Why did they buy Twitter in the first place?

Elon Musk has always had it something about the letter X. It goes all the way back to 1999, when he reportedly paid $1 million for a game x.com domain and invested another $12 million to make x.com an online banking site. So when Musk was out of town, the group replaced him with another CEO and renamed the whole thing PayPal.

In return, Musk says tried to restore the X in the name, urging the marketing department to rename the site X-PayPal “before they completely remove the PayPal name.” This was at a time when the site had already realized that people were using PayPal as a verb. Not only did some at the company think that abandoning the company’s brand was “crazy,” there was a serious problem with using X; The company’s research showed that people always think that x.com is about porn.

That’s a problem that still exists, but it’s not the only problem where Musk is cutting another household name to fulfill his X magic. His biggest problem in trying to reinvent his property is that other people already have a say in using X for whatever he’s trying to do, and none of those people are going to walk away without paying. All of this just confirms what should be the biggest question of all: Why did Elon Musk buy Twitter in the first place?

As a result, Mark Zuckerberg also has a piece of the X-pie. Like Reuters reports, Meta, in addition to owning Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and WhatsApp, also has a government license to use X for “programs and media.” Given that Meta is synonymous with social media at this point, it can have permission for every letter in the alphabet and variations of different cuneiform characters. However, they cannot refuse to give their X without objection.

Microsoft, as part of the expansion of its XBox video game platform, also has a clear investment in X, with copyrights related to the use of X for communication between players that can be seen in the form of messages sent using X-Twitter. Microsoft is also unlikely to leave something that hasn’t been given a check with too many zeros.

These are just two of the companies on the list. By choosing such a short and non-distinctive name, Musk opens up X-Twitter to endless lawsuits and lawsuits. For a guy who often talks about the need to cut costs on his social media platform, choosing a new name that would mean millions spent on litigation and millions more spent on buying important rights seems like a bit of a move. Maybe you should watch it in 4D.

Oh, and about the other issue: Here’s a quick rundown of what Musk insists on calling “xeet” on his platform.

It seems like it could be about, but then, maybe this has been the plan all along. Maybe Musk’s intention for X-Twitter isn’t Instagram plus PayPal like the new PornHub. That certainly seems possible. Because, back to the main story, why would Musk buy Twitter only to shut it down and lose all of its valuable assets?

He didn’t buy it for the art platform. Not only is the platform not very difficult to start with, as shown by many clones, but Musk’s first move was to chase the technology team and make life unbearable for those who stayed behind. Musk himself has complained about the wires-and-spit underpinnings of the site while at the same time making big demands for new products on an unclear schedule. It is a process of fragility, and both the site statistics and the user feedback show that X-Twitter is just getting stuck.

They didn’t buy it because of its sales. Musk has done everything in his power to alienate those advertisers with erratic behavior, dirty words, and a vision for a company that seems less organized than a Scooby Doo villain’s agenda. Things happen on X-Twitter, and then other things happen, but if there is any consistency or logic behind those things, they are not visible to the general public. Combine this with racist support, tears, prejudice of all kinds, and a willingness to make the most ridiculous decisions, and it’s no wonder that advertisers went screaming for him to get out. Oh, and yelling at advertisers for leaving is not a good way to get them back. X-Twitter has become the first place to find all the cheap scams that tend to fill the dusty commercial space on Tucker Carlson’s show. Even the pillow salesman who destroyed the ad is facing a financial crisis and can’t step up to save the day.

Musk couldn’t afford to buy users. The management team that built this area was wet from the moment Musk brought the friggin sink to the door. Since then, he’s done everything he can to drive users, testing the limits of many alternatives as everyone pushes a new board to call home. A thousand developers at Thread and Blue Sky are to thank for this work, but it’s hard to imagine that was the plan. Meanwhile, the corpses of X-Twitter accounts disappear due to the proliferation of Russian bots and farms.

He certainly didn’t buy it to be recognized by the rest of the world. The name also known as Twitter has a value even after the marketing has been changed a lot. There are people still beating Kodak and Atari for every type of consumer electronics, depending on how randomly wired neurons are to trigger interest or confidence. While Musk may prefer an online bank to a message board, holding onto the Twitter name and ID while the shares that moved underwater would still retain the value of his purchase. Only… no.

Musk didn’t drop $44 billion on X-Twitter for technology, users, advertisers, or brand. What else?

A more cynical theory would be that Musk bought Twitter with the intention of killing it. Even a casual observer would read everything he has done to destroy the potential of the platform as quickly and efficiently as possible while pretending that it will not harm his business.

But really, this gives Musk a lot of credit. It’s still telling that he had a plan when he opened his mouth and committed to using it twice as much as Twitter was worth at the time. What’s more likely is that Musk never had plans for Twitter. Considering the vagueness of what he said and how much he’s pushing now, it’s clear he doesn’t have an X-Twitter plan.

As a democratic strategist Elizabeth Spiers explained X-Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino (whose only job seems to be trying to be understood that he is happy with every problem that Musk has just entered), what has been said about this new strategy is not clear.

Linda, Elon couldn’t even provide a working Twitter. He did not make it profitable; it is much less used than it was; and has actually destroyed trust and security—not only for users but also for advertisers.

Spiers offers the right to count AZ against the idea that X could be some kind of international banking company.

So Musk has lost users, advertisers, technology, and the Twitter brand in exchange for a name he will have to defend in court for years and a vision that will never be realized. Indeed, having the most successful microblogging platform means that Musk can get his latest jokes in front of millions, and he’s managed to land one salary on some of his favorite Nazis. But is that so? Really? For $44 billion?

It’s like this guy is just… twisted.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *