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

Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 52 posts

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#31

Post by qgin »

paulette449 wrote: post #10
gbenzzz wrote: post #9

And they still haven't changed the primary app domain to x.com. Such a joke. It will probably never happen due to the engineering complexities of such a switch with just a barebones engineering team and loss of institutional knowledge over the last year.

The rebranding was an incredibly dumb decision. I have never seen it referred in the wider world to anything other than "X (formerly known as Twitter)".

X is an un-ownable name/word.

It's the 2023 version of the artist formerly known as Prince.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#32

Post by xenospn »

qgin wrote: post #31
paulette449 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rebranding was an incredibly dumb decision. I have never seen it referred in the wider world to anything other than "X (formerly known as Twitter)".

X is an un-ownable name/word. It's the 2023 version of the artist formerly known as Prince.

At least the artist formerly known as Prince continued providing value until the day he died. With Twitter, that value is long gone.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#33

Post by xenospn »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #8

Isn’t this Elon putting his money where his mouth is? He’s stated many times that he bought Twitter due to free speech concerns and not to make money. It’s kind of weird to me that people on the internet aren’t praising him for being principled, and are instead laughing at him for (expectedly) losing money.

He’s blocking and banning people left and right. I don’t think the “free speech” claim was serious.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#34

Post by ryanklee »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #8

Isn’t this Elon putting his money where his mouth is? He’s stated many times that he bought Twitter due to free speech concerns and not to make money. It’s kind of weird to me that people on the internet aren’t praising him for being principled, and are instead laughing at him for (expectedly) losing money.

He's not being principled, he's being an asshole.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#35

Post by ryanklee »

throw310822 wrote: post #25
kjellsbells wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle with the two-sided ness of his claims. If he wanted to build a free speech base, and burn his money doing so, that is his right, but then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere. Which he does, in spades. Even more oddly, he has poor Linda Yaccarino out there pressing the flesh on Madison Avenue, trying to reassure customers that Twitter is a safe…

> then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere I said this so many times it's embarrassing, but the wrong assumption is that advertisers stop buying ads because somehow the content directly damages the brand. Which I think is super naive. The reality is that organisations and media who dislike the content threaten advertisers of organising campaigns against t…

They should threaten and pressure him and Twitter until he shoves off into the abyss.

The guy is an existential threat.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#36

Post by kjellsbells »

throw310822 wrote: post #25
kjellsbells wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle with the two-sided ness of his claims. If he wanted to build a free speech base, and burn his money doing so, that is his right, but then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere. Which he does, in spades. Even more oddly, he has poor Linda Yaccarino out there pressing the flesh on Madison Avenue, trying to reassure customers that Twitter is a safe…

> then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere I said this so many times it's embarrassing, but the wrong assumption is that advertisers stop buying ads because somehow the content directly damages the brand. Which I think is super naive. The reality is that organisations and media who dislike the content threaten advertisers of organising campaigns against t…

Consumer pressure (aka outrage, real or invented) is certainly a factor, but advertisers seem to be coming to the conclusion that X isn't worth the agita, independently of any given week's particular rumpus.

If I'm the CMO of , I can either be watching 24x7 for a blowup that is going to consume all my people and news cycles about my company for a week, or I can just give up on X and move my spend to, say, YouTube or Tiktok. I only have so many cycles in the day, and X no longer even gives me decent information about my reach (eg they withdrew from the MRC audit that advertisers use to validate reach). Pulling back is an easy decision.

Like Elon said in his Dealbook interview last November, let's see where the chips fall.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#38

Post by vikingerik »

pohl wrote: post #30
chung8123 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think it is weird that there is an advertising boycott of Twitter but nothing is hitting Tesla yet. People seem ok with Elon's antics when it comes to the poplar car.

Wait, do companies buy ad placement in Teslas? Do they appear on the dashboard display while driving or something? If not, then how would they boycott?

I think the parent just meant that there's no popular mindshare backlash against Tesla like against X/Twitter. The perception of Tesla that electric cars are environmentally good is outweighing whatever negative perception of Musk.

Re: Fidelity marks down X valuation by 71.5%

#40

Post by _3u10 »

gbenzzz wrote: post #9

And they still haven't changed the primary app domain to x.com. Such a joke. It will probably never happen due to the engineering complexities of such a switch with just a barebones engineering team and loss of institutional knowledge over the last year.

It doesn't take much, just a rewrite rule on a frontend proxy. The nice thing about barebones engineering teams is you get barebones solutions.

"Turns out it doesn't actually require that many people to run the site" - Elon Musk.

Post reply on HN