You keep asking for evidence, but you aren't providing any in return. So how about this, before asking for additional evidence beyond stories reported by the leading media company on business news, how about you provide evidence to support your assumption that he delegated this task? Or admit that you can't. Then I am happy to continue to provide you with evidence in return.
You don’t have any evidence that Elon made the list himself. I don’t need to see your evidence. It doesn’t exist. And I don’t have to prove to smart people that typically specific layoffs are decided by middle and upper management, not the CEO. Everybody who knows business knows this. It doesn’t need to be proven.
it’s a waste of time. Dude has zero idea of what’s he’s talking about He articulated the extent of his knowledge base on the subject of Twitter with a one sentence post “Musk is awesome’. Uh huh sure thing….
Okay, so you made an assumption, and now claim you don't need to prove your claims rather than simply admit that you can't except using the same sort of reporting that I utilized to prove that he needed to beg people to come back (i.e., reporting about how the layoffs occurred utilizing sources). So, like I said, just admit you have no evidence or provide it. And then I am happy to continue to provide evidence to back my claims.
I’m no longer requesting your evidence. Your evidence is anonymous hearsay peddled by a known liberal rag, lol. Have fun with that.
"A known liberal rag" Bloomberg News Bias and Reliability | Ad Fontes Media BTW, here is a source that quotes the slack channel sources to back the report. So I agree, when you have no evidence, and I am willing to continue to provide it, it is strategically smart for you to stop requesting, as it becomes more and more obvious which one of us is coming to this conversation with evidence and which one is just fanboying. Musk discusses putting all of Twitter behind a paywall
Quoted text says it was a manager emailing out to bring back certain ones who were let go. (ie not Musk) Are you really stupid enough to think Elon himself made out a list of 3,700 employees to lay off after only being with the company for two weeks and barely knowing people? Or is it more sensible he asked his managers to make the cuts? If you’re stupid enough to believe it was Musk acting unilaterally, I feel sorry for you.
I just wish the dude could admit he is bald. Pictures of him in the PayPal days show very little left. I don't trust any man that can't admit and deal with ageing.
Yes, the managers realized that the cuts (which largely came from the people he brought in with no background in social media) were not correctly done. Because they didn't take the time to get to know the business before cutting people loose. The firings came from Musk, Sachs, Calacanis, and the Tesla people, whom Musk apparently decided worked for him personally and not a publicly traded company with stockholders to whom he has an obligation. None of those people had anything to do with Twitter and are his personal lackies. And, no, they had no idea who they were letting go, which is why the managers that were left had to ask people to come back. BTW, it is not rare to bring in consultants with industry experience to decide how to downsize an organization. However, they tend to be people with industry experience and who spend more than 2 weeks getting to know the organization/business and how it operates. That is not how this happened.
I think Elon is an amazing engineer and gets other engineers to do amazing work. Spacex is incredible. Tesla is too to a lesser extent. Everything else he seems like a spoiled child throwing tantrums. I started buying Tesla this morning. I think it’s a long term hold. I may buy more on the dips.
Musk does have some experience in the online space with PayPal. I remember when people were saying Tesla was a pipe dream. Yeah, TSLA is a good buy here. Yes, it has fallen a lot of late, but primarily because it trades at such a high multiple compared to its competitors, therefore had more room to correct.
Okay, so now you have gone from your declaration that you don't need any evidence to back your claims because you have business knowledge to ignoring evidence and specific pieces of information with a claim that I don't run a Fortune 500 business (which you don't either). So why didn't we need evidence to back your claims again?
If we're going to limit our criticism to people with inferior backgrounds in education, athletics, financial success, etc., we're not going to have much to talk about.