Submitted by koavf t3_10do4gb in nottheonion
SilasX t1_j4qou3u wrote
Reply to comment by koavf in Taliban start buying blue ticks on Twitter by koavf
Nit: The buyout price for Twitter was $43 billion.
koavf OP t1_j4rgxs5 wrote
SilasX t1_j4s5hb8 wrote
The nit where, in context, the relevant comparison would be to the cost of twitter. If you weren’t using that as the baseline, as would be natural, you can just say, “I was comparing to Musk’s personal loss of net worth” instead of making me read a link to untangle what you mean.
koavf OP t1_j4sq09u wrote
He lost all that money because he bought Twitter: that is Twitter's true cost of ownership.
SilasX t1_j4t34zg wrote
That’s not the right way to account for it. It’s one party’s loss because of semi related events. Not everyone who participated in the twitter purchase suffered a share of the $200 bn loss, only of the $43 bn loss.
koavf OP t1_j4twlis wrote
> Not everyone who participated in the twitter purchase suffered a share of the $200 bn loss, only of the $43 bn loss.
You are wrong, since every everyone who paid $44 billion to own Twitter also lost a total of $200 billion.
SilasX t1_j4u7ht9 wrote
Nobody paid $44 bn. It was jointly financed across multiple parties.
And even if Musk had out put up $44 bn, it doesn’t mean the other losses were attributable solely to that purchase. The Tesla price fluctuations were not entirely due to the sale of Musk’s shares, for example.
koavf OP t1_j4vsmv5 wrote
Oh, okay, whatever. I don't care about this.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments