|
|
|
|
|
by bhaak
1062 days ago
|
|
The most sane interpretation is that Elon Musk was payed to dilute or destroy Twitter. I can't think of anything else that would make sense. Throwing 44 billion dollars on a company and then gutting it for everything that was valuable including a unique brand that had even its own verb? But the sad reality is probably that a 12 years old narcissist edgelord in the body of a billionaire wanted a vanity plate. |
|
Best-case (for him), Twitter as we knew it dies and he manages to turn the burnt-down ashes into something profitable enough to overcome that hurdle. Twitter per se cannot reasonably get out of the hole he's dug for it.
Though, arguably, the brand itself was a huge part of the value, and he just threw that in the trash.
You know a guy's going down a weird path when all defenses of his behavior amount to "I know the last twenty things he's done have looked insane and none of it's made any money, but he's got a secret genius plan, I swear! 5D chess!"