be like if Ford was stuck selling rebranded ‘awesome edition’ Tesla Cybertrucks instead of F150s at 10% of the revenue.

Tesla gets a lot of press. But the flash is always bigger than the reality, except when it comes to stock price.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying teaching a child progressive values is similar to teaching a child to be vulnerable to sexual abuse is accusing progressives of being like sexual abusers of children. That's hateful. (I deliberely didn't say hate speech)

teaching a child progressive values We aren’t talking about lectures extolling high marginal rates. Some parents object to exposing children to inappropriate sexual themes for the purpose of conditioning them to accept the same as normal, i.e. grooming.

I wasn't talking about that. When that happens I find it alarming. I've yet to see the snide throwaway line "Ok Groomer" used in a case of actual child sexual abuse.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#727

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…

> Twitter won't make enough money to service it's debt

This isn't (necessarily) true. While buying Twitter seems like a stupid investment if you want to make money, it's financials[1] very obviously point to streamlining which would make the debt serviceable.

In 2021 Twitter spent USD$1.2 billion on "Research and Development". Think about number - when did Twitter actually substantially change the platform? In their financial report this is recorded as essentially all salaries, and is separate from their server/operational expenses and salaries.

So right out the gate, the roughly $1 billion interest payments you take on buying it the way Musk is can be handled by essentially dropping that department which observably seems to have produced nothing Twitter needs to operate (you can even keep 15% of it to have some R&D). Stories like this tend to support the idea that their R&D is a drag and should go: https://twitter.com/n8agrin/status/1518860754757189632?s=21&...

Now, all that being the case - it's still a bad purchase, because every single one of their user acquisition graphs show that Twitter is very near saturation - their user growth has been slowing in a conventional looking sigmoid curve where they've probably hit the maximum market size. This is not a company you'd want to buy, because the purchase price doesn't justify any reasonable expectation of future growth (Twitter's 30 million US users are pretty much all they'll ever have).

Except: it's probably not a bad purchase if you happen to own a vastly overvalued car company which represents a huge amount of on paper wealth, and would like to liquidate that somehow. And this is (I suspect) Musk's actual goal - or part of it. Twitter is well-established and not going anywhere - I'm embedding tweet's in this very post! It's just not growing. But if Musk were want to sell say, 40 billion of Tesla stock, the likely outcome would be that it would turn out to be worth half or less of that number and the valuation would collapse. Whereas using Tesla stock to buy Twitter - key to supporting Tesla's valuation anyway via it's memestock status (price goes up based on him, personally, tweeting about stuff).

Using Tesla stock to buy Twitter doesn't look like you're selling out of Tesla because you think it's overvalued, it looks like a crazy billionaire buying Twitter so he can keep posting and "oh lol how funny". But buying Twitter, saying you'll "fix Twitter" (which you can - firing a 1000 people suddenly means other then the debt, Twitter looks profitable now) - and then liquidating your stake in Twitter, let's you cash out without necessarily burning Tesla (as it is, Tesla holders are concerned anyway - acting/being crazy has its own drawbacks).

tl;dr Musk tends to look crazy, and might be crazy but his actions have plenty of rational underpinnings.

[1] https://investor.twitterinc.com/financial-information/annual...

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Job offer or not, $42 million for doing almost nothing is a great deal.

$42 million is a pittance for a man at his level. VCs with a tenth of the risk have taken home more money than that over the years from several deals. He has also been at the company for a very long time. I’d be enraged at a $42 million exit when I’m a child prodigy who has worked his ass off to finally helm one of the most publicly visibly corporations on the planet.

Most child prodigies and most people that work their ass off don't become millionaires, much less ones that can earn a million a year from interest. Also he did receive compensation for all the years he worked, no?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, are we on the same HN? I feel like I see a lot of topics debated I’d call political (“about how society ought to function”) on a daily basis.

I was going to say.... HN is full of politics. Not always the Red vs Blue kind, but there's political discussions constantly . At any given time several front page stories are explicitly political, and several more are implicitly political (e.g. cryptocurrency).

Discussions without politics are a bit like science without the mathematics field: If you take the larger definition, there's hardly any way to avoid it. Especially if you define things like crypto currency as political, it's basically impossible to have a tech discussion without scratching it.

What people mean when they say that is that political topics are usually a side concern to the technical topics at hand, not pure political discussions. The off-topic, angry and/or ad-hominem comments are also quite rare - yes, they exist, but compared to (most of) Reddit and Twitter it's very relaxed. And policy is almost never the primary topic, unless it directly affects the tech field.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#730
post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that vine as a name and at least some vines are still at least somewhat prevalent online, makes me think that vine literally was "already" the next big thing and twitter just completely misread the room.

yeah, people are still reconnecting with vine creators, on TikTok. You can see in the comments, a video came up on the user's feed and they were compelled enough to be like "are you so and so from vine!?" Vine was killed half a decade ago .

And YouTube. Some of the biggest commentary channels used to be Viners.

The fact that it was shut down when it was is testament to how badly Twitter misplayed their hand with it. Every single creator flocked to whatever platform would take them at the time.

Post reply on HN