The Twitter platform decisions are making headlines and opening conversation, because Elon Musk is trying to retain his platform against all odds and not really working to solve his problem. Several platform changes are taking place that are being less than honestly explained. As interested CTH readers look on quizzically, perhaps it’s time for me to revisit the truth of Musk’s challenge as it has always existed so people can understand. [NBC ARTICLE HERE, that doesn’t understand]
Keep in mind, long before people realized the Dept of Homeland Security (FBI, DHS, CISA etc.) had a portal into Twitter, I was explaining how transparently obvious it was. {Go Deep – Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop} In part, the transparency of the problem is driven by CTH understanding of the costs associated with Twitter as a very unique platform in the sphere of social media. {Go Deep – Understand the Costs}
With the latest revelations we shared about the financial position of Twitter {Go Deep on FINANCIALS}, all of the moves now underway make sense. Musk was on track to hit a date in/around October of this year where Twitter would be insolvent. If you had read those previous “Go Deep” links, you will easily see the problem. However, if you have not read those backgrounds, this could be difficult to understand.
Musk is being disingenuous in his explanation here. I’m being generous in not calling him a fibber. His problem is multifaceted, and he is looking at it with two approaches.
First, by Musk’s prior admissions, he’s losing approximately $300 million/month and needs to grow revenue fast. That’s why he hired Linda Yaccarino. Second, he’s trying desperately to reduce operational costs for data processing. Twitter has a systemic platform cost issue that will not change easily – due to his very unique issue of “simultaneous users,” in combination with no proprietary content. That’s where he is being less than honest about these changes.
Twitter is a global discussion platform, essentially a global commenting system. Elon Musk is trying to address the cost and utility of his platform at the same time that a similarly constructed META alternative is about to launch. Yes, Mark Zuckerberg is JUST ABOUT to launch a Twitter version of META that will link Facebook, Instagram, and Google YouTube content into one big instant conversation and commenting system.
Zuckerberg has one key thing Musk doesn’t, proprietary content and actively engaged and solid advertising systems built into the operation.
META CEO Mark Zuckerberg has the revenue options that will cover the extreme costs of the simultaneous user interface and data processing, while simultaneously allowing content creators to cross post their content.
Zuckerberg has multifaceted advertising engagement systems that allow advertisers to target and engage with users in very creative ways on his platform(s). You can even shop directly from Instagram and Facebook with the advertiser. Setting aside the other issues with advertisers, corporate wokeism etc, Elon Musk has nothing like that – not even close.
However, Musk’s biggest issue is the cost of his platform. This is what he is trying to tackle right now, while simultaneously fending off the META infringement.
In the big picture of tech platforms, Twitter, as an operating model, is a massive high-user commenting system.
Twitter is not a platform built around a website; Twitter is a platform for comments and discussion that operates in the sphere of social media. As a consequence, the technology and data processing required to operate the platform does not have an economy of scale.
There is no business model where Twitter is financially viable to operate…. UNLESS the tech architecture under the platform was subsidized.
[NOTE: In my opinion, there is only one technological system and entity that could possibly have underwritten the cost of Twitter to operate. That entity is the United States Government. That’s where the quid pro quo in allowing DHS to have a backdoor comes in.]
Unlike websites and other social media, Twitter is unique in that it only represents a platform for user engagement and discussion. There is no content other than commentary, discussion and the sharing of information – such as linking to other information, pictures, graphics, videos url links etc.
In essence, Twitter is like the commenting system on the CTH website. It is the global commenting system for users to share information and debate. It is, in some ways, like the public square of global discussion. However, the key point is that user engagement on the platform creates a massive amount of data demand.
Within the systems of technology for public (user engagement) commenting, there is no economy of scale. Each added user represents an increased cost to the operation of the platform, because each user engagement demands database performance to respond to the simultaneous users on the platform. The term “simultaneous users” is critical to understand because that drives the cost.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter has approximately 217 million registered daily users, and their goal is to expand to 315 million users by the end of 2023. Let me explain why things are not what they seem.
When people, users, operate on a tech platform using the engagement features, writing comments, hitting likes, posting images, links etc, the user is sending a data request to the platform’s servers. The servers must then respond allowing all simultaneous users to see the change triggered by the single user.
