MeerkatBong

I'm waiting on your ruling here on if this source can be considered objective and bias-free. I'd like to know what is wildcat-approved for business news consumption that isn't mind-warping. In that vein, do you have any newsletters or dailys that you read for news that you can share that you find to be objective?

okay? Is Ben Thompson some known media bias weirdo? This is the newsletter: https://stratechery.com/

Good question, the author doesn't explicitly say why not added in the debt service for total annual cost of 2022 (FY23), but I am guessing it's because it was a one time cost and it was reconciled in 2021. Per the link back (you need a paywall, it's a newsletter, but I'll copy/paste here, bold emphasis my own): These numbers are deceiving; in December 2021 Twitter made a $809.5 million payment to settle a shareholder class-action lawsuit for having allegedly misled investors about user engagement metrics in 2015. Without that payment Twitter’s 2021 cash flow from operations would have been $1.4 billion, which is, needless to say, enough to cover its debt burden. This shouldn’t be a surprise, by the way: while I am sure the banks regret agreeing to fund Musk’s horribly overpriced acquisition, it is silly to think that they would have committed more money than Twitter as currently constituted could afford to pay.

Saw this objective analysis from a newsletter I subscribe to (bold emphasis mine): -- Twitter, of course, has not gone down (although there do at times seem to be oddities consistent with some sort of degradation, but it’s hard to know to what extent this is a sort of psychosomatic suspicion of bugs that have always existed), and Musk is bragging about record users and engagement. That, though, doesn’t solve the issues I have raised around monetization and regulators; the advantage for Musk, though, is that those are no longer the expectations: simply staying online is now seen as a Musk victory. This isn’t the first time we have seen similar dynamics, of course: there is sometimes a tendency to imagine the worst possible outcome and to proceed as if it is an inevitability, and then, when that outcome does not come to pass, more moderate concerns are discredited in the wash. Like, for example, a potential degradation in service, or, as I have been writing about, concerns about monetization and regulatory action. Those are still real concerns — and to be fair, I suppose Twitter could forget to renew a security certificate or something — but it seems to me that the hysteria of last Friday has, counter-intuitively, increased the chances that Musk succeeds because it already seems like he has. What I have not seen much discussion about is the positive impact on Twitter’s financials of all of Twitter’s layoffs and resignations. According to Platformer Twitter had 2,700 full time employees as of last Monday; that’s down from 7,500 at the end of last year (there were also a reported 4,000 contractors let go). Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that 20% of Twitter’s Cost of Revenue, and 80% of Research & Development, Sales & Marketing, and General & Administrative were salaries: 2021 (in thousands) Total Costs $ Salary Salary Costs Cost of Revenue $1,797,510 20% $359,502 R&D, S&M, G&A $3,007,010 80% $2,405,608 Total $2,765,110 Employees 7,500 Average $368,680 Post-Layoffs 2,700 Total $995,440 Again, these are very rough estimates, but I think it is reasonable to assume that Twitter’s employee costs have been cut significantly, leaving its total annual costs at around $3.0 billion (excluding last year’s lawsuit settlement); add on the company’s reported $1 billion in interest payments and the company needs to come up with $4.0 billion a year in revenue. 2021 revenue, meanwhile, was $5.1 billion, and remember, Twitter had around $6 billion in cash pre-buyout. In other words, while I suspect Twitter’s ad revenue has been impacted, it will take a pretty large impact to drive the company bankrupt.

I heard the opposite, where the journalist wearing a rainbow flag wasn't being let in (and finally got let in) and FIFA sent word to Qatar any more of those shenanigans and they will cancel games, so obviously the guy got let in and you haven't heard much more of those types of issues (rainbow shirts, subtle support, etc.). It sounded like Qatar was worried about FIFA cancelling games and FIFA had the leverage.... That said, I understand the idea of sportswashing, but I'm thinking Qatar is having a bit of buyers remorse on this one. Nothing good coming from this for them and they clearly value different things than most of the world and don't appreciate people trying to get them to change...

Speaking of Russell Crowe, just saw Thor Love and whatever, and it was pure garbage EXCEPT for Russell Crowe's portrayal of Zeus as a fat, greasy Greek. Hilarious.

Same, same.

It's a bit of a bloodbath out there right now. I just got through about 6 weeks of negotiating which was a knife fight to get what was a first or second offer just 8-9 months ago when you could name your price in the job market.

Pretty massive difference.

Put some respect on his name; Toni.

The Imitation Game (2014) I had heard good things, don't think this film as aged all that well and seems to be historically super hollywood washed. Thought Benedict Cumberbatch was just okay. Give it a B for entertainment value only (which I guess is why they took so many liberties with the historical facts and timelines).

Disney up early with the Sunday night dumping of CEO, that's interesting.

People are sickly attracted to deranged. Similar to young, good looking chicks who write and marry serial killers in prison.

I'm reading with Bob Chapek being axed and activist investors at the gates, Disney+ will combine with Hulu

Dang, suicide!?! With 4 kids. RIP, didn’t know he had demons like that but I guess he’s been out of the spotlight for decades.

Of course he's not, which is why the absolute meltdown media members were having is so hilarious and ridiculous in the first place.

Jefferson wasn't even the Vikings leading receiver today. I think you owe a little bit more an apology than that.

Well?

Pretty impressive to have the hapless colts almost beat the best team in the nfc and lose by 1. Guess this guy really was a travesty of a hire like Everton freaked out about.

They are gonna be like $125k base price at this rate.

It’s like you people don’t read Fishbowl or Blind or even Reddit or Quora. In fact this very point I think was made even here on a thread some years ago. It’s not even remotely controversial to state that, all things being equal, Twitter even before Elmo wasn’t a tier-1 destination compared to FAANG.

lol okay cool, hook em.

I think you missed my point which was, on the whole, Twitter doesn't have "rockstar" or "ninja" or whatever cool prefix is used before "coder/techskill" that denotes an A+ player. They are a bunch of B & C team players to begin with. To put it as an analogy in my world. Twitter is like the tech world's KPMG of the Big 4. Sure there are some outlier all-stars and probably even a few departments that are great or practices that shine, but on the whole, it ain't housing the best in breed (and this is because of multiple reasons; compensation plan, RSU/stock options have sucked, mission-driven people roll their eyes, culture stuff, etc.). All that said, B&C team players are better than an empty bench where there is work to be done, so in that we agree.

I gave up a few weeks ago. Forgot they existed again until this thread.

I've also read some on this and from what I've read the general consensus in this Big Tech world with all these skillsets is that Twitter had at best the B-team of Silicon Valley and at worst was home to the most mediocre of big tech STEM/Developers/Tech people. That doesn't bode well for competing against the 10k amazon folks and 13k meta folks who are already on the street due to RIF's with Google's cut incoming. Basically these Twitter folks are smart to quit and get in before the labor market is a mess with the job market being super tight for comparable compensation/jobs in big tech.