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

Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#321

Post by [deleted] »

twblalock wrote: post #245
Animats wrote: post #129

OK, so far, not much. Musk is getting stretched rather thin. Space-X seems to be doing OK with Gwynne Shotwell running things. Tesla, which Musk apparently does really run personally, is doing OK, but their side ventures are not. Self-driving is a mess. Solar panels (yes, Tesla has a solar panel business) are not doing well. The Cybertruck is years late. (Maybe next year.[1]) So is the Tesla Model 2, the low-end vehi…

I don’t think many people are cross-shopping Teslas with Bolts or Leafs. The difference in performance and technology is big enough to put them in a different vehicle class. Most of the people I know who are buying Teslas are coming from Audi and BMW, and never would have considered buying a Chevy.

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#322

Post by hef19898 »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #258
Animats wrote: post #129

OK, so far, not much. Musk is getting stretched rather thin. Space-X seems to be doing OK with Gwynne Shotwell running things. Tesla, which Musk apparently does really run personally, is doing OK, but their side ventures are not. Self-driving is a mess. Solar panels (yes, Tesla has a solar panel business) are not doing well. The Cybertruck is years late. (Maybe next year.[1]) So is the Tesla Model 2, the low-end vehi…

Disclaimer: Previously worked in Toyota's EV R&D division, opinions my own. > Remember, Tesla has to become bigger than Toyota to justify the stock price. It is not possible to do that at Tesla's current price points. It is not possible to do that at Tesla's current price points. Long term Tesla has to create a balance sheet and a narrative that convince people that it's current valuation is justified. Based on my ti…

As long as Tesla doesn't own the Li suppliers or mining rights, it doesn't matter how much Tesla got in the past, because going forward all other EV makers, or battery makers, will get their volumes as well. Prices will spike, in which case past contracts can help to buffer that.

And assuming Tesla has a squezze on Li supplies, laws prevent the use of that control to hurt competitors. Braking these laws carries enough fines in all major markets that they will be adhered to.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#323

Post by ar_lan »

Animats wrote: post #129

OK, so far, not much. Musk is getting stretched rather thin. Space-X seems to be doing OK with Gwynne Shotwell running things. Tesla, which Musk apparently does really run personally, is doing OK, but their side ventures are not. Self-driving is a mess. Solar panels (yes, Tesla has a solar panel business) are not doing well. The Cybertruck is years late. (Maybe next year.[1]) So is the Tesla Model 2, the low-end vehi…

Wasn’t the Model 3 the “low cost” one? Is there supposed to be a cheaper one?

Cars are so confusing these days - $40k USD just seems like the average price now.

My neighborhood has so many Tesla roofs I was actually surprised by your comment - but that’s fascinating! I thought they would be doing much better.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#324

Post by mooreds »

cutenewt wrote: post #299
mooreds wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I think he understands that, as indicated by https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1585619322239561728 That doesn't sound like someone burning Twitter to the ground. Also, many are acting like Musk has free rein in running the company. Yes and no. Beyond needing employees to actually run the thing, he also has loans to pay back ($13B!) and investors to maintain good relationships with. More on that here: https…

The investors can't really do anything -- the board has been dissolved.

My limited experience is that people with money can still influence companies, even if there aren't formal paths. Share owners still have influence.

And people who lend money typically have contracts and the ability to seize assets if they don't get paid. (I have no idea what the $13B of loans looked like, but can't imagine they were personal, non-recourse loans.)

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#325

Post by fooey »

cutenewt wrote: post #289
thinkingemote wrote: post #248

They need to re-free up the API. Early adopters and hackers really did some great work using the API until they walled-gardened it and rate limited it to make it unusable. They need to do this for goodwill at the very least, but I think it will spark the fire to make it popular with techies again. Based on the recently published discovery chats we will probably see: * High def video * Focus on music publication * The…

I think it's going to be more in the other direction. He really hates the bots, so he'll probably close up the API. Until bots gets solved, no developer should expect the API to open up.

Part of his pitch during the acquisition was charging for embeds, so I would not be making any bets on the API loosening up

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#326

Post by naasking »

phailhaus wrote: post #110
hn8305823 wrote: post #69

He literally said it will not be a free for all. He may be chaotic, but he's not stupid. There is a huge difference between no moderation (anarchy), and not targeting conservative voices solely based on ideology.

> not targeting conservative voices solely based on ideology. This literally does not happen, and is entirely made up in a form of projection. In fact, Twitter has been found to be biased towards recommending right-wing sources. [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/22/twitter-a...

That's a very selective reading of the article. Twitter boosts things that attract more views and shares. Outrage generates those views. But why would mainstream right-wing politicians and articles generate more outrage on Twitter than non-rightwing content?

That only makes sense if Twitter is predominantly anti-right wing, and people who are anti-rightwing get outraged by rightwing nonsense more than leftwing nonsense, and thus rage-click, share and comment on that content more.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#327

Post by regularjack »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #184
mlindner wrote: post #12

I feel like this techcrunch article itself violates hacker news policies because it has numerous personal attacks and deriding commentary throughout the article. Including calling the purchase of twitter a "toy". More so calling it "crowning himself CEO" as if that wouldn't be automatically required if you layoff the existing CEO. A temporary CEO would be required until a new CEO is found. I think it's also important…

> I feel like this techcrunch article itself violates hacker news policies because it has numerous personal attacks and deriding commentary throughout the article. Including calling the purchase of twitter a "toy". HN is little different from big tech ideologically, and your comment is already fading out of existence. I expect it will be completely censored soon.

This site has a downvote button and an upvote button. The fact that people use that feature of the site (downvote), means the site is working as intended. It is not censorship.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#329

Post by skissane »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #24

Does Elon Musk own Twitter, or does a group of bankers orchestrated by him jointly own it with him?

I think Twitter is owned by a holding company controlled by Musk. I think he had at least two holding companies, “X Holdings I” and “X Holdings II”, with the later a subsidiary of the former, and the acquisition was legally a merger between Twitter and the subsidiary. That’s a quite typical way to legally structure acquisitions.

I’m not sure exactly how the coinvestors fit in the picture, but I expect they (or more likely their own holding companies) own minority stakes in the parent holding company. The debt is probably the parent company’s also, although Musk may have personally guaranteed much of it.

Also, probably even the parent holding company is not directly owned by Musk. Probably owned by one or more trusts he controls.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#330

Post by rootusrootus »

vanshg wrote: post #262

Could this be the largest purchase ever made by a singular individual?

I think that depends on some definitions. There have been much larger purchases in the past that largely boiled down to one individual. And what about Berkshire Hathaway? That's sort of just another name for Warren Buffett. Certainly some large acquisitions there.
Post reply on HN