> Given that they are unprofitable, if I were a shareholder I would be upset if I did not see experiments being run to see how much cost can be cut and where.
Twitter will never get to $44bn market cap again (much less a valuation with a decent IRR) by cutting costs alone. They need to grow way more than they need to cut costs.
If any of those experiments lead to less growth (which I’d argue is true of a broken Tweetdeck), then they are wholly not worth it.
If I were a former Twitter shareholder, I'd be extremely grateful to the board for selling the whole thing for 44 Bn. No way tje company would have reached this evaluation without Musk. And Musk knew it, he just signed himself a contract he couldn't het out of.
So, shareholders got paid the pre-downturn price after the downturn? At a time big tech went down double 10+%? Sounds like an incredibly good deal to me.
Twitter will never get to $44bn market cap again (much less a valuation with a decent IRR) by cutting costs alone. They need to grow way more than they need to cut costs.
If any of those experiments lead to less growth (which I’d argue is true of a broken Tweetdeck), then they are wholly not worth it.