Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer

Seeking Alpha2022-04-15

SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...

Source Link

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

452

Report

Comment（148）

following to
·2022-04-17
Good analysis. Good to hold
Reply
Like
Report
Mr Mooney
·2022-04-15
Attention seeker! That why SEC keep following his Twitter for breach of rules.
Reply
Like
Report
HengHuat
·2022-04-15
Everyone should stop reacting to what this guy said and did.
Reply
1
Report
koolgal
·2022-04-15
A very interesting analysis on Twitter giving 3 possible options why Elon Musk wants to take over Twitter. Option 1 He wants to run Twitter his way Option 2 He wants to influence Twitter without having to take over Twitter Option 3 He just wants to call it a bluff. Finally the author says that if you have shares in Twitter - Don't sell.I wonder what will happen next....... Stay tuned. @TigerStars
Reply
15
Report
xuero
·2022-04-15
Currently only $45. I think Elton musk offer looks good enough for now. [Thinking]
Reply
1
Report
jejesss
·2022-04-15
Ok
Reply
1
Report
Eddieash
·2022-04-15
Oooo
Reply
1
Report
XiaTian
·2022-04-15
[Smile]
Reply
3
Report
JLSE
·2022-04-15
👍👍👍
Reply
5
Report
Charging
·2022-04-15
[smile]
Reply
2
Report
kksuen
·2022-04-15
Like pls
Reply
6
Report
BerryNat
·2022-04-15
Reaaally..
Reply
5
Report
kaido
·2022-04-15
Nice like pls
Reply
2
Report
ElvisLHS
·2022-04-15
Read...pls like. Thanks in advance
Reply
3
Report
yeelyn18
·2022-04-15
K
Reply
4
Report
Alexiss
·2022-04-15
👍🏻
Reply
2
Report
US_watchlist
·2022-04-15
Please like and comment. Thanks
Reply
3
Report
Dragonbody
·2022-04-15
[Miser] [Miser] [Miser]
Reply
Like
Report
Oldie
·2022-04-15
Ok
Reply
2
Report
Megaverse
·2022-04-15
Okay 👍🏻
Reply
3
Report

Most Discussed

7x24

All

Terms and Conditions·Privacy Policy

Company: TTMF Limited. Tech supported by Xiangshang Yixin.