Example: when you hit the “like” button feature on an engagement system, the response (like increasing by one) must not only be visible to you, but must also be visible to those simultaneously looking at the action you took. If 100,000 simultaneous users are looking at the same thing, the database must deliver the response to 100,000 people. As a result, the number of simultaneous users on a user engagement platform drives massive performance costs. In the example above, a single action by one person requires the server to respond to 100,000 simultaneous users with the updated data.
As a consequence, when a commenting platform increases in users, the cost not only increases because of that one user, the cost increases because the servers need to respond to all the simultaneous users. Using CTH as an example, 10,000 to 15,000 simultaneous commenting system users, engaging with the servers, costs around $4,500/mo.
This is why most websites, even big media websites, do not have proprietary user engagement, i.e. commenting systems. Instead, most websites use third party providers like Disqus who run the commenting systems on their own servers. Their commenting systems are plugged in to the website; that defers the cost from the website operator, and the third party can function as a business by selling ads and controlling the user experience. [It also sucks because user privacy is non existent]
The key to understanding the Twitter dynamic is to see the difference between, (a) running a website, where it doesn’t really matter how many people come to look at the content (low server costs), and (b) running a user engagement system, where the costs to accommodate the data processing -which increase exponentially with a higher number of simultaneous users- are extremely expensive. Twitter’s entire platform is based on the latter.
There is no economy of scale in any simultaneous user engagement system. Every added user costs exponentially more in data-processing demand, because every user needs a response, and every simultaneous user (follower) requires the same simultaneous response. A Twitter user with 100 followers (simultaneously logged in) that takes an action – costs less than a Twitter user with 100,000 followers (simultaneously logged in), that takes an action.
If you understand the cost increases in the data demand for simultaneous users, you can see the business model for Twitter is non-existent.
Bottom line, more users means it costs Twitter more money to operate. The business model is backwards from traditional business. More customers = higher costs, because each customer brings more simultaneous users….. which means exponentially more data performance is needed.
User engagement features on Twitter are significant, because that’s all Twitter does. Not only can users write comments, graphics, memes, videos, but they can also like comments, retweet comments, subtweet comments, bookmark comments, and participate in DM systems. That is a massive amount of server/data performance demand, and when you consider simultaneous users, it’s almost unimaginable in scale. That cost and capacity is also the reason why Twitter does not have an edit function.
With 217 million users, you could expect 50 million simultaneous users on Twitter during peak operating times. My back of the envelope calculations, which are really just estimations based on known industry costs for data performance and functions per second (pfp), would put the data cost to operate Twitter around $200 to $300 million per month.
In 2021, Twitter generated $5.1 billion in revenue, according to the Wall Street Journal. According to the New York Times, in 2023 that revenue has dropped to around $1 billion per year.
Musk stated during public conversation that Twitter was essentially break even at $4 billion, which was the position in 2022 just prior to his taking over. [2022 costs around $4.5 billion and revenue around $4 billion +/-, per public financial statements and reporting]. Musk cut approximately $500 million in expenses from realignment and staffing reductions.
Musk has a $1.5 billion debt service on the loan he took out, per his own admission: that’s more than $100 million per month. The debt service alone is higher than his revenue. As I noted last month, Twitter is losing somewhere around $300 million per month. With $1 billion liquid in the bank, as of June (per Musk), that only gets him to September; by October, he needs another influx of cash, or else.
There is no business model, even with paying subscribers, for Twitter to exist without a major increase in revenue (Yaccarino) or a major decrease in costs. As the business grows (more users), the costs increase (more simultaneous users), and the costs to subscribers would grow. Twitter Blue subscriptions are around 180,000 users, paying $11/mo. That’s around $2 million a month- a pittance in comparison to what he needs.
Right now, meaning literally right now, Musk is trying to reduce operational costs by limiting user engagement.
It is not an accident these solutions target the “simultaneous user” issue?
Can you see it now?
.
Mr @elonmusk, I can solve ur problem w/ one simple line of code.
Every Tweet becomes a static and cached url after 10 days.
You cannot engage w/ it, RT it, like it, or view replies to it.
You can only cop the url and forward it to share it.
Done. Easy peasy. https://t.co/ilWn4nJv9J
— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) July 1, 2023
Think about all the expense they cut when they kicked President Trump off the platform and a big percentage of his followers left with him.
Unique way of looking at this. Because I believe Musk is just as anti-Trump as the worst of them.
