526
Transphobe mad about people deadnaming his company
hello guys i've recently changed my name, why should i be responsible for the 400.000$ debt related to my old name? The name doesn't relate to me anymore.
Musk giving off sovereign citizen vibes.
He should of written diagonally in red ink on the court documents SMH
aka dumbshit who isn't punched in the face enough vibes.
Did you sign your new name at 45 degrees in red ink?
The social security card says it was issued to "ELON MUSK" but my name is "Elon Musk". Direct all these supposedly mine tax bills to "ELON MUSK" and leave me alone.
$400,000 isn’t even that much for a company like this, it might’ve cost that much just trying to fight this.
Twitter's revenue has cratered hard, and because its privately owned, every dollar Twitter loses is a dollar that Elon has to come up with.
Because his wealth is entirely in overinflated Tesla stock, and because he's already massively overleveraged from buying Twitter, coming up with that money means selling Tesla stock, and because the Tesla stock price is based on dreams and unicorn farts any amount he sells tends to sink the price.
This means that for Elon to cover $400,000, that could easily lose him tens of millions in net worth. And there's no telling when the Tesla stock price will just collapse entirely as investors finally start valuing it like a car manufacturer, and not like kind of predestined savior of the human race (for context, Tesla in its entirety is currently valued at $800bn. Ford is currently valued at $40bn. And Ford sell a LOT more cars than Tesla).
This is mostly incorrect.
First he's not overleveraged from buying Twitter. He bought it with Russian, Saudi, and 400 other investor's money. There was aist recently published.
Second, he doesn't need to put any personal money to pay Twitter's fines, Twitter has its own money/debts and accounting.
Third, even if it was his own money, he would sell stock, he could borrow against it, avoiding selling it.
Fourth, even if all of the above was true (which it isn't) for a hundred-billionaire, losing tens of millions doesn't register. It's like someone with a couple million bucks in the bank losing a few hundred. It's like a nice dinner.
Point four I've already answered; the need to liquidate stock amplifies any costs, with a potential to create a catastrophic snowball that could lead to a significant collapse in his fortune (nothing could ever make Musk "poor" by any sane standard, but he could become significantly poorer, which I'm sure to him would be the end of the world).
Point three is answered by him being overleveraged. He took on a lot of debt to buy Twitter, which makes taking on additional debt significantly harder. You've both tried to dispute this, while simultaneously confirming it. We'll get to that with point one.
Point two is misleading. While Twitter does have its own accounts, those coffers are bare. Either Musk foots the bill out of his own pocket, or the company goes bankrupt. Either way, he's still on the hook for about $800,000,000 a year in interest payments on the debt it took to buy it.
Which brings us to point one; you've tried to dispute this point by offering the evidence that confirms it. As your correctly state, Musk went into business with a murderers row of the kind of merciless loan sharks that you only do business with if the banks all laughed at you. As I mentioned previously the interest on the debts he took on to buy Twitter is $800 million a year. You don't accept those kinds of financing terms if you have better options. The fact that he did is all the proof you need that his credit is shit. The banks know damn well how precarious his wealth is. And if further evidence was needed, consider this; why did he trigger a significant collapse in Tesla's stock price last year selling off stock to service those debts if he had the option of simply borrowing against his assets as you claim?
Twitter is it's own entity. Musk is not in debt, Twitter is. And if their coffers are empty they can take more debt, in Twitter's name. I'm sure a Saudi bank would oblige as long as it's useful. However Twitter could go bankrupt and Musk would just lose his initial investment, which was a couple of billions max. Saudis, Russians and the Peter Thiels of the world would lose their investments as well, which I'm sure they would see as a small price to pay to kill a platform so inconvenient for them as Twitter was.
Tesla? Last year all tech stocks took a dive. Tesla's price is based on unicorns and rainbows, so it tracks the tech bubble more than real companies like Ford. Same like OpenAI and others.
