[kloncks]

The company Jack Dorsey is CEO that is doing well isn't Twitter. If he is thinking logically, that would be where he will focus all his resources.

Twitter needs and deserves a full-time CEO or to get sold to a larger company that can do something with it.

[uptown]

I still feel Bloomberg LP would be the ideal buyer of Twitter.

[sebleon]

Bloomberg could not afford Twitter - their market caps are $22Bn and $17Bn, respectively.

[adventured]

Bloomberg is worth $50+ billion. They could afford Twitter.

Michael Bloomberg is worth an estimated $52 billion per Forbes. He owns 88% of Bloomberg the company, and nearly all of his wealth is wrapped up in the company. It's an extremely profitable business with $9+ billion in revenue.

It was worth ~$22 billion during the great recession, when Michael Bloomberg repurchased 20% of the company (rather brilliant timing, buying it from Merrill Lynch). That was a decade ago.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/michael-bloomberg/

[RyanZAG]

I'd guess he has more profitable and more useful things to spend his money on than Twitter.

[adventured]

Defending that archaic terminal monopoly for one.

In all seriousness, as savvy as Bloomberg has been throughout his career, I'd expect him to wait until valuations plunge again, before making any big moves. I also wouldn't expect them to bother with Twitter.

He's a signer to the giving pledge. At nearly 76, he's no doubt facing a serious decision about what to do with his company. I'd expect either a public listing, or a sale to a large financial firm (JP Morgan etc).

[mcintyre1994]

Surely regulators wouldn't let Bloomberg be bought by a large financial firm whose competitors all rely on the data?

[dbbk]

Or he might take the Marissa Mayer approach and say hey, the other one is a harder challenge, and thus more interesting.