nuff said
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
2486 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
59412 readers
3397 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
probably both. twitter was never profitable afaik, the whole idea was to have either some rich moron or (more likely) a megacorp buy it and everyone who contributed would get a fat final paycheck. but the way musk handled things definitely didn't help either.
I just want to point out the idea that these companies not being profitable is bullshit. It just means they've moved money that would be profit into some other place and now they can call it something other than profit.
Got $100k extra profit? Pay it all out as bonuses to your executives, now that $100k is an expense instead of profit.
on the surface level, makes sense, yeah. but twitter hosts video, that stuff isn't cheap -- hell, even images aren't cheap and twitter has piss poor ad integration and a meaningless subscription that they made pretty much as uncool to buy as possible. hosting a platform that size is hella expensive.
https://mashable.com/article/twitter-profitable-earnings-2017-first-time
it was profitable at least at some point
Mission accomplished!