Has Elon Musk lost his mind or?…

[frm]

I'm not disputing that at all, just wondering if you can post some of the public tantrums of the people who left then went back.

Shaun King is probably the most vocal activist that "left" and is now back from this list. The first person from this source said "bye", but had to come back and remind of us how Harris was trying to fix the broken immigration system that Trump tried to stop (right... because if he tried to stop her, it wasn't because she was trying to fix the immigration system, proven day 1 signing the Executive Orders he did).

"I'm out": Some celebrities are vowing to leave Twitter now that Elon Musk is in control

Some celebrities have deactivated their accounts while others are weighing whether they will leave. Here is what they're saying about Musk's acquisition of the company.

www.cbsnews.com

There has to be a more comprehensive list than this. Just went to The View to see if those old hags left, and it looks like only Whoopi and Sunny. However, Whoopie still passes her messages through the view. So did she really leave, did she?

At least Don Lemon had enough courage to not come back (good).

 

[frm]

Counting my posts . You sound a little stressed, all that caring will do that to you.

You're the best kind of "troll" that I look for in news source article comments. The ones that really don't care either way, but somehow only get under the skin of the left because they're so sensitive, while the right would tend to just scroll on and not interact.

Yes, aggresive little wet lefties bore the tits off me.

But comments from users like you sometimes make my day with a huge threaded comments section.

 

[Opus X]

That GOP died with McCain. Embrace the change or go to the left.

or wait until the current cult members realize they were sold a pile of dung.
but your response is exactly what i expected of what appears to be a proud member of the ridiculous right.

 

[frm]

or wait until the current cult members realize they were sold a pile of dung.
but your response is exactly what i expected of what appears to be a proud member of the ridiculous right.

Not going to happen anymore. No new wars unless they merit it. After learning more about the truth behind 9/11, I can tell them they can all go to hell with McCain, and I can't wait till Eyepatch McCain is out. Having served, you'd think he'd want to protect our interests, but nope, just his own wallet.

Both the right (old guard/RINOs/neocons) and the left's mouth are watering over any conflict they can get us in so they can line their pockets.

 

[smallwheels]

The last 10-Q that Twitter filed was on 07/2022. Where is the information coming for data over 2023? I'm genuinely curious. Did Musk state as such?

Just a side tangent and a strategic marketing move, if it did come from Musk as it's a privately traded company, not subject to SEC rulings... wouldn't that just be the best "grift" ever to openly state declining revenue? Lose half your whack jobs, but gain over 50% support of this country to use your platform because it's "dying in revenue". I mean, just look at My Pillow Guy and how he went from Zero to Hero after endorsing Trump. Just something to consider there, as the right finally realized boycotts work, something the left loves to do, and so does the opposite. The right is finally playing the game by the rules the left set and I love every meltdown from it.

Edit: Yeah, the only sources you can cite are Bloomberg guessing ad sales slump $2.5bn and from Social App Report. However, neither of these sources has the insider information to confirm it for certainty. You can't say that verification helped slumping revenue or not, and you can't even confirm whether it did drop as $2.5bn because some that stayed might be happy with paying the same (or more) because they're not reaching as many bots anymore. You don't know, neither do I. TLDR: Don't cite stuff that can't be proven.

Claiming to be such a clever smartass as you do: Do your homework. It's not that hard.

Wall Street Journal as of yesterday:

https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/wall-street-banks-prepare-to-sell-billions-of-dollars-of-x-loans-c609beb1

Banks are hoping to sell the X debt at around 90 to 95 cents on the dollar

Which they would not do if X wasn't a bad risk.

The price Musk paid for Twitter was high, even at the time of his purchase, and the company’s rocky performance had knocked down the value. The deal is considered one of the worst that banks agreed to finance since the 2008 financial crisis.

In a January email to staff, Musk pointed to the company’s growing influence and power, but said the finances remain problematic.
“Our user growth is stagnant, revenue is unimpressive, and we’re barely breaking even,” he said in the email, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
The banks never disclosed how they value the loans on their books. Some of X’s equity investors had written down their stakes in the company by as much as 75%.

 

[frm]

Can you prove to me declining revenue with an annual report or SEC filing?

"According to Fidelity's financial filings, its funds' stake in X has fallen almost 80% in value since the Musk takeover. "

Ok. Thanks for the source that makes this an open and closed case. We can wrap up the review of their revenue decline based on this. Sorry I missed it. /s

 

[frm]

Wall Street Journal as of yesterday:

https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/wall-street-banks-prepare-to-sell-billions-of-dollars-of-x-loans-c609beb1
Which they would not do if X wasn't a bad risk.

Looks like Musk is in the position to be able to now repurchase that $3bn debt at $150,000, essentially bringing his purchase price from $44bn to $41bn.

Imagine the genius move behind that, if it was a strategic move that was planned (unsure if you can "plan" it without fraud, but it happened nonetheless and could work in his favor).

He might get it down to $20 billion in some time, then when they have their accounting done right and can prove numbers, take it public again at a $40bn valuation. Who knows.

 

[smallwheels]

Looks like Musk is in the position to be able to now repurchase that $3bn debt at $150,000, essentially bringing his purchase price from $44bn to $41bn.

Do the maths.

Banks are hoping to sell the X debt at around 90 to 95 cents on the dollar

which converts your $3bn to $3bn*0,9=$2,7bn and in addition to that you forgot that you had to pay interests for that loan. So your "brilliant maths" does not add up at all.

Imagine the genius move behind that, if it was a strategic move that was planned (unsure if you can "plan" it without fraud, but it happened nonetheless and could work in his favor).