Musk supported free speech when he wasn’t in charge of it. But remember he is a liberal at heart.
Do the wired up monkeys at Nuralink get free speech ?
Elon has never been for free speech or the freedoms of this country and him bowing to the EU allowing them to dictate free speech at twatter should be enough for everyone to dump all.
People prefer too see him as a ‘saviour’ of free speech. They prefer to be oblivious to his background or what’s done to experiment on Animals at Nuralink. Sad.
Let’s all help Elon out by staying off his corrupted social network. You’ll feel much better about yourself once you break the habit.
I feel fine. I never had the habit.
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
NEVER been on and when Sundance produced those screeds on what it takes awhile ago, and being a “techie” I knew the writing on the wall. Also, some close “techies” I know also have been discussing and asked the question: If Yacinda is coming onto Twitter, does that mean that GOOGLE servers have a back-door to “HELP” with the load for a side-payment?
Also, Amazon has the same issues as Google AND Twitter so there’s that…BEFORE Elon does something like one of the tech companies in he is going to think long and hard and that time span is VERY short!!!
JTOL – (Just thinking out loud)
Ditto.
Neither did I.
A habit I’ve never had.
I never joined in the first place, so staying off is easy to do.
Everyone should be off of twatter and Fakebook and all. Social platforms.
I consider social media dangerous.
Search engines are terrible for news due to either web crawling latencies or censorship.
I joined twitter to search for news and usually can find faster breaking news and better story depth (usually from the independent researchers) than what the search engines deliver.
I joined because twitter no longer allows non-users to use the search function.
I have no currency in the system since I don’t engage so these new limits do not effect me. I can simply create a new account since twitter no longer requires a phone number to join (that, of course, could change tomorrow)
I see the opposite strategy… let’s all help Elon out by joining and twitter nonstop creating exponential meltdown.
Never been on it.
Was thinking same. Was imagining dialogue between Musk and DJT … I’ll let you back on because of free speech yada yada but please refuse because you know… costs man. Sure Elon I’ll refuse and stay on my own platform Truth Social to make “a stand for principles ” and you’ll be a 1st ammendment hero. It will be a win win for both of us. 👍👍
I noticed that I can’t open linked Twitter posts even though a couple days ago I could and had some limited access to comments and related videos even if I did not have an account. That’s fine. I still refuse to sign up. Same applies to Facebook.
Forgive me for forgetting who said this … but … “sometimes the tide must go out to expose those who are naked” … Elon?!
I believe it was an Englishman that said it, can’t remember which, brain power fading . . .
I remember now that Neil Oliver brought it to us, still can’t remember his attribution . . .
Well Buffett said something close
If I am understanding Sundance, Elon doesn’t WANT you to sign up.
Users are not paying customers, there are no “sales” users just cost him $.
The opposite of what advertisers want.
Same here; suddenly for all Twitter posts especially today for all President Trump’s rally in S Carolina. Is Musk up to some explanation? Is he blocking posts linked to Twitter that are shared on CTH?
He ain’t your friend.
Musk bleeding money – lots of it. He may have believed rumors that President Trump is going to use his Twitter account. It’s obvious Musk is salivating at the prospect of millions of Trump supporters joining Twitter with the sudden no access for non account users. Including new accounts for those who will also follow thousands of pro-Trump account users.
Trump supporters know Musk is no friend – it’s simple as that.
Zuckerbucks is big on election interference. F Zuck.
You mean “puckerbutt”?
“Elon Musk Is Self-Immolating …..”
So, does this mean he’s gonna lose all his carbon credits?
Well, he’s going to become nothing but carbon, so maybe it equals out?
Looks like Elon could lose control of Twitter at any minute, if he hasn’t already, putting the bad government actors back in full charge.
Even though it’s frustrating not to be able to read Tweets now without an account, it’s might be best not to to sign up for Twitter just before the Deep State possibly gets the database back under their jurisdiction.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that he either had commented he might consider shutting it down, or that he was thinking about shutting it down or that he should just let it go bust. I wish my memory on this was clearer. But what are the odds he does?