Email：uservice@ttm.financial

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"data":{"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1143171275","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","media":"Seeking Alpha","content":"<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":null,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"TWTR","symbol_name":"Twitter","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","article_id":"1143171275","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"sourceInfo":null,"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"seekingalpha.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"translate_title":"Twitter的价值超过了埃隆·马斯克每股54美元的出价","themeId":"","isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"TWTR":0.9},"content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","kind":null,"is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":9081374163,"gmtCreate":1650205803162,"gmtModify":1676534668484,"author":{"id":"4102257114570840","authorId":"4102257114570840","name":"following to","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4102257114570840","authorIdStr":"4102257114570840"},"htmlText":"Good analysis. Good to hold","listText":"Good analysis. Good to hold","text":"Good analysis. Good to hold","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9081374163","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089446638,"gmtCreate":1650027707379,"gmtModify":1676534631576,"author":{"id":"3583044537429562","authorId":"3583044537429562","name":"Mr Mooney","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/6836340f20d36afa666f6d8d4b0a929d","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3583044537429562","authorIdStr":"3583044537429562"},"htmlText":"Attention seeker! That why SEC keep following his Twitter for breach of rules.","listText":"Attention seeker! That why SEC keep following his Twitter for breach of rules.","text":"Attention seeker! That why SEC keep following his Twitter for breach of rules.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089446638","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089507391,"gmtCreate":1650000331636,"gmtModify":1676534627092,"author":{"id":"4089527924629590","authorId":"4089527924629590","name":"HengHuat","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5854d1323f59ffe9e66dca6d58fd6af8","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4089527924629590","authorIdStr":"4089527924629590"},"htmlText":"Everyone should stop reacting to what this guy said and did.&nbsp;","listText":"Everyone should stop reacting to what this guy said and did.&nbsp;","text":"Everyone should stop reacting to what this guy said and did.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089507391","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089275839,"gmtCreate":1649999060392,"gmtModify":1676534626772,"author":{"id":"3559581955535845","authorId":"3559581955535845","name":"koolgal","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c05274d88ffc0434623e57350c52c70a","vip":2,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0a8758340a08196056f8bc1e54805193","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"3559581955535845","authorIdStr":"3559581955535845"},"htmlText":"A very interesting analysis on Twitter giving 3 possible options why Elon Musk wants to take over Twitter.&nbsp; &nbsp;Option 1 He wants to run Twitter his way Option 2 He wants to influence Twitter without having to take over Twitter Option 3 He just wants to call it a bluff.&nbsp;Finally the author says that if you have shares in Twitter - Don't sell.I wonder what will happen next....... Stay tuned.&nbsp;<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/U/9000000000000149\">@TigerStars</a>","listText":"A very interesting analysis on Twitter giving 3 possible options why Elon Musk wants to take over Twitter.&nbsp; &nbsp;Option 1 He wants to run Twitter his way Option 2 He wants to influence Twitter without having to take over Twitter Option 3 He just wants to call it a bluff.&nbsp;Finally the author says that if you have shares in Twitter - Don't sell.I wonder what will happen next....... Stay tuned.&nbsp;<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/U/9000000000000149\">@TigerStars</a>","text":"A very interesting analysis on Twitter giving 3 possible options why Elon Musk wants to take over Twitter. Option 1 He wants to run Twitter his way Option 2 He wants to influence Twitter without having to take over Twitter Option 3 He just wants to call it a bluff. Finally the author says that if you have shares in Twitter - Don't sell.I wonder what will happen next....... Stay tuned. @TigerStars","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":15,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089275839","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089255257,"gmtCreate":1649996897266,"gmtModify":1676534626316,"author":{"id":"4099055228687120","authorId":"4099055228687120","name":"xuero","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/043271093c85fc090b9b3f3a6e36cec5","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4099055228687120","authorIdStr":"4099055228687120"},"htmlText":"Currently only $45. I think Elton musk offer looks good enough for now.&nbsp;[Thinking]&nbsp;","listText":"Currently only $45. I think Elton musk offer looks good enough for now.&nbsp;[Thinking]&nbsp;","text":"Currently only $45. I think Elton musk offer looks good enough for now. [Thinking]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089255257","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089262316,"gmtCreate":1649995215491,"gmtModify":1676534625832,"author":{"id":"3571015317722951","authorId":"3571015317722951","name":"jejesss","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/198a6a4d807d473d73a6f152624c1a23","vip":1,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f84d87792f02cf78e80ee34979fd31e5","crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3571015317722951","authorIdStr":"3571015317722951"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089262316","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089268109,"gmtCreate":1649995091798,"gmtModify":1676534625724,"author":{"id":"3581678169581963","authorId":"3581678169581963","name":"Eddieash","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581678169581963","authorIdStr":"3581678169581963"},"htmlText":"Oooo","listText":"Oooo","text":"Oooo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089268109","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089261749,"gmtCreate":1649995051151,"gmtModify":1676534625716,"author":{"id":"3575368380492738","authorId":"3575368380492738","name":"XiaTian","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/71777f1a5ae276e73064272b5ae7df92","