he said. “We’ll be gone, and it’ll be gone because of an advertiser boycott.”… eeer, no.

  • @Zozano@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    31
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This cunt wearing dogtags…

    I hope he needs them.

    Edit: they’re Israeli dog tags… Woooow…

    IDF_DogTag1966

  • @skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Adult man acting as edge lord is the cringiest thing ever. I feel embarrassed for him whenever I see him talk.

    Not sure how anybody worships the guy once they have actually heard him speak.

  • Kalistia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    592 years ago

    Did someone actually watch the interview? He just looks like an overgrown kid trying to make others in the classroom laugh… That would have been funny if it was not pathetic…

    • @mbryson@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      202 years ago

      The best thing for the Fediverse has been Musk cannibalizing twitter with ever decision he makes it seems.

      Twitter imploding -> People finding Mastodon as an alternative -> People discovering federation as an alternative to walled garden social media

  • Maestro
    link
    fedilink
    302 years ago

    We’ll be gone

    Don’t threaten me with a good time…

  • @Nobody@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    272 years ago

    I hope the boards of Tesla and SpaceX are paying attention. Once Xitter goes down in flames, he’ll be looking for the next project to micromanage into bankruptcy.

    • R0cket_M00se
      link
      fedilink
      English
      162 years ago

      Why wouldn’t he have done that first?

      Twitters downfall is intentional, if he wanted to micromanage Tesla and SpaceX he would have. This is all a symptom of the fact that he didn’t want to buy Twitter in the first place, he was using it as a coverup for selling stock in Tesla.

      • @Nobody@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        172 years ago

        Both companies had teams of handlers that followed him around and kept him from messing with important work. Now that he’s addicted to 24/7 media attention, I doubt the handlers will be able to contain him.

    • ugh
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      Sounds like a win for Tesla and SpaceX employees.

    • @AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      I don’t understand why Tesla won’t remove him. He isn’t even the majority stock holder. I highly doubt he adds any value for the company at this point so the only thing I can think of is that there must be some weird clause in their agreements.

      I’ve owned a Tesla since 2017 and at this point, I’ve only replaced tires and spent less than $1000 on electricity to go a bit over 50k miles, but I’m ashamed to be driving it every day and it sucks.

  • Zuberi 👀
    link
    fedilink
    English
    482 years ago

    Elon made deals w/ hedge funds to funnel him money as they shorted the stock (not to mention 100x leverage derivatives against Twitter).

    Since canceling his PR team, Elon’s entire MO has been to run it into the ground in a manner that seems plausible to the SEC so he doesn’t get out-right sued.

    He just isn’t this stupid, whether you want him to be or not.

    “Fuck you” to his advertisers seems like a fairly on-brand way to telegraph his true intentions.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I’m a little confused by this comment, Twitter isn’t a publicly traded stock anymore?

      Unless you mean he made deals with them before he BOUGHT twitter (for well beyond market value), meaning the hedgies would be taking a loss…?f

      edit: that doesn’t preclude the possibility he’s tanking the company so he can declare bankruptcy to get out of his loans, but that doesn’t involve conspiring with hedge funds, it’s just a different kind of financial fraud

      • TurtleJoe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        Your edit has been my pet theory for some time. That and he gets to ruin a platform that leftists have used to organize around the world.

        • @IHadTwoCows@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          That just tells me that he doesnt understand how leftists work. We change platforms on the reg.

        • archomrade [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          Yea, I mean I think it’s probably his best play. But I don’t really grant him to be so principled as to have originally bought twitter for that purpose: I think he’s a dumbass who got called on a shitpost, and now he has to weasel his way out.

          Doesn’t mean he’s not also a reactionary cunt, but I personally think that plays second fiddle to this situation.

    • @FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      Making deals with hedge funds to ruin a brand they have shorted seems illegal.

      Is there any legislation that prohibits this in the United States?

    • @srecko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      312 years ago

      There are no twitter stocks, you can’t buy or sell them, and therefore can’t short them, since you need to borrow them to do just that. This could work if Elon had some percent of the company, so other people’s money would enter the equation, but right now it is not possible.

    • SeaJ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      312 years ago

      He’s the primary owner of the private shares. The shares are not publicly traded. None of what you said makes any sense.

