Elon Musk watch (was Elon Muskrat watch)

Tesla high today is $158 per share, recent low was $108. Savvy investors that bought on the dip made a healthy profit. Never bet against Tesla!

  • Earnings (adjusted): $1.19 vs $1.13 per share expected, per Refinitiv
  • Revenue: $24.32 billion vs $24.16 billion expected, per Refinitiv
www.cnbc.com

Tesla reports record revenue and beats on earnings

Electric vehicle maker Tesla reported earnings after the bell. Here are the results.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
Pyromania said:
Tesla high today is $158 per share, recent low was $108. Savvy investors that bought on the dip made a healthy profit. Never bet against Tesla!

  • Earnings (adjusted): $1.19 vs $1.13 per share expected, per Refinitiv
  • Revenue: $24.32 billion vs $24.16 billion expected, per Refinitiv
www.cnbc.com

Tesla reports record revenue and beats on earnings

Electric vehicle maker Tesla reported earnings after the bell. Here are the results.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
Click to expand...
Those profits won't have done any harm:

Tesla made an annual profit of $12.6 billion in 2022​

High operating margins and good sales growth are responsible, Tesla says.​

 
Tesla now at $176 per share. Nice bounce!
 
Pyromania said:
History in the making.

thedriven.io

History in the making: Tesla may deliver biggest moment in car industry since Model T

A future where electric vehicles are far cheaper to buy, run and maintain will finally end the era of the internal combustion engine.
thedriven.io thedriven.io
Click to expand...
From the link:
More and more evidence suggests that Tesla’s Investor Day event this week will mark the beginning of a new era in automotive manufacturing. One in which EVs are not only much cheaper to run and maintain than petrol and diesel cars, but also cheaper to make.
Click to expand...
If that turned out to be true, it would be a big deal. I remain sceptical for now.
 
cecilia said:
elon desperate to get money

mashable.com

Not a joke: Twitter will take your blue checkmark on April 1 if you don’t pay

Cough up $8 or the checkmark gets it.
mashable.com mashable.com

or, it's an april 1st joke

or maybe both
Click to expand...
The checkmark thing was often misused anyway so I found it amusing when he torpedoed loads of previously spurious blue ticks. It's much simpler now that what appears to be the absurdly overwhelming majority of them on my feed are paid-for-my-tick-Elon-fanboys. I don't think most of them realise it has the diametrically opposite effect to its apparent intention.
 
Robert said:
The checkmark thing was often misused anyway so I found it amusing when he torpedoed loads of previously spurious blue ticks. It's much simpler now that what appears to be the absurdly overwhelming majority of them on my feed are paid-for-my-tick-Elon-fanboys. I don't think most of them realise it has the diametrically opposite effect to its apparent intention.
Click to expand...
The execution was pooched but in theory it should be a good way to verify - it depends on the payment processor and whether they share names with you. Anyone making payments on behalf of some entity wants to be pretty sure they now who (or what) the identity is so they are naturally in the verification business. Piggy backing on that should have prevented the fake twitter handles (sorry, your handle doesn't match your credit card - explain!!!!!!) so it's surprising that it didn't.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Piggy backing on that should have prevented the fake twitter handles (sorry, your handle doesn't match your credit card - explain!!!!!!) so it's surprising that it didn't.
Click to expand...
I don't think Twitter is particularly interested in ensuring the names match. However, even if it were interested, I'm not sure how feasible that is. I think it's the issuing bank that provides the cardholder name but isn't verification usually done by contacting the API of Visa, Mastercard or whoever? In which case you could easily verify 16 digit number, CSV, etc., but not so easy for cardholder name.

Meanwhile, we have this:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1640188239976734720

Which sounds reasonable up to a point, unless it's also a lie, as claimed here a few hours later:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1640507567700086785

Also had a wry smile at the GitHub username of the Twitter source code leaker being "FreeSpeechEnthusiast."
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Ya know ... for a long time it's been possible to spam people's twitter feeds by paying. It's called "sponsored" content - and all the platforms have it. That's what the advertisers do.
Click to expand...
and I happily ignore all that garbage
 
cecilia said:
this is just too hilarious

bbs.boingboing.net

Microsoft dumps Twitter, Musk threatens lawsuit

Originally published at: Microsoft dumps Twitter, Musk threatens lawsuit | Boing Boing …
bbs.boingboing.net bbs.boingboing.net
Click to expand...
And the blue tick confusion also continues to amuse. Watching Musk tussle with the @dril account was particularly funny. In case you missed it, he was given a tick which he didn't want. Changing the display name removes the blue checkmark, so dril changed the display name, the blue checkmark disappeared, and then later it reappeared, dril changed it again, the blue checkmark disappeared again, etc., multiple times until eventually Twitter stopped trying to re-apply it.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1649879817662382080
Other amusing nonsense documented in this article:

Twitter verified fake Disney account, claims dead celebs subscribe to Twitter Blue​

Living celebs want everyone to know they didn't pay Elon for those checkmarks.​

Over the weekend, Twitter applied checkmarks to the accounts of many well-known people who didn't pay for them—including some dead celebrities—along with a message that the accounts subscribed to the $8-per-month Twitter Blue service.
"This account is verified because they are subscribed to Twitter Blue and verified their phone number," states the message attached to accounts with blue badges, including those of Kobe Bryant and Chadwick Boseman. Meanwhile, living celebrities who got the same checkmark made sure to tell followers that they hadn't actually paid for a Twitter Blue monthly subscription or verified their phone number. It would be more accurate to say that Twitter gave free subscriptions to people with a large number of followers, whether they wanted the checkmarks or not.

A blue checkmark on Twitter used to indicate that an account was notable and that Twitter had verified that the person running the account was who they said they were. Now, some famous people who got the checkmark want to make sure that no one mistakenly believes they're giving Musk's company $8 a month.

Twitter also made a notable mistake last night in awarding its gold verification badge to a fake Disney account. The gold badges come with the message, "This account is verified because it's an official organization on Twitter."
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
And the blue tick confusion also continues to amuse. Watching Musk tussle with the @dril account was particularly funny. In case you missed it, he was given a tick which he didn't want. Changing the display name removes the blue checkmark, so dril changed the display name, the blue checkmark disappeared, and then later it reappeared, dril changed it again, the blue checkmark disappeared again, etc., multiple times until eventually Twitter stopped trying to re-apply it.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1649879817662382080
Other amusing nonsense documented in this article:

Twitter verified fake Disney account, claims dead celebs subscribe to Twitter Blue​

Living celebs want everyone to know they didn't pay Elon for those checkmarks.​

Click to expand...
best reply:

"This article is probably going to be me my go-to link to share next time I hear somebody insist that Elom is #ctually playing some sort of seventeen-dimension chess to discredit Twitter or sow confusion or buddy up to the Saudis or whatever is this week's weak-ass strongman conspiracy.

Please.

I've had episodes of flatulence that displayed better planning skills."


LOLOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top