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"3575368380492738","authorIdStr":"3575368380492738"},"htmlText":"[Smile]&nbsp;","listText":"[Smile]&nbsp;","text":"[Smile]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089261749","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089287611,"gmtCreate":1649994672594,"gmtModify":1676534625620,"author":{"id":"4089028522442560","authorId":"4089028522442560","name":"JLSE","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b2e0c693d513ad9276d36f34b54134c2","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4089028522442560","authorIdStr":"4089028522442560"},"htmlText":"👍👍👍","listText":"👍👍👍","text":"👍👍👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089287611","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089286622,"gmtCreate":1649994331342,"gmtModify":1676534625518,"author":{"id":"3574924744683779","authorId":"3574924744683779","name":"Charging","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb132b01616074824a4d1a4b8478727e","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574924744683779","authorIdStr":"3574924744683779"},"htmlText":"[smile]&nbsp;","listText":"[smile]&nbsp;","text":"[smile]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089286622","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089212241,"gmtCreate":1649993472430,"gmtModify":1676534625268,"author":{"id":"3557629001242050","authorId":"3557629001242050","name":"kksuen","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e1eb0ceb998a78cefb82c2f66d2addb1","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3557629001242050","authorIdStr":"3557629001242050"},"htmlText":"Like pls","listText":"Like pls","text":"Like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089212241","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089216143,"gmtCreate":1649993391086,"gmtModify":1676534625202,"author":{"id":"4087986020499840","authorId":"4087986020499840","name":"BerryNat","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/27333e490249edd9b1054f0311c8584c","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4087986020499840","authorIdStr":"4087986020499840"},"htmlText":"Reaaally..","listText":"Reaaally..","text":"Reaaally..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089216143","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089218419,"gmtCreate":1649993377213,"gmtModify":1676534625195,"author":{"id":"3574926290820486","authorId":"3574926290820486","name":"kaido","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b3866436a9d4f9acaf05b97581f52f9d","vip":1,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b75ce0c34afff716602792a5d0929dd","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574926290820486","authorIdStr":"3574926290820486"},"htmlText":"Nice like pls","listText":"Nice like pls","text":"Nice like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089218419","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089219794,"gmtCreate":1649993168632,"gmtModify":1676534625128,"author":{"id":"3582789589641542","authorId":"3582789589641542","name":"ElvisLHS","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/0eedb9c8606dbadf3e0b6fb7789c6be7","vip":1,"crmLevel":8,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"3582789589641542","authorIdStr":"3582789589641542"},"htmlText":"Read...pls like. Thanks in advance&nbsp;","listText":"Read...pls like. Thanks in advance&nbsp;","text":"Read...pls like. Thanks in advance","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089219794","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089219594,"gmtCreate":1649993162032,"gmtModify":1676534625116,"author":{"id":"3574914526090483","authorId":"3574914526090483","name":"yeelyn18","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae47c3e96729c68a0234dd22850dfe69","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574914526090483","authorIdStr":"3574914526090483"},"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089219594","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089219637,"gmtCreate":1649993157084,"gmtModify":1676534625152,"author":{"id":"4093827796988890","authorId":"4093827796988890","name":"Alexiss","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"4093827796988890","authorIdStr":"4093827796988890"},"htmlText":"👍🏻","listText":"👍🏻","text":"👍🏻","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089219637","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089210042,"gmtCreate":1649993072700,"gmtModify":1676534625085,"author":{"id":"3581244873474125","authorId":"3581244873474125","name":"US_watchlist","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c45e6bbe1cefb0fecde067a20b3c788f","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581244873474125","authorIdStr":"3581244873474125"},"htmlText":"Please like and comment. Thanks","listText":"Please like and comment. Thanks","text":"Please like and comment. Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089210042","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089234648,"gmtCreate":1649992937404,"gmtModify":1676534625061,"author":{"id":"4109052217286120","authorId":"4109052217286120","name":"Dragonbody","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/8c619fa4bf1941f68f7764c4f6441991","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"4109052217286120","authorIdStr":"4109052217286120"},"htmlText":"&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;","listText":"&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;[Miser]&nbsp;","text":"[Miser] [Miser] [Miser]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089234648","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089232421,"gmtCreate":1649992837733,"gmtModify":1676534625021,"author":{"id":"3584415246670106","authorId":"3584415246670106","name":"Oldie","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/09a7a0c9fe9b5b416d6f049746ddfa29","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3584415246670106","authorIdStr":"3584415246670106"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089232421","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":9089238206,"gmtCreate":1649992699762,"gmtModify":1676534624958,"author":{"id":"3576278607547570","authorId":"3576278607547570","name":"Megaverse","avatar":"https://static.itradeup.com/news/0bc7f9365fb6866c5d290efdfb79d160","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3576278607547570","authorIdStr":"3576278607547570"},"htmlText":"Okay 👍🏻&nbsp;","listText":"Okay 👍🏻&nbsp;","text":"Okay 👍🏻","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9089238206","repostId":1143171275,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143171275","pubTimestamp":1649987184,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143171275?