While I enjoyed the analysis, and always appreciate Sundance as a shining light in a sea of crappy punditry, this post seems overly simplistic. It completely glosses over why Twitter uniquely has a “simultaneous user” problem but other social media websites and commenting systems do not. While I do believe Twitter was subsidized by the government due to the quid pro quo, I certainly wasn’t convinced by this technical/financial analysis. We should answer these questions:
1. What proprietary content does Facebook have that Twitter doesn’t? Unless I’m missing something, the content on both platforms is entirely user-driven.
2. Twitter has advertisers! How does its model/scale differ from Facebook’s so dramatically?
3. Disqus offloads its economies of scale problem to its customers through licensing plans. However the same problem exists, just distributed out to its customers. If we are to assume that it is economically-viable for Disqus’s customers to cover the costs of their simultaneous users, then why would that not be the case for a single “customer” like Twitter as well?
4. Using CTH’s cost model as an input into estimating Twitter’s cost is not remotely appropriate. I can guarantee you the architectures are FAR different, and the costs don’t scale linearly. And what “known industry costs for data performance and functions per second” are you referring to here?
Also to nitpick, the terminology is “concurrent users” not “simultaneous users”.
One significant difference is users on Facistbook can advertise and sell. Twit has nothing comparable, as was stated in the article.
And fyi, the very first synonym listed for simultaneous is…concurrent.
While FB does indeed take a cut from FB marketplace sales, I highly doubt that covers their costs.
And yes, of course the two terms are synonyms in a thesaurus. I was commenting specifically on what the standard technology industry nomenclature was. Not using it correctly is a credibility issue.
Are you going to answer the actual questions, or just falsely claim to know my motivations?
Your questions were already answered in Sundance’s many, lengthy, well researched and detailed analysis in posts.
That answer is very troll like.
That was incredible.
Un-credible?
Non-credible?
Dis-credible?
I always had a chuckle over the pop exclamation of the ’60s…”In..Credible…”. Scratch head, wrinkle nose , yeah. Not believable?
We probably need to go point by point to properly answer the questions. But to start, Facebook certainly has far more “persistent” content than Twitter. How many Twitter users go to old tweets compared to FB users looking at family photos? Don’t forget Google in this proprietary question. What analog does Twitter have to YouTube, for example? How many Twitter users search for tweets from the past compared to YouTube or Instagram? It’s well know that both YouTube and Instagram creators continue to make a good income off months-old property sharing ad revenues.
I tend to share Sundance’s cognitive model on how much server load is generated by Twitter’s platform compared to other social media sites. Certainly all platforms depend on ad revenue to some extent as well. But the real cost is in the server infrastructure. Take YouTube – a user requests a video, and the server delivers the data to his system. If the user has a comment, it gets uploaded to the end of that data file. Other users can see that comment, but only by downloading that video. The notification of other users also occurs as a serial operation, at the leisure of the server’s scheduler. Nobody watching a YouTube gets interrupted in the midst of the video by another user.
Twitter is different in that the comment stream is live. All the concurrent users independently interact with each other. I’m not sure how such a system would be modeled by a data engineer to even estimate the power of the servers necessary. I imagine the server systems must be hugely over populated, with most servers loafing along for a while followed by periods of overload. It seems like a recipe for enormous capital costs.
Anyway, interesting discussion.
It’s stuff like this that makes us question whether you understand the topic at all:
“Old 2022: We’re going to make the Twitter code open source so everyone can see it.
New Hotness 2023: OMG they’re scraping.”
The source code is open source, the data (Tweets) are not. If I give you the blueprint to my house, that doesn’t give you the right to steal the food inside my fridge. Tesla is an AGI company (FSD requires it), and its competitors are using Twitter’s data to train their own AGI models. It’s not complicated.
“In the example above, a single action by one person requires the server to respond to 100,000 simultaneous users with the updated data.”
Except, that’s not true. Everyone that uses Twitter knows the counters update at seemingly random times, or after an action taken by the reader. Go check Tucker’s latest video. When you see it embedded it has one counter, but when you click through it increases by millions.
Are you related to tech anon 🤔
No, although he’s right that Twitter’s counters are unreliable, and actions on posts are definitely not instantaneous across all users.
Does that have to do with users periodically refreshing the page viewed?
The only time I see updated comments from other users is when I refresh the page. So my ‘view’ is not automatically synced to newer comments.
Depends on the architecture of the site or system you are in, and the difference between the count that you see versus the count that is up to date in the database. What you are raising is a question of lag, and while most all social media sites have this issue to an extent, I think Twitter’s issue goes far beyond this.
