Exactly…like Musk is going to drop $44 billion just by looking at the P&L, Balance Sheet and Cash Flow statement.
- Thread starter HALL85
- Start date
That's why I'm voting for Mikie Sherrill on Tuesday. She will ALWAYS fight to keep politicians out of your personal health decisions. LMAO. Amazing she can put ads up claiming that when she wasn't fighting for those people who lost their job.
the better you are at coding, the less lines of code you need to accomplish the same task.
Yes he does. It is a heavily leveraged deal.
He needs to cut costs immediately and show profitable operations, then he can think about refinancing that debt.
Twitter-Musk Deal Drama Is Just Beginning for Wall Street Banks
Elon Musk is the new owner of Twitter Inc., ending months of uncertainty for Silicon Valley and shareholders. Yet for debt bankers on Wall Street, the drama is far from over, as they’ll need to convince investors that the Chief Twit’s ambitions for the company can justify its heavy debt load.
www.bloomberg.com
The thing is... You've made an argument that Musk himself isn't even making. He didn't even claim these firings were about productivity. He said the firings were because twitter isn't profitable. That is why he is cutting entire departments.
Except of course for interest expense of what was usually around $100 million is now going to be around $1.2 billion?
As have I... All were many months longer than this one and none of them waived the business due diligence like this one. I wouldn't claim to have any knowledge of the productivity of the thousands of people Musk fired though because I would be talking out of my ass.
What else is he going to say publicly? “I felt like firing people because I don’t like them”? Of course savings are the main reason. Twitter had added thousands of heads in the last few years…they were bloated. Isn’t it a good decision to make the company immediately profitable and also accelerate the launch of the new business model?Yes he does. It is a heavily leveraged deal.
He needs to cut costs immediately and show profitable operations, then he can think about refinancing that debt.
Twitter-Musk Deal Drama Is Just Beginning for Wall Street Banks
Elon Musk is the new owner of Twitter Inc., ending months of uncertainty for Silicon Valley and shareholders. Yet for debt bankers on Wall Street, the drama is far from over, as they’ll need to convince investors that the Chief Twit’s ambitions for the company can justify its heavy debt load.www.bloomberg.com
The thing is... You've made an argument that Musk himself isn't even making. He didn't even claim these firings were about productivity. He said the firings were because twitter isn't profitable. That is why he is cutting entire departments.
Look how much attention this is getting. The Twitter brand and Musk’s name has value. He’s viewing these people as disposable since he has the brand, platform and code.
You’re right merge; he made a terrible decision; didn’t know any thing about Twitter and is doomed to fail. You know more than the guy worth $200 billion.
Last edited:
Yes, it is a good decision and necessary one.
It just wasn't about performance and not sure why you made that argument. No one else has.
Musk saw departments which did not contribute to earnings and decided to cut them. No reason to say those people were poor performers.
I didn't say any of that.
Just said you made up the part about performance.
I did say I thought he overpaid, but Musk also has acknowledged he overpaid... So not really a controversial statement.
Like I said, I am a fan of Musk and a Twitter user so I am rooting for him to succeed.
Of course it made sense to make the cuts. I gave you the reason. But there were articles that indicated that the people he brought in from Tesla and Boring reviewed developers and productivity or amount of code was a determining factor. So performance did matter for those roles.
And don’t you think they looked at performance reviews?
He may well have overpaid, but obviously he sees something downstream where he will create value that will far exceed what he paid. I’m not rooting for him. I just enjoy watching successful visionaries and understand what makes them tick.
oops!!
Twitter Now Asks Some Fired Workers to Please Come Back
Twitter Inc., after laying off roughly half the company on Friday following Elon Musk’s $44 billion acquisition, is now reaching out to dozens of employees who lost their jobs and asking them to return.
www.bloomberg.com
Paywalloops!!
Twitter Now Asks Some Fired Workers to Please Come Back
Twitter Inc., after laying off roughly half the company on Friday following Elon Musk’s $44 billion acquisition, is now reaching out to dozens of employees who lost their jobs and asking them to return.www.bloomberg.com
Oops. Twitter is already trying to rehire workers Elon Musk fired days ago, sources say
Twitter cut close to 3,700 people this week via email as a way to trim costs following Musk’s acquisition.
fortune.com
Must be fake news. Impossible that they would not have done this in a perfectly well thought out manner based on performance metrics.
Given the speed and number are you surprised? You claim to have been on deal teams. Have you ever been in a deal that eliminated half the workforce on Week 1? They made a mistake in about 1% of the RIF. Not “perfect” (your term) but that’s like a rounding error.Oops. Twitter is already trying to rehire workers Elon Musk fired days ago, sources say
Twitter cut close to 3,700 people this week via email as a way to trim costs following Musk’s acquisition.fortune.com
Must be fake news. Impossible that they would not have done this in a perfectly well thought out manner based on performance metrics.
woah woah woah, i thought "musk and his team" had this thought out.
lol. that was quick.
is saying "i was instantly proven wrong" easy?
cause thats the only thing that played out here for you.
https://www.cbsnews.com/60-minutes/#app
Two excellent segments on 60 minutes last night. First one on social media points to exactly where we are. The immigration piece is also excellent.
Two excellent segments on 60 minutes last night. First one on social media points to exactly where we are. The immigration piece is also excellent.
The only reason this is in the news is because Musk is unliked. I'll bet a good portion of the companies we hear firing large numbers of people end up rehiring dozens back. I'm sure many people know someone who was fired then called back. Nobody writes about it. But because it's Musk and the Twitter, this is newsworthy.
This is the largest public to private transaction ever and they laid off half of their workforce within days.
Of course that is newsworthy and will be heavily scrutinized.
that was a materclass in being wrong. tough look for you.
If you can't see the Musk Derangement out there than you're not being honest. MSM complaining about what he will do with Twitter, while ignoring the cesspool it had become. Hollywood dropping accounts is news because it's a public to private transaction?
Someone provided an analogy that made a lot of sense to me. It's like members who own a private club and then someone buys it and now they have their panties in a bunch because they can't say or do whatever they want anymore. Think Dangerfield buying Bushwood.
In the grand scheme of things, 7,500 employees is a small corporation....hospital systems in a city/region employ 15,000 - 40,000 employees. Amazon has over 1.6 million employees; Starbucks has 350,000. The mass layoff last Friday won't even register a blip.
But we've seen similar stories play out with any high profile disruptions.
I recall highly scrutinized tech deals from Dell, HP, Yahoo from decades ago.
It's high profile. That's why its getting press.
Similar things happen and they get press. It's really not uncommon.
Right, a medium sized company with a gigantic valuation.
Most of the stories you see have nothing to do with the fundamentals of the deal or potential relaunch. It's all political and Hollywood nonsense. Hiring back "dozens" of employees is a non-story in any other acquisition of this size when the number is immaterial to the total....but it's Musk.
My post was all about rehiring dozens. I don't believe that the scrunity would be half as much if Bezos was the buyer and had to rehire dozens.
Agree to disagree there. Pretty much every major Amazon move has faced a fair amount of scrutiny in the media. Only thing that would come close would be their purchase of Whole Foods and there were all kinds of articles about that going wrong early on.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2022/11/09/salesforce-redfin-job-cuts-tech-layoffs/8315517001/
In addition to FB layoffs (11,000 13% of workforce) Redfin and Salesforce cutting). Amazon lays off its entire robotics division.
Tech over hired during the pandemic and easier to fire when working from home. Musk: “If you don’t come to the office we will assume you have resigned”.
In addition to FB layoffs (11,000 13% of workforce) Redfin and Salesforce cutting). Amazon lays off its entire robotics division.
Tech over hired during the pandemic and easier to fire when working from home. Musk: “If you don’t come to the office we will assume you have resigned”.
Also at the all hands meeting where he said that comment about assuming you will have resigned, Elon was asked
"How are you going to deal with the expected attrition and align everyone on a shared vision?"
Elon: "I don't know....we all need to be more hardcore."
Strong Kendal Roy vibes.
"How are you going to deal with the expected attrition and align everyone on a shared vision?"
Elon: "I don't know....we all need to be more hardcore."
Strong Kendal Roy vibes.
Yes he does. It has been a blessing in some parts of his life, and a curse in others.
This is an example of the latter.
No need for the snark. That is the experience that Musk has described if you have been following him.
Sorry, you have been talking about him sending messages and building up the right culture.
You're just going to excuse him when he makes mistakes like this because he has Asperger's?
Similar threads