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-15 09:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143171275","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest ","content":"<html><head></head><body>Summary<ul><li>Twitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.</li><li>Musk&#39;s interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.</li><li>But if he&#39;s right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?</li></ul>I&#39;ve been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I&#39;ll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk&#39;s offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is &#34;yes,&#34; and the answer to the second question is &#34;no.&#34; So now that the stock is effectively &#34;de-risked,&#34; shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter&#39;s History in a NutshellTwitter started as a &#34;micro-blogging&#34; site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company &#34;Square&#34;, now known as &#34;Block&#34; (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an &#34;IPO price&#34; of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb94f60a78c5ab5cb73a019721a717db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year&#39;s lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it&#39;s actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn&#39;t much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue &#34;drops straight to the bottom line.&#34; (This is an oversimplification, but it&#39;s still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter&#39;s Shareholder Letter:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/651814d49f5de822d55066b4689f1781\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter&#39;s share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, &#34;Total Costs and Expenses&#34; were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year&#39;s numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that&#39;s very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not &#34;the magic&#34; of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the &#34;Truth Social&#34; offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company&#39;s Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he&#39;d been off for almost a year). So Twitter&#39;s business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7e97ffbd971155113d753a6748ff21b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48877c257e17a678562789221605573c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"465\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Elon Musk&#39;s Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk&#39;s activity alone doesn&#39;t prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter&#39;s level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don&#39;t know of any other way to answer the question than to say, &#34;Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that&#39;s why people use it.&#34;What Does Musk&#39;s Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company&#39;s stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it&#39;s worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1556fe029f6438ac238ca752b1d3d7b1\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/>Musk&#39;s Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be &#34;good for&#34; the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He&#39;s bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI&#39;ll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I&#39;m not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders&#39; gains don&#39;t have to &#34;top out&#34; at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the &#34;best of all possible&#34; worlds for Twitter shareholders. They&#39;ll get the benefit of Musk&#39;s ideas, but they won&#39;t give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company&#39;s hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn&#39;t have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don&#39;t Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it&#39;s clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk&#39;s influence to make changes. In either case, there&#39;s little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk&#39;s buyout offer.If Musk&#39;s offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn&#39;t mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.</body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Twitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTwitter Is Worth More Than Elon Musk's $54 Per Share Offer\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-15 09:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer>Seeking Alpha</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nSummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give...\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TWTR":"Twitter"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4501410-twitter-is-worth-more-than-musks-offer","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143171275","content_text":"SummaryTwitter has struggled to grow into profitability but is now turning a corner.Musk's interest shows the value of the business is real and growing.But if he's right - why should shareholders give away all the upside to one buyer?I've been an active Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) user for years, but I was never a shareholder. Notable users such as Donald Trump (currently banned from the platform) and Elon Musk have made extremely productive use of the platform and used it to expand their reach and influence. In this article, I'll explain why there are two big questions that matter for the decision to own stock in Twitter:- Can it be made profitable?- Will being profitable ruin the company?Elon Musk's offer to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share confirms that the answer to the first question is \"yes,\" and the answer to the second question is \"no.