To note, older technologies like http and REST protocols are stateless and uni-directional, and do not update in your browser unless you request an updated view by refreshing. Other tech, like Websockets and telemetry-focused protocols like MQTT are stateful and bi-directional, and your view is automatically refreshed on an active basis. There are many mixed flavors of those two categories, but in short, there is a big processing cost to bi-directional comms. So you want to limit those to critical functions, and with things that have very low overhead. And thus why something like Twitter does not actively update your view.
With that said, they are in theory still tracking data in a database somewhere. My concern is when the number is SO FAR OFF that it cannot be just due to lag. My assumption is that it is a gap in their horizonal architecture. Meaning, they have many different databases capturing the same user view counts…but for only a particular segment of the user base. Those databases need to sync and add in order to get the proper aggregate counts, however this process has a large lag and/or has numerous ways to be incorrect.
But the devil is always in the details on things like this…
Is it trolling to ask legitimate questions? Sundance is a big boy, let him clarify his analysis without trying to be a suck up white knight that nobody asked for.
Lolz. Salt Dog?
The analysis provided here, for FREE, needs no clarification. The analysis IS the clarification.
Nobody asked for your snark opinions either; yet here you are anyway.
I suppose it is just possible the regime decided to leave Musk out to dry, if he decided not to play along. Teaching him a Chuckles Schumer lesson, there’s six ways to Sunday…
I am not a member of Twitter, but if I’m reading something and it has a reference to Twitter, then I click on it to read whatever it is.
I have always been able to do this….UNTIL WHAT I’VE TRIED IN THE LAST FEW HOURS!!
Everytime now I’ m unable to read anything on there.
Well, that didn’t take long. Musk recently hired Linda Yaccarino as a Twitter CEO. Yaccarino has ties to WEF, who is all in for an unelected world government. Hence the censorship of Twitter will continue unabated. Musk, you are just like the rest!
What I’m getting out of this is that “Meta” is a subsidiary of the Intelligence Community. And, tjat it is gearing to replace Twitter, now that it no longer does what it’s paymasters at Lagley require… Is “self-made billionaire” “Zuck” just another facetious construct of our Intelligence black budget?
Asking for a friend…
“Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.” Acts 4:32
Here we have the requirement for the unity of the Church. “Heart” represents the intellectual side of character and “soul,” the emotional. Now the requirement for the unity or “oneness” of the rising Global totalitarian NWO exactly parallels the Christian. Rather than heart and soul globalists speak of our thoughts as cognitive infrastructure.
uncoverdc.com has written extensively on the subject of cognitive infrastructure and say Jen Easterly, Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is an important figure:
“Easterly is an important figure because, as Editor-in-Chief Tracy Beanz points out, she has attended every weekly meeting having to do with Election Security and Resilience (ESR), coordination between CISA and Facebook about election mis- and disinformation, CISA’s Cybersecurity Advisory Committee (CSAC), the subcommittee for mis-, dis-, and malinformation (MDM), and the Election Infrastructure Subsector Government CoordinatingCouncil (EIS-GCC) and Election Infrastructure Subsector Coordinating Council (EI-SCC) Joint MDM Working Group. She was nominated for director of CISA by Biden in April 2021.
“…CISA has designated Americans’ thoughts as “Cognitive Infrastructure.” Because they’ve declared what Americans decide to write on social media as infrastructure, they have decided that it also falls under their purview to manage and control. CISA and Easterly have been taking steps for years to make “cognitive infrastructure” stronger, in their image, of course. To most, that means propaganda. To CISA, it means censorship and control while ensuring only “approved” narrative is available for consumption.”
“America’s cognitive infrastructure, they say is “foundational to our country’s economic and political health.”
“Here they also advocate for partnerships between social media companies and independent fact-checkers like Snopes.com to avoid “viral falsehoods.” They conclude that “good national security policy” is only as good as “the set of facts” that define the issues we debate.”
Elon Musk is a Transhumanist, which means he is torn between two positions: preservation of free speech and the necessity of “correct” American thoughts as cognitive infrastructure.
There’s a lot of information in your comment. Quoting from your post: Cognitive infrastructure is what Americans decide to write on social media. But that narrative must be controlled so that only APPROVED narrative is available.
Zuckerberg’s META link up with Facebook, Google and Instagram will be the next command and control device to more efficently correct American WRONG THOUGHTS.
thanks Sundance. seems like you’re advising Musk/Twitter how to rectify the revenue problem.
If Sundance is correct, then rectifying the Twitter revenue problem need not involve a WEF-infused gubmint “back door” at all! So now Musk has a credibility problem *if* he ignores Sundance’s advice and instead grovels back to the gubmint censors, correct?
Whenever I click a link from here or anywhere else for that matter to Twitter it’s just an error saying to try again later. I don’t have an account, my old one was hacked and I tried to fill out the forms to get it back and never heard from Twitter.. even tried twice with no luck. Oh well, no love lost.
Fair Warning (again) – use TWTR at your own risk. I haven’t used TWTR or Facebook for years now.
Who approves/approved funding of the Twitter platform? Congress? Paper trail?
As we could very well be swiftly approaching the day when unpunished, not spied-upon free speech is a thing of the pre Crazy World past, I am inclined to root for Musk for at least giving WeThePeople back this lifeline and do not feel any need to agree with him on every single issue.
The Crazy Clowns could shut down Twitter just as fast as they’ve shut down Nigel Farrage’s bank accounts. Musk has said enough based things to assure me he’s not one of the Bad Guys.
This is simply great.
@thelastrefuge2 tweets out a million dollars worth of consulting fees of advice… but because he’s shadowed 😅… nobody sees it☺️
6000 post a day? Get a life!
I guess I can see FB as a bit different but wouldn’t Instagram or any other similar platform face the same simultaneous engagement issue?
I will click on links (or should I say “used to”) provided by others, but have never had a personal Twitter account (had one for a business some 10 years ago) so I’m really not missing a lot
He’s not looking so smart after all. You lay down with vermin you get infected.
I think it’s to limit scraping of data by the Censorship Industrial Complex.
Start this at minute 53 for the discussion
https://rumble.com/v2xaw74-devolution-power-hour-158-sat-1030-pm-et-.html?mref=v6mdk&mrefc=2
Elon Musk was clueless to the “coffee shop” before he made the purchase, now the government has stopped providing the subsidized processing twitter is on crash course with oblivion. The only way out is likely to reinstate the “partnership” or let it fail.
I don’t recall anywhere other than CTH reporting on the reality of twitter, and doubt very much Elon reads or has read SD’s analysis.
He has no choice but to show support for meatball if he intends to save twitter (reinstate the partnership) – pretty certain he’s regretting making the purchase
my speculation
Don’t give a FIG (Facebook, Instagram, and Google YouTube) for Zucking META; nor Musky TWAT , for that matter ! Go with GAB, Volks !!
My question is, did Musk close down the “government’s” portal into Twitter or are they laying in the grass until the smoke settles?
FTA: Using CTH as an example, 10,000 to 15,000 simultaneous commenting system users, engaging with the servers, costs around $4,500/mo.
Count me astonished! That is roughly equal to my entire gross salary. That puts my monthly contribution to CTH into a whole new (embarrassingly) microscopic category.
The term “self-immolating” is interesting. I’m not sure it is exactly correct… he might be trying to stop throwing good money after bad. Funny example, I am a hopeless SpaceX fanboy. I need a SpaceX info-fix two or three times a day. BUT, now I can’t see SpaceX content on Twitter. Who is the chief poo-bah at SpaceX? Who is the chief poo-bah at Twitter? Odd. However, SpaceX has zero “need” for its fans who are “little people” like me. Cutting me off from one source of my info-fixes has zero consequences for them.
I had the same reaction to that data. lol
Does Truth Social have the same revenue problem as Twitter?
Musk looks like he’s ready to go down with his ship. He’s not admitting to the public that it’s failing BECAUSE he doesn’t have the same levels of government sponsorship Twitter once enjoyed.
I put Twitter and Fox in the same category. Cut ’em both off and you’ll learn more that is truth and get the noise from twitter through other sources (like CTH) that are reliable.
Financially, it should work just fine on Mars. Better speed up the timeline Elon.
It takes a lot of progressive liberals to create an economic model whereby success breeds failure.
Elon, here’s an idea. Do what’s right for the nation, for the world, and for your soul. Truth, is what’s right, and the payoff will be more than money. Much more.
So, how exactly did the Deep State axe the $3 billion worth of services it was providing to keep Twitter afloat (and captive)?
