this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
176 points (72.7% liked)
Technology
59091 readers
4107 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think he, accurately, determined that it was a sinking ship. He got as many employees to leave as possible and is now trying to get as much money as possible from the service before it dies.
It wasn't sinking before he sunk it. It was losing money, but not that much... then instead of making intelligent, reasonable changes, he stuck them with a ridiculous amount of debt, slashed and burned the work force, and scared off half the advertisers.
I mean it had repeatedly lost money for years, I honestly don't think anything could have said it. I am not at all defending Musk, I just think the platform was doomed with our without him.
Twitter was not in danger of going bankrupt before. They are now due to Musk's actions and financial setup. They did actually make decent profits (over $1B) in 2019 and 2018. The previous organization could have made modest cuts and improved efficiency to become profitable... also they were paying good salaries to over 8,000 people, and more advertisers and users were benefiting from the platform than are now. Musk's destruction of the company was entirely unnecessary.