\" So now that the stock is effectively \"de-risked,\" shareholders should hold on and not be willing to sell at this price or anything less than say $100 per share.Twitter's History in a NutshellTwitter started as a \"micro-blogging\" site in 2006 by Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and others. The site became more and more well-known over time, and reached 100 million users per day in 2012. Although growing, it was something of a corporate curiosity: the company was not profitable, and unusual for these situations, founder Jack Dorsey basically left to start another company \"Square\", now known as \"Block\" (SQ).After some internal intrigues, Dorsey returned as CEO in 2015 but without giving up his role at Square/Block. Twitter went public in 2013 at an \"IPO price\" of $25 but traded that day up to $44 per share. Investors have suffered poor returns ever since as the company struggled to obtain profitability:Share Price and Profits (Koyfin, Author)So over the last nine years, Twitter became one of the most influential companies and mediums of communication on Earth. But no one could be sure what it meant to own stock in the company. In November, Dorsey stepped away from his role as CEO and Twitter executive Parag Agrawal took over.Can Twitter Make Money? Yes.As you can see in the chart above, around halfway through the Trump administration Twitter found a way to produce net income on flat revenue. The last year's lack of net income is actually marred by the one-time event of an $800 million lawsuit settlement, so it's actually more profitable than it appears.The incredible strength of software and tech business models lies in their ability to not only grow earnings without additional capital but also in the increasing returns to scale of additional revenues. The cost of running Twitter for say 110 million users isn't much greater than the cost to run it for 100 million users, so any additional revenue \"drops straight to the bottom line.\" (This is an oversimplification, but it's still useful.)To see what I mean, look at the Income Statement from Twitter's Shareholder Letter:Twitter Income Statement (Twitter)We clearly see the $765 million line item for Twitter's share of the settlement mentioned above. So without that settlement, \"Total Costs and Expenses\" were $4,805 million in 2021 compared to $3,690 million in 2021 - so costs increased of 30%. At the same time, revenue increased year over from $3,716 million to $5,077 million for again in revenues of 36%. To the extent that this trend can keep growing, future profitability is far greater than the $272 million income from operations (without the lawsuit) we see in last year's numbers.Even if Twitter had reported net income of $250 million instead of a loss of $221 million, it would still seem expensive at a market cap of $37 billion times earnings (148x earnings). Buying at those prices indicates expectations of much higher profitability in the future, and I think that's very reasonable.But will Twitter Stay Fun? Yes.Now that we know Twitter can begin earning net income, the next question is whether or not \"the magic\" of Twitter will remain and keep it such an essential part of the marketplace. After all, others have talked about starting alternative social networks geared to conservative voices such as the \"Truth Social\" offering of Digital World Acquisition (DWAC) and the growing reach of TikTok (owned by ByteDance).Despite a number of challenges, it seems like Twitter is staying relevant and vital. Twitter suspended Donald Trump (its most influential!)user on January 8, 2021, but as you can see from this chart in the company's Shareholder Letter, both revenue and the number of users have increased from the fourth quarter of 2020 (when Trump was still on the platform) to the fourth quarter of 2022 (when he'd been off for almost a year). So Twitter's business is clearly bigger and more durable than just the effect Trump had on its growth.Twitter Year-over-Year results (Twitter Shareholder Letter)Musk has also become an increasingly active user of the platform, as you can see in this article from Visual Capitalist, which also reviews some of his best-known Tweets:Elon Musk's Tweets by Year (VisualCapitalist.com, Carmen Ang)While looking at Musk's activity alone doesn't prove anything, it seems like there are plenty of reasons to think Twitter remains vital. This article explains what Twitter means to marketing customers, so you can see that even though WhatsApp (owned by Facebook/Meta (FB)) or other social media apps may be gaining, Twitter's level of engagement and value to customers remains high.Armchair strategists have had ideas for how to make Twitter bigger, more successful and more relevant for years (see for example this article from 2016). Many have been critical, but throughout it all - the company keeps growing. So I don't know of any other way to answer the question than to say, \"Yes, Twitter keeps being fun and that's why people use it.\"What Does Musk's Offer Mean for ShareholdersMusk, of course, has a pretty storied history with Twitter, including offering to buyout Tesla for $420 per share(pre-split) and another tweet which got him sued for libel. Last month, he bought 9% of the company's stock, planned to take a seat on the board of directors, and then withdrew from consideration.Now Musk has made an offer to buy the whole company, and it's worth reading the whole test of his filing with the SEC:Musk's Offer to buy Twitter (SEC)Musk has been selling stock in Tesla(TSLA) recently, but his 17% stake is still worth approximately $175 billion - so he should be \"good for\" the $40 billion or so required to buy the rest of Twitter. (Recall that he already owns 9% of the company).There are a few ways to think about his offer:1. He wants to take over the company and run it2. He wants to draw attention to his ideas about how to run Twitter3. He's bluffing about buying Twitter and just wants attentionI'll skip over analyzing number 3 because it requires an assumption of bad faith I'm not willing to make, and focus on 1 and 2. If 1 is true and Musk thinks the company is valuable, then maybe someone else can unlock that value and shareholders' gains don't have to \"top out\" at the offer price of $54.20?If 2 is true and Musk wants to draw attention to the way he would run Twitter, this is something of the \"best of all possible\" worlds for Twitter shareholders. They'll get the benefit of Musk's ideas, but they won't give up any upside. This is also a great strategy for Musk himself. He can bring the focus of executives, directors and shareholders to his strategy, and possibly gain influence or place someone in the C-Suite or board of directors - but he doesn't have to pay a buy-out premium. He gets the benefit of forcing the company's hand to increase the value of his investment, but he doesn't have to pay a premium for it!Shareholders Can Sit Pretty - Don't Sell!For the reasons described above, I think it's clear that the value of Twitter is starting to poke out from under the surface. It remains to be seen whether the current management team can deliver, or whether it will require Musk's influence to make changes. In either case, there's little reason for outside shareholders to give up future upside by selling their shares in the market, or by supporting Musk's buyout offer.If Musk's offer is not accepted, I would expect shares to fall in price for the time being. But that doesn't mean the value of the business has declined. I would consider that a good time to buy.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":452,"commentSize":148,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}