The problem is that the less talented staff won't be the ones leaving; it'll be the ones with more options that leave, i.e. the more valuable staff.
Not really. A bloated company that overhired during the pandemic would presumably like to choose who they let go.
Challenges will arise in 6 months or even later, but maybe Arison doesn't really care. He's been CEO since barely 1 year and may leave the boat when he will boast massive profits before a downturn.
Grindr didn't have a bloated staff. It had less than 200 employees, half that sw engineers. Tech stack is modern, solid and has no legacy code in it. It wasn't stripped to the bone, but now the company lost any fat it had, lost all muscle, and some bones in the process too.
The salaries were not high, but people enjoyed working there because they were at the same time helping the LGBT+ community which majority of employees were a part of.
Said Elon Musk about Twitter. How's that working out for him?
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/09/05/tech/elon-musk-adl-lawsui...
https://www.adl.org/resources/letter/open-letter-companies-a...
https://theweek.com/controversies/1018137/one-month-after-it...
https://forward.com/news/556095/adl-twitter-advertising-boyc...
I’ve linked to proof of boycotts and the ADLs position in convincing advertisers to drop twitter due to the ADLs “research.”
You provide nothing other than you opinion or assumption presented as fact. I digress, you can believe whatever you want to.
The reason for the drop is Musk’s erratic behavior. Advertisers paused or halted their spending entirely because Musk is known for making on-the-fly decisions, and businesses don’t want to get caught up in his latest antics.
There is no proof outside of Musk’s statements that revenue has dropped since X no longer makes public their finances, and there is no proof that anything the ADL has done rises to legally actionable defamation. They have certainly mounted a boycott campaign, but that is not proof of defamation. Myriad other organizations have also called for boycotts. It is curious to me that you are so personally focused on the one boycott that Mr. Musk cited as the sole cause of the revenue drop.
I did link in another post a peer reviewed study from a third party showing that hate speech has measurably risen since Mr Musk’s takeover.
There certainly is a lot of correlation here, but all of us, including you, are speculating on the causality. You are leaning heavily on the statements of a single man who has a proven track record of being incorrect, to put it gently. We are leaning on a variety of other heuristics that can be summed up as “A known bullshiter has said something that sounds like bullshit, and makes no sense to our understanding and experience of the world.”
Here's some vetted research from reputable institutions unconnected to any boycotts showing a demonstrable increase in hate speech on twitter https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.04129.pdf.
I don't have insider knowledge, but I would be perfectly willing to believe that advertisers find it untenable to risk advertising alongside hate-speech, or to be associated with a platform that has failed to signal that they won't tolerate hate speech, and as a result they have pulled their campaigns.
Whether that is because the ADL alerted them to the increase in hate speech, because it is their job to understand cultural phenomenon and trends, or because they have web browsers and eyes, I would not be able to tell.
The First Amendment is somewhat beside the point, since Elon is alleging that they are defaming him/Twitter. Defamatory speech is not protected by the First Amendment. So it's totally fine to call for a boycott — but totally actionable to call for a boycott using defamatory statements.
It will be difficult for Elon to prove defamation, since he is a public figure, of course.
for everyone else, he is an entitled, inherited-wealth internet troll with a history of lying
you don't see him filing his lawsuit against the ADL like he said he would, do you?
how about him stepping down as CEO of twitter like he said he would?
he's just an attention whore.
It takes more than a couple days to create the suit. We’ll see what happens. If you have any _facts_ that he’ll never sue I’m all ear. Probably just your assumptions.
He isn’t CEO. He hired a CEO, Linda Yaccarino. Again either you don’t follow what’s going on or you’re intentionally dense and arguing points that you don’t know about.
Just admit it you hate the guy and will recite anything and everything to reaffirm your unsubstantiated claims.
Instead of presenting a counter argument with facts or data to back it up you resort to calling Elon a liar. It obviously shows your bias. You can believe whatever you want to believe.
do you have any reliable sources or insider knowledge that you can present that would prove true these unreliable, unconvincing claims of an infamous liar?
Again that’s you opinion.
How long has it been since you stopped beating your partner?
but your opinion that he is not is cute
I imagine such silly, reality-denying opinions accompany the same derangement that drives a very small, very loud minority of people to shriek hate and "hate!" at everyone who points out that elmu is a notorious liar
It really isn't working out well, is it?