861
X is left with advertisers pushing dubious cryptocurrency and AI 'undressing' apps, users say after Musk's outburst
(www.businessinsider.com)
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
861 points (94.2% liked)
Technology
60086 readers
1982 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The thing is, Twitter is liable for that debt, and they continue to fall further into the red every time they fail to pay their bills and every time they lose advertisers because ad aggregation is their business. So the business is definitely being detrimentally affected by his leadership because he is directly responsible for the underwritten debt of $13bn and the $14 million+interest in unpaid bills, plus probably more than $500 million in unpaid severance pay. He's barely owned the company a year. And there are so many lawsuits that honestly he'll end up owing more just from that.
They're only liable for the debt so long as the business is operational, though. If the business folds, all the debt goes with it.
The point I'm making is that, while the decisions Musk has made since buying it have only made the business worse, ultimately the reason it's going to fail is the huge amount of debt, which is primarily from the leveraged buyout. If anything, Musk's antics are nothing but those of a clown trying to distract from and give plausible deniability against the real evil that's happening.
They're only liable for the debt from the buyout. The other stuff? We'll see what the courts rule. But on the other hand, that assumes the banks were in on it.