Like Clint Eastwood said….A man has to know his limitations!!
Timing of everything seems curious to me. Elon buying Twitter, Twitter files released, Meta new business and Elon throttling user interaction. Will elaborate in open thread but my opinion is this entire string of events was/is intentional.
A simple solution. The conservatives have dealt a massive financial blow to Bud Light and the parent company. Odds are very good those beer drinkers will not return to that brand as they have found alternatives.
Twitter is the same, the company does not stand for fore speech, and it is not an open platform. Just walk away from twitter, delete the app, social media has proven itself to be harmful to our children. We can open their eyes very quickly by just deleting twitter and not using it again.
Some Twits must not have much of a life, posting 6000 per day is one every 14.4 seconds. Eliminate the bots, eliminate the costs.
What if this is all intentional, a coordinated destruction of Twitter? The timing/sequence of events from the beginning of negotiations with Elon to the current decision to reduce user interaction is peculiar, to say the least.
1. Going back to when Elon started negotiations, remember the on again/off again nature of the purchase? Now read Sundance’s comment on revenue before the acquisition at $4 billion in 2022 and $1 billion in 2023. Where did the lost revenue come from? Was the delay in the sale a result of Jack and the government trying to figure out how to solve the subsidy issue without having to disclose to Elon?
2. Now to Zuckerberg’s Meta working on a Twitter like platform that would serve as direct competition. Any startup endeavor is a mountain to climb to make successful, especially when you are going up against a behemoth like Twitter. Also remember that Facebook has an image problem, as it is viewed as the old people application. Wouldn’t it be much easier if you could just eliminate your competition?
3. What if the government also knew that the gig was up on interference via Twitter and wanted to wash their hands clean? This is especially true as Elon was announcing his determination to bring free speech back to the platform. The government would then have a need/desire to push users to a new platform they could control, enter Zuckerbrg.
4. With the current decision by Elon to limit user interraction, I believe he had no idea what was going on prior to his purchase. Did Jack and the government pull the wool over his eyes?
Was all of this done with an eye towards the new Meta platform and for the government to continue to control the online narrative? All while taking out the largest competitor. Maybe/maybe not, maybe this is all a conspiracy theory…..until it becomes a reality. The one question that sticks with me that nobody has been able to answer is this: if the government lost its ability to control the narrative via Twitter, does anyone really think they would just slink away in the shadows?
It never made sense to me that Musk over paid so much for such a sketchy platform. Everyone knew that Twitter stock was wildly over valued and speculative. I assumed he knew what he was buying but apparently he didn’t. That’s kind of a big mistake to make in front of the world.
I believe he thought he could use the existing reach & add revenue-producing components to it & turn it into a money-maker. How the powers-that-be are keeping that from happening, I am not sure, but somehow they are. Elon is nobody’s dummy, but they do have ways of threatening him & controlling him.
Thanks Sundance.
Would Truth Social cost structure/ model be just as similar as Twitter’s?
Maybe I am just dense, but where was the annual $5.1 billion vs current $1 billion revenue coming from since Musk’s takeover? Is this the “subsidized” amount as you explain it? Other than the revenue created by dues for blue check marks, I see no other way that Twitter produces revenue at all.
Look at Musk’s background, his friends in the WEF & other wealthy elitists. A Leopard doesn’t change its spots. Sorry, Leopard for the comparison!
Slow down, Sundance. Twitter users are being mass-scraped by the censorship industrial complex (CIC). Data is sucked into CIC in order to tune and perfect their AI-based censorship at the behest of taxpayer-funded three letter agencies. Nearly all of the censorship is aimed at the Freedom Caucus and Trump-aligned citizens. Check out Mike Benz’s take on what’s going on before you jump to conclusions. It’s early days right now:
https://tinyurl.com/3x8jd3cs
Thank you!
Mike Benz’s to my thinking makes a lot of sense.
One thing I am sure of EM is a lot more effective than I so I’m just watching and waiting to see what happens.
This guy has a different take – and it’s quite interesting:
Wow. Sundance solved EM’s pending insolvency situation.
H/T to Sundance.
This post just amplifies a question I’ve had for some time: Why did Elon buy Twitter? What is he getting out of this?
The entities who have products placed on twitter must be incensed.
They have lost all those non-member eyeballs….