151–160 of 250 posts
> Refusing to provide toilet paper or pay rent, but employees can’t work remotely. Why do people worship this clown again?
You can go quite long without paying rent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their policies aren’t exactly written in stone. Yes, on November 11, it was ( https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-twitter-inc-technology-... ) “an email to employees from Musk on Wednesday night ordering workers to stop working from home and show up in the office Thursday morning” , but that was ages ago. Last week, we got ( https://nypost.com/2022/12/30/twitter-closing-seattle-office... ): “Twitter is closing down…
> but that was ages ago I’m not sure if this is really well done sarcasm, but the original article is less than 2 months old.
I mean that's not a difficult or outlandish guess.
Mid term (2-5 years) it seems like it would be optimal for Twitter to leave SF. Downtown isn't that great to work in and the Elon hate is red hot. They could still keep their SF employees as a satellite office. Bailing on what is surely a very pricey lease is an attractive bonus :-). Though, it would be hilarious if Twitter's no work from home policy lead to downtown revitalization :0). I still think SF has a lot to…
Musk fired a significant number of content moderators; I haven't seen any indications that they plan to rehire those roles elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t know anything about Twitter’s books but Loan payments in excess of profits doesn’t mean you’re insolvent. It doesn’t even mean you’re losing money. You can be gaining money each year while paying more in loans than you take home in profit.
The key thing here is that the loan payments are new, and are greater than profits were before the loan payments. That doesn't necessarily mean they are losing money -- revenue could have increased, or costs decreased, to make up the difference. Losing money also wouldn't mean they're insolvent -- that only happens once liabilities exceed assets. Still, it's definitely a signal that creditors will take note of. Good…
Mid term (2-5 years) it seems like it would be optimal for Twitter to leave SF. Downtown isn't that great to work in and the Elon hate is red hot. They could still keep their SF employees as a satellite office. Bailing on what is surely a very pricey lease is an attractive bonus :-). Though, it would be hilarious if Twitter's no work from home policy lead to downtown revitalization :0). I still think SF has a lot to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Unless Twitter has no assets of any marketable value (which obviously isn't the case, the company itself just sold for 44 billion dollars) the landlords will get paid, worst case by having Twitter issue additional stock in a debt for equity swap.