Musk Proposes to Buy Twitter for Original Price of $54.20 a Share

[Pegasus]

Look don't blame me when you're the one who thinks a business isn't out to make a profit

Yes we have covered that, and your statement was proven incorrect in post 1556
to which your stupid reply is :


Perhaps read it and debunk it.

 

[Pegasus]

Methinks you're trying to save face, and projecting.

Save face for what?

 

[quovadis]

I did ask.
You answered that you don't know what you said (or tried to say).

I don’t know how others may or may not interpret the meaning in the wider context of the soldier being a nazi and Elon saying how times have changed?

 

[RedViking]

His company. His rules. They wanted his money. But they do not want his authority. Twitter is now clay in his hands and the sense of entitlement twitarts have over the platform is hilarious.

Anyways, what's next.

 

[RedViking]

Lol, now the snowflakes are triggered by birdies in a cage.

This would have been better?

 

[ShaunSA]

Yes we have covered that, and your statement was proven incorrect in post 1556
to which your stupid reply is :
View attachment 1417229

Perhaps read it and debunk it.

Yes yes yes. Businesses are charities. Now go argue semantics with someone who cares

 

[Pegasus]

Yes yes yes. Businesses are charities. Now go argue semantics with someone who cares

Well perhaps structure your statements correctly then you won't have to keep defending your stupidity.

 

[Ponderer]

Save face for what?

Seriously?

 

[Gyre]

His company. His rules. They wanted his money. But they do not want his authority. Twitter is now clay in his hands and the sense of entitlement twitarts have over the platform is hilarious.

Anyways, what's next.

It'll die down eventually, or I could be horribly wrong and it becomes the new Politics in America thread

 

[Ponderer]

I don’t know how others may or may not interpret the meaning in the wider context of the soldier being a nazi and Elon saying how times have changed?

How do you interpret it.
Or don't you know how you interpret it.

 

[RedViking]

It'll die down eventually, or I could be horribly wrong and it becomes the new Politics in America thread

It's only been a couple of days, lol. Will take at least 3 years to get twitter where he wants it to be, trial and error.

I think the mistake Musk is making is trolling tweeting too much. Maybe been hanging out with that orange man.

 

[Gyre]

It's only been a couple of days, lol. Will take at least 3 years to get twitter where he wants it to be, trial and error.

I think the mistake Musk is making is trolling tweeting too much. Maybe been hanging out with that orange man.

I think people will come around to the idea of paying for verification, I think the only thing that will keep it in the news is Elon baiting people with his tweets

 

[RedViking]

I think people will come around to the idea of paying for verification, I think the only thing that will keep it in the news is Elon baiting people with his tweets

Verification is just a distraction. He is doing it on purpose so he can work on other things. He knows how to trigger the snowflakes.

 

[quovadis]

Yes yes yes. Businesses are charities. Now go argue semantics with someone who cares

If you get back to the original point of contention of this entire thing it was argued that "Net profit is the biggest determinant of sustainability" its hardly semantics and demonstrates a fundamentally basic understanding of accounting. Imagine using that metric to determine if a company is sustainable if the company has made a loss continually for years but has 7 billion dollars in assets of which 2.6 billion is cash and equivalents and 300 million is cash on its balance sheet?

By that logic every bootstrapped company in history would've been closed down based on that metric alone. Not to mention charities are businesses, corporate vehicles are also businesses, non-profit businesses exist etc.

Net profit is not a determinant of sustainability.

 

[ShaunSA]

If you get back to the original point of contention of this entire thing it was argued that "Net profit is the biggest determinant of sustainability" its hardly semantics and demonstrates a fundamentally basic understanding of accounting. Imagine using that metric to determine if a company is sustainable if the company has made a loss continually for years but has 7 billion dollars in assets of which 2.6 billion is cash and equivalents and 300 million is cash on its balance sheet?

By that logic every bootstrapped company in history would've been closed down based on that metric alone. Not to mention charities are businesses, corporate vehicles are also businesses, non-profit businesses exist etc.

Net profit is not a determinant of sustainability.

I wasn't making that argument. All I'm saying is a business exists to make a profit. The end.

I have nfi where Peggy gets that they are charities. But anyways...

 

[quovadis]

How do you interpret it.
Or don't you know how you interpret it.

I already stated how I see it. Not sure others would. Perhaps since it's a Nazi soldier you can find a neo-Nazi and ask if they see it the same way?

 

[quovadis]

I wasn't making that argument. All I'm saying is a business exists to make a profit. The end.

I have nfi where Peggy gets that they are charities. But anyways...

One day I hope you have a lot of money and then buy a massive beautiful yacht, plane or other wonderful asset - your awesome financial advisor will then advise you that it may be best to place that asset in a company for various but still legal benefits now and/or in the future. That business/company will not make profit but it will have a yacht and other expenses for which you will pay but won't be seen as the business making any revenue. On the books that company will make a continual loss - ie Net Profit BAD. At that stage I will come along and buy that company from you for nothing because it's obviously not sustainable since all business exists to make a profit. I'd bet you'd not want to sell - or am I wrong?

 

[ShaunSA]

One day I hope you have a lot of money and then buy a massive beautiful yacht, plane or other wonderful asset - your awesome financial advisor will then advise you that it may be best to place that asset in a company for various but still legal benefits now and/or in the future. That business/company will not make profit but it will have a yacht and other expenses for which you will pay but won't be seen as the business making any revenue. On the books that company will make a continual loss - ie Net Profit BAD. At that stage I will come along and buy that company from you for nothing because it's obviously not sustainable since all business exists to make a profit. I'd bet you'd not want to sell - or am I wrong?

You want to buy a company that has assets for nothing? You mad bro?

 

[Pegasus]

One day I hope you have a lot of money and then buy a massive beautiful yacht, plane or other wonderful asset - your awesome financial advisor will then advise you that it may be best to place that asset in a company for various but still legal benefits now and/or in the future. That business/company will not make profit but it will have a yacht and other expenses for which you will pay but won't be seen as the business making any revenue. On the books that company will make a continual loss - ie Net Profit BAD. At that stage I will come along and buy that company from you for nothing because it's obviously not sustainable since all business exists to make a profit. I'd bet you'd not want to sell - or am I wrong?

I am in complete agreement with leftists today.

 

[quovadis]

You want to buy a company that has assets for nothing? You mad bro?

Hehe only if you believe it's unsustainable based on Emjay's determinant metric.