      • @gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        Yeah I find I hard to believe that this man that has constantly done illegal shit to maniuplate the stock market would go as far as to illegally manipulate the stock market.

        • @gmtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          82 years ago

          Because its kind of pointless to the point t of sealioning.

          Like take for example when the leader of Wagner group died in a plane crash and it was pretty obvious putin had him killed. Would asking a random lemmy user to provide proof of that claim add anything to thr discussion?

          • @GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            In this case and the Wagner example, if the point isn’t obvious it’s reasonable to ask for some kind of proof to get a better understanding of the point. But I do agree that there’s no reason to ask for proof in this case, because the conspiracy theory is already so nonsensical that any proof would just compound the nonsense.

            People simply need to stop putting him on a pedestal and accept that he isn’t some genius businessman whose inner machinations are an enigma. He made a stupid deal and bought a company he doesn’t know how to run so he’s running it into the ground, that’s it. No grand conspiracy required. You need a grand conspiracy only if you can’t accept that Musk is just an ordinary man whose biggest contribution to his success is having wealthy parents.

        • Zuberi 👀
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          The question doesn’t make sense in context because that’s not what my comment was implying. It’s down-voted for being silly, not pedantic.

          • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 years ago

            You clearly imply insider trading going on. The fact that it might not be (I’m not sure if the law) musk being guilty of insider trading, but just commiting fraud so others could do so, is being pedantic and silly.

            • Zuberi 👀
              link
              fedilink
              English
              02 years ago

              TSLA is his Twitter collateral. Really surprised nobody else sees what I see lol…

      • @Crismus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        He only bought Twitter because he was forced to or admit he was trying to manipulate the stock again.

        He bought a much higher stake, used Twitter to telegraph a higher price than it was worth. Then he didn’t use his own money when he was finally forced to purchase Twitter at the higher price he tweeted. The money he used to purchase Twitter came from countries who have stated they didn’t want Twitter to be around because it hurt their public perception when they were caught doing shady things.

        His Twitter gift started the same way the SEC sued him for market manipulation for his Tesla manipulation years before. Publishing his $420 price point then selling stock when the price goes beyond his tweeted price point.

        He was never savy enough to use shorting like the Hedge funds do, but his reach among the idiot masses to cause jumps in price to artificially male a bigger profit.

      • R0cket_M00se
        link
        fedilink
        English
        222 years ago

        Well he’s spent the last decade committing market manipulation, not that far of a jump.

      • Zuberi 👀
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        He’s not the one trading the stock(s) in the above scenario.

  • Baby Shoggoth [she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    112 years ago

    Cluster-B summed up perfectly. His platform will die because of “an advertiser boycott”, and not because he’s driving it into the ground while throwing middle fingers with both hands and ranting about how everyone else can go fuck themselves as the world burns around him.

  • BigVault
    link
    fedilink
    242 years ago

    No real loss if it does die.

    Why the fuck would advertisers want to pay to have their products advertised and inevitably associated with the shit on there?

  • MisterMoo
    link
    fedilink
    102 years ago

    Nice bomber jacket and full head of natural hair, ya fuckin idiot.

  • stown
    link
    fedilink
    English
    572 years ago

    It is hilarious to me how this guy thinks he is entitled to have advertisers on his platform. I don’t understand why he thinks he can coerce them back with insults and claiming they will bankrupt his company. Why do they have any responsibility to save your rotten company? Delusional!

    • @Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      412 years ago

      Typical conservative victim mentality. It can’t be a result of his actions, no. It’s not his fault the company is crashing and burning. It’s those darn blackmailing advertisers!

      • @ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        352 years ago

        In 7th grade, many years ago, my school had an excited young teacher who convinced management to let them teach a Logic class. I can’t even remember if the teacher was male or female, but I use the shit I learned in that class constantly, particularly the fallacies and biases we memorized (and then promptly weaponized against teachers, parents, and pastors).

        When billionaires attribute their success entirely to their own virtues, skills, or talents, and blame others or external circumstances for their failings, they are demonstrating a self-serving bias, a specific form of the fundamental attribution error. They fail to acknowledge external factors like market conditions, socio-economic advantages, or the efforts of their teams that may have contributed to their success. Conversely, they externalize blame for failures, ignoring any personal shortcomings or misjudgments.