So "X" - nothing to see here. Elon's in control - Part XXX **Threadbans in OP**

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955839#Comment_120955839

Just a new owner putting their own stamp on their new company.

Elon obviously has his own style preferences. He seems to like a more stripped down sleek look, rather than some cartoonish emblem. Each to their own really... As I said, I like it. People in my own circle who use it far more than me, seem to either like it or are not too fussed either way.

I haven't actually seen the strong reaction IRL that you seem to get in online circles. But I suppose I shouldn't really be surprised by that, as online discourse seems to be far more polarised in general.

Obviously some people were attached to the little blue bird and are having some withdrawal symptoms. Also, a certain demographic in society seemed to see twitter as their very own little echo chamber that they controlled and had some sort of ownership/rights over. This is possibly another step from Musk to erase that symbolically, by killing off the blue bird. New ownership, new ideas/approach.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955810#Comment_120955810

Well, most of the words that are distinctly associated with the brand become meaningless. Tweet, Twitter etc have entered the public vernacular and become common. You could equally say Google sounds a bit silly but it's a very well established brand so changing the name would be a disaster.

Even searching X and it's multiple results down. It's outshone by an excellent horror movie of the same name. Which ironically enough relates to porn. 🤣

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955887#Comment_120955887

Changing the entire company name when the name has global brand recognition is not "putting their own stamp on their new company" and it is absurd to suggest it and demonstrates a complete and total lack of understanding of branding. This has been pointed out on thread, and by expert professionals in the sector.

Advertising is down significantly. This rebrand will do nothing for that. You keep ignoring that point when it is put to you, for the obvious reason you have no response.

Then the phrases... Spotty teenager \ silly blue bird \ withdrawal symptoms \ echo chamber.

Unable to respond to the points put to you about brand recognition, advertising revenue, you respond with insults and digs. It is obvious you have no coherent argument here, and are just using this as an excuse to settle some ideological scores.

Didn't take long for your paper thin pretence of 'objectivity' to be pierced.

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955894#Comment_120955894

X-box is used by far more kids than adults (although in fairness, there are a decent % of adult users)

So why don't we hear any complaints about a kids game console being named X-box? Doesn't seem to be much of an issue at all from what I can see? No parent's pressure groups complaining about links to porn with the letter "X"...

I think certain people are trying to create controversy where there really is none to be had. Mountain out of a mole hill really...

Run Forest Run

And his other company, Space"porn" of course!

Who could forget that? lol

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955887#Comment_120955887

Well as someone who doesn't have a Twitter account I can speak as a demographic for whom the brand change will have no quantitative value.

However, it's all well and good putting ones spin ona brand, but this is a brand in severe debt and has lost half its advertising revenue since Musk's takeover. Changing the branding top to bottom at this point could prove a rash decision that only furthers Twitter's inability to make bank. And at the end of the day - that's Twitter's priority given the levels of crippling debt it now finds itself in thanks to the overpriced takeover.

Branding matters. It may not always have a definitive ndollar amount of a value but it has a cumulative effect to what twitter had achieved: cultural presence. Grannies and technophobes knew what "Twitter" or a "Tweet" was - X is by definition of convention either a placeholder or porn. You're free to like it, but renaming one of the world's biggest brands when it was already experiencing issues might turn out to be a famously terrible decision on par with New Coke.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955918#Comment_120955918

And Twitter \ X has no connection to X box, so it can't use X in that space.

Demonstrates the lack of business sense underlying this, when lots of other companies own trademarks to X in their domains.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/problem-with-x-meta-microsoft-hundreds-more-own-trademarks-new-twitter-name-2023-07-25/

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955917#Comment_120955917

We'll have to wait and see really how the re-branding works out.

These so called professionals frequently get things wrong. There have been lots of examples of very expensive brand changes led by highly paid "professionals" who have made a complete balls of it.

As regards your other comments, I have no idea what this "ideological scores" stuff is all about? Some of you guys may be slaves to a particular ideology - political or otherwise - but thankfully I'm sensible enough not to get dragged into these cul-de-sac never ending tribal arguments. But I do of course recognise the raw hatred of Musk, because he is seen as being on the opposing team. So naturally it is amusing to someone like myself on the outside, watching people tear their