nuff said

  • Bdi89@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s impressive how quickly and severely he fucked up what was once a successful tech giant!

    • drathvedro@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree. Twitter was already going under even before he took over. In fact, it was doomed from the beginning as one of the uber era “grow valuation, think about revenue later”, hoping to exit someday by selling it to some rich megalomaniac, and actually, they’re the ones who succeeded.

      • esty@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        and now he’s doing the same grift with bluesky

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        well, it was actually about ready to start breaking even, and even paying off some debt. there was a path to profitability with twitter, but it was tenuous at best.

        king of the idiots was forced to by it, saddling it with so much dept that that profitability dream was over the moment he became involved.

      • JuliusSeizure@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think twitter is artificially ‘failing’ because of meddling by influential special interests. It is being shunned by some advertisers because he won’t bend the knee to the ESG tyrant bankers.

    • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Other then a website…what technology does twitter actually do? I do not consider websites to be tech giants.