Well, you are a fanboy, obviously. Business ethics is foreign to you (as is simple maths) and no matter what happens: In your eyes Musk is a genius and will always be, no matter what he does.

 

[frm]

which converts your $3bn to $3bn*0,9=$2,7bn and in addition to that you forgot that you had to pay interests for that loan. So your "brilliant maths" does not add up at all.

My bad I did 5 cents on the dollar.

You got me there!

Point remains that he'd get a 5% savings for someone else (or himself) to repurchase that.

I dunno why a bank would consider a 5% loss as a must sell, unless they have other troubled assets they need to cover.

Do you know the terms on the loan, ie, interest rates and maturity dates? Still nope. Could be a debt owed out to 2028 for all we know. I'm pay walled behind the article so all I see is 95 cents on the dollar.

 

[Capitan Terror]

@JamesBrown
@frm
@ForumFan
@Wing

This is how these eternal whiners and socialist victims are treated. No mercy for them, my friends!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[smallwheels]

Point remains that he'd get a 5% savings for someone else (or himself) to repurchase that.

Who would be stupid enough to do that? He himself probably not as he has not the funds, else he would not have needed the credit in the first place. So it could easily be russian oligarchs, saudis or mafioso who want to gain influence on public and then would have Musk by his balls.

I dunno why a bank would consider a 5% loss as a must sell, unless they have other troubled assets they need to cover.

It is all outlined in the article and they have waited for a long time already but a sale was impossible and finally, du to the involvement of Elon into the US government w/o being elected have the hope that the loss my only be 10% - if they are lucky.

I'm pay walled behind the article so all I see is 95 cents on the dollar.

If you are as smart as you claim or as rich als you claimed in your Bitcoin promotions recently a paywalled article should not be an issue for you.

 

[smallwheels]

This is how these eternal whiners and socialist victims are treated. No mercy for them, my friends!

It is always interesting to see, what a friendly attitude thos guys who call themselves "christan" have and how everyone who does not share their opinion is a socialist a socialist victim. Keep your hate to yourself and your mouth shut please if you are unable to constructively take part in a discussion in a civilized manner.

 

[frm]

He himself probably not as he has not the funds

He has Tesla shares worst case. He'll be fine. Tesla holders, not so much if he has to dip into that.

If you are as smart as you claim or as rich als you claimed in your Bitcoin promotions recently a paywalled article should not be an issue for you.

Why would I subscribe to a news outlet to read 1 article? That's asinine. You don't get rich by being wasteful.

And my Bitcoin promotions was actually ETH. So, you're a user on another forum, I see...

 

[Taylor J]

Not going to comment on anything else here as I don't feel like getting into it this early on a Saturday but for anyone that ever wants to read a paywalled article, use your systems/browsers "reader mode" and you get the entire article for free usually.

 

[MySiteGuy]

Ok. Thanks for the source that makes this an open and closed case. We can wrap up the review of their revenue decline based on this. Sorry I missed it. /s

X is required by the SEC to make these disclosures to it's stakeholders. Why are you suggesting X/Elon lied to them?

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

 

[frm]

X is required by the SEC to make these disclosures to it's stakeholders. Why are you suggesting X/Elon lied to them?

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

Fact check yourself before you post.

No, a privately owned company is generally not required to report to the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) unless it meets specific criteria, such as having more than 500 shareholders and over $10 million in assets, or if it is issuing public debt

You dug your own hole.

He's only supposed to report to the shareholders, which is by far fewer than 500. Which means, there's only second-hand information that can't be independently verified.

 

[Starbucks]

@JamesBrown
@frm
@ForumFan
@Wing

This is how these eternal whiners and socialist victims are treated. No mercy for them, my friends!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I love this video of Milei.
Now, for those that have no idea what a “Zurdo” is, that’s an extreme leftie in Argentina (and no @Mr Lucky, I won’t explain again what an extreme leftie is, just take the opposite of an extreme right as you knew pretty well what that was).

After living in Argentina for almost 5 years, I completely understand what he says as I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Even though the subtitle does not completely match with what he says, it is quite accurate.

 

[Starbucks]

Now, what I don’t like is that he wants to copy everything from the US. They simply can’t. They don’t have the money for that. The United States is mainly interested in Argentina for its resources and YPF. Milei also wants to step out of the Mercosur (similar to the European Union but for South America), and now he suddenly talks about stepping out of WHO and the Paris agreement.

I don’t think this is the right choice for Argentina.

 

[smallwheels]

Fact check yourself before you post.

Maybe YOU should. And start reading properly before answering.

X is required by the SEC to make these disclosures to it's stakeholders. Why are you suggesting X/Elon lied to them?

What has what you wrote

No, a privately owned company is generally not required to report to the SEC

to do with that?

You dug your own hole.

He didn't. Just that your's is so deep you cannot judge any more.

He's only supposed to report to the shareholders, which is by far fewer than 500. Which means, there's only second-hand information that can't be independently verified.

You claim the shareholders lied to the SEC?

 

[MySiteGuy]

You dug your own hole.

He's only supposed to report to the shareholders, which is by far fewer than 500.

We aren't talking about a privately held company with non-institutional stakeholders (shareholders).

Investment firms like Fidelity are required by law to report financials reported to them from the companies they hold a stake in, and that puts X under a legal obligation to report to institutional holders like Fidelity.

Which means, there's only second-hand information that can't be independently verified.

Fidelity is the third-largest investment firm in the world, and they are one of the gold standards for their reporting of their finances and their financial disclosure reporting of who they are invested in. I'll take their word over yours.