2459

nuff said

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] irkli@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

TIL how loooong it takes for a largeish business to die. It's hard to grasp scale I guess. I thought it would be over in months.

I find it hard to believe Facebook is so terribly great. Keep in mind these are not businesses like a grocery store; they're publicly traded and the metric is growth, not profit. (Edit: Twitter is private now no idea how that change is accomplished.)

Truly, I'm hoping they all die.

[-] db2@lemmy.one 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The stocks had to be bought back first, then basically they could be turned in to the DTCC and the company gets delisted. That's how Twitter did it.

The other way is to naked short so much you've got enough shares to control the board and tank the company from inside then you don't have to do a buyback because there's no company. This will be reddit's future if they even get to ipo at this point.

[-] CurlyWurlies4All@prxs.site 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The more realistic death is a buyout, merger and dismantling. That's how the vast majority of publicly traded companies die. Bought my a larger organisation looking for a deal on your IP, userbase or reputation who then sells off all physical assets, offshores all talent and outsources all capabilities. They retain the brand equity which then gets rinsed through a range of products that are smaller and smaller before quietly being shelved. See GEs dismantling of RCA, the death of GE itself, and every company EA has ever bought.

[-] RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

and the metric is growth

No, not really. The metric is growth only for those who aren't profitable. They use growth as a promise of future profits.

Meta/Facebook is turning in a huge profit each ear. Nobody cares about the user count that much anymore unless it sharply falls.

Twitter is different. Twitter didn't really make a profit yet. They aren't profitable.

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

Meta is pumping ungodly amounts of money into a moon shot (VR) because it is in stagnation phase and their market is saturated - so they do care about growth quite a bit.

[-] RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We were talking about growing the userbase. Growth of the business is something different. Of course any company is interested in growth. However, I don't think usercount growth is the metric Facebook is looking at currently.

Look at Amazon. The cloud division is now more profitable than the Amazon website. Facebook is looking to use those large profits to branch out in different directions. Some like the metaverse won't work. Just like Amazon's echo didn't become profitable. But others eventually will.

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

If your business relies on the size of your userbase than those things are quite related. Again, not a coincidence that while facebook is stagnating meta is desperately trying to force vr.

[-] RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's doing double digit billions in profit every year. Both Facebook and Meta. They're actually doing quite all right even with the VR fiasco.

And even iftheir only possible growth vector was user count(which it isn't), they have close to 3 billion active users monthly with over 2 billion people using Facebook daily. It is impossible to grow. There are no more people.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

No, even profitable Fortune 500 companies are focused on growth.

[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Musk crumpled the cashflow pretty quickly in weeks, but he also has a lot of wealth, he had to chip in billions of his own dollars to save the company from his mistakes.

[-] traveler01@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Musk wasted a shitload of money to make it private. Twitter is wasn’t even close to being a net neutral business, was downright a hole of money the investors kept feeding because well, it’s Twitter.

Musk bought the brand, he was well aware that this was going to happen.

[-] irkli@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Right. I wonder, now, if he had any idea what he was doing. Not to argue with you. His fuckups are just so weird here. If he wanted it "off" he could have been a lot more effective. He just looks like a fool and not one decision looks intentional. It is interesting though. A very slow motion car crash.... I assume the bridge abutment or cliff is in front of him somewhere.

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
2459 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59559 readers
2162 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS