Tag Archives: shareholders

The return of the man

That is what I had to see when I engaged myself to what I had lost. The Khaleej Times (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/tech/is-bluesky-the-next-twitter-why-millions-are-ditching-elon-musks-x-for-this-new-platform) where we are given ‘Is Bluesky the next Twitter? Why millions are ditching Elon Musk’s X for this new platform’ And we get the starting sentence “As discontent with Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) grows, Bluesky has emerged as a fresh alternative, attracting millions of users in search of a better social media experience.” I currently have both. Hoping that this setting is the one that starts the cleaning services of X at the behest of Elon Musk. You see at present (at ZDNet) we get “According to the newest stats, it has shot up to more than 16.7 million since Tuesday, up from 9 million in early September and 12 million around mid-October.” At present the numbers give us 18.9 million users or a 9.3 member growth per second. Now we get that like me there are a few users that remain in both camps, but this will hurt the Musk advertisement numbers to no end. The giggle moment I had that there is even chance that at present X (yes, I use the expression now), there is a chance that bots are paying revenue to advertise to other bots. The reality is that brisk. To optionally lose 20 million people by December 1st should be a warning sign to Elon Musk (and not the first one mind you). And there is a larger concern for him. If every member attracts 3 to 4 other people The power of X will have been decimated to the largest effect before January 1st 2025. So what will come of this 45 billion dollar Edsel? Well, to close it down is to early to say, but there are a few suggestions that people from the FBI gave others, and I reckon that the NSA is on board with at least two of those suggestions. 

I gave the idea to Google a few months ago (merely because I wasn’t sure what Bluesky was up to) and I leave it to you to see where it goes from here. 

As I see it, there is a larger option for Bluesky and Nostr to get the bulk of what was formerly known as twitter to reduce its sentience to a mere hollowed out cadaver. How far this goes is up to Elon Musk and Linda Yaccarino to decide, yet in this I think that the shareholders would want to make a massive turn about. Merely because the idea of bots advertising views to other bots might seem hollow to them. Its like a salesperson engaging with a non-decider in a company. It is a waste of both times (well, the non-decider might get a few meals and drinks out of this). So as ‘advertisement’ revenue drops (like brick) in that setting the shareholders will be massively unimpressed and so they should be. As such Elon Musk and Saudi prince and billionaire Al Waleed bin Talal al Saud, who rolled over $1.89 billion in former Twitter shares at the time of the deal. Might presumably see their stock diminish in value for a little over 40% by the end of the year. Well, I gave prince Al Waleed bin Talal al Saud the option of control of an idea to the extend of $5,000,000,000. An expected idea, that was merely the setting of IP in the first phase, which could grow to a lowly estimated $15 billion to $20,000,000,000 annual, after the second phase would be possible (not guaranteed). This would have costed him my fee of $50 million (post taxation) plus 3% annual revenue for 20 years (pre taxation). I think there is a chance he missed out on both. The first failure I personally did not see coming. 

I expected Elon Musk to be more mindful of his sink (that visualisation can be used in both directions). A friend of mine had evidence ready to be presented to Elon Musk showing him that the 45 billion was too high a price (his data showed the valid reason of diminishing that amount by 30%-45%, not a speculation, he had lot more data than I did. So as I see it, this setting will bring back the man Jack Dorsey by a lot more visibility and overly carrying suitcases full of dineros. As such The recent reports of the UAE taking the steps to set the stage with X could be faltered by the mere reason that they should have included Bluesky. I reckon that before the en of the year that move would be evidently clear. 

I wonder how this all plays out at the lemon-lime brand named X at present and the closure of this year. We’ll just have to see it. Anyways my day goes to fruition nicely as I do not own any stock in X. Still I have no stick in BlueSky either, as such I could be doing better.

So hasta lasagna to everyone and a fair Monday to all as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Both sides against the middle

This is not some wannabe setting, not some educated evolution of events, this is pure fiction, this is purely the idea for a script, for TV (or movie) and none of it is real in any way, or if it is, I am seemingly unaware of it. A “Names, characters, business, events and incidents are the products of the author’s imagination. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental” quote is added, so the neighbours wife (and the neighbour) need not get alarmed when I write about seeing her coming out of the shower naked and me as. Result masturbating, it’s purely coincidental (that was a funny). So the setting is a stage where the world, most nations are now in a setting where the military are set into a station where they have become the police, a sort of governmental Helpdesk and a facilitator of services. In this there are the opportunity seekers that have a balance between the military and the people, not unlike the setting in the Third Man. But here we see that the new military are at the mercy of the marketeer, all whilst the veterans are given the goods at near cost price, all whilst the people pay for the matter, with the exception of children, they get their needs at cost price. By setting these margins the dealer gets to swim through the mazes of the law and through the nets of the facilitators in reasonable safety. Yet the path is changing, a new officer is sent into the field taking care of the exploiters, in an age where resources are dwindling down, the exploiters are ending with too much and the military wants it to stop. As such the dealer gives up whatever black market fish there is to keep himself/herself safe. Yet the stage is even larger than the officer realises when a stage evolves where the large corporations are employing their own black marker dealers to keep the private needs of their board members satisfied, the dealer however knows too many of them and as such a larger stage of cat and mouse begins, a stage the officer dreads and loathes as his bosses need these corporate players as well, as such a larger stage of equilibrium is created and basically nothing gets resolved, for the officer it was a lose-lose proposition from the very beginning, so he sets a premise of safety for the dealer to get the goods on the larger corporate exploiters and all whilst he is trying to document the larger goods on all players including the dealer. 

It is a stage that is purely fictive, yet when we look at todays world, we see these element in play and the media is playing a dangerous game in the middle of share holders, stake holders and advertisers. So what happens when one media member jumps the fence? What happens when that person states enough is enough? We see the impact of FIFA and Sepp Blatter when we see “Blatter was found to have accepted undue economic benefits totalling 23m Swiss francs (just under £18m) and approved payments or bonuses of a further CHF46m to other officials” (source: The Guardian), and all whilst the alarm bells were rung by Andrew Jennings in 2006, it took close to 14 years to get that ball seriously rolling, why that long? As I stated before the media had too much power stating all kinds of facilitating settings all whilst it was the share holders and stake holders pulling the puppet cords, so is that setting that weird? We can see (and accept) the headline ‘Parliamentary inquiry into media diversity is ‘a sham’’, yet in that same setting we also get ‘The Biggest Risks to Big Tech’s Continued Dominance’, we want to be clever and hit out against one or both of the two (big tech and media), yet everyone seemingly forgets that the stakeholders are in the middle keeping the seesaw in a position that profits THEM the most, and everyone is ignoring that part of the equation. This is not a new setting, this has been going on for close to a decade at least and we are given news article after news article, by those who want to flame the audience, because emotions are set into profits, into clicks and into $$$$. A stage ignored by most as the media is at the centre of things, now consider the officer in the story when you have these elements available to you, do you think that the stakeholders in the story will give that officer even an inch? The seesaw is there to unbalance opponent after opponent and the officer becomes a tool of the larger players, because the image and documentations were whatever they allowed to get out into the open. 

A stage that remains a lose-lose for anyone offered that position, with a large promotion as incentive, so when we know that, who do the bosses of that officer serve? That is the stage we see unfold in the story, but the story remains slightly illusive. Because in that setting as the officer is keeping balance on a river standing on an ice-plate as it goes down the river hitting other ice-plates. The result being that the ice-plate with the officer diminishes in size the longer that officer is on the river and the more it hits other ice-plates. The premise of a lose-lose situation, so what can that officer do?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, movies