Edit: I wrote a different response here, but there's no point. You refuse to acknowledge basic facts that undercut your whole argument. You don't understand this situation a fraction as well you think you do. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you about your fantasy version of reality.
/r/iamverysmart
Then WHY fight something that would've been pennies and now will at least be dimes? As much as I want to believe musk is close to insolvency, I don't think its quite possible yet. But then why die on these stupid little hills?
So far, 27,000ish Cybertrucks sold ever. In comparison, 127,500ish Broncos sold this year so far. Hmmmmmm.
Exactly. Right now Tesla are being priced like they're the next Amazon, but this is largely on the belief that they'll somehow end up licensing self driving software to every company in the world that deals in transit or transport. It's a total fantasy. While Tesla does have some competitive advantages (such as owning the accepted standard for EV charging) they're not worth anywhere close to what their stock price says. At this point they're basically turning into a new South Seas Company.
The fine increases for every day they don't comply.
The fine was issued last October, though I'm unsure if legal proceedings put a halt to the counter
Lol, Elon Musk thinks that the USA justice system runs on crack so the World justice system must too. 🤣🤣
I doubt Musk even knows about this case. X has lawyers for this type of pedestrian issues, and they come up with defense strategy.
we coddle our billionaires here which is why they can't make it overseas. Its time we took a tough love approach to billionaires in the US; the billionaire herd needs thinning.
Just think, this brilliant mind could soon be administrating vast swaths of the US government!
it's still Twitter
It's not twitter it's Xitter!
Hint hint
Yup, same thing, but more shitty. Although, I agree with MAGA Musk that it shouldn't fucking exist.
As long as twitter.com redirects to X, it's officially still called Twitter, I don't care what Elmo says
Wouldn't the business license say still be for Twitter, with a DBA "X"?
I've had a dig (I have no idea what I'm doing) but in this ASIC registry, seems to show they filed to try and wind up the company, and that was rejected? Again, not a lawyer. (See the "Documents" section)
Edit to add: And they still have their trademark registered, so it clearly still exists haha how bizarre.
Wheelahan found that under Nevada law, merging Twitter into X turned Twitter into a "constituent entity," which then transferred all of Twitter's legal consequences to X Corp.
Isn't that how it works everywhere? What where they even arguing for?
Like, if that worked, wouldn't every company just sell itself to a new shell company once a year and drop every kind of legal liability?
Pharmaceutical businesses enter the chat
Elmo was really hoping he found a SovCit level loophole to just escape all consequences.
Which is weird, because SovCits are a cargo cult who try to mimic the legal miracles top lawyers sometimes manage to pull off. Musk should be different - he does have access to these top lawyers who do have deep understanding of the law.
Unless Twittex' lawyers got the same treatment the engineers got?
Someone should start twitter.com.au using this argument
I don't get why twitter wouldn't just comply & implement measures the moment it knew it's platform was being used to distribute CSAM.
The fines are no doubt cheaper than actually doing something about it. Plus if they do something and are even moderately successful then he'd have less of an excuse for doing nothing about Russian disinformation and other bullshit.
I do. I know why.
Because they care about money, not harming children. This is why we live in a world where there isn't enough effort put into keeping children safe by rich people, because they prefer money to chlidren.
Money.
It would cost money.
Well now we know that Twitter doesn't care that there csam on their platform. Like couldn't even do the bare minimum standard of compliance
Is this "gotta try anything instead of submission" thing or just "new level of stupid" thing?
Was there actually some hope for this to work or was this just something the man baby cooked up and his layers just thought "fuck it, I'm getting paid for this and he won't listen anyway".
Arthur Fleck isn't quilty, it's the Joker who did it
Sometimes I’m perplexed how someone can be so smart and immensely stupid at the same time.
Dude became one of (if not the most) richest person in the world and yet his attitude, behavior and speech are immensely stupid.
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
526 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58998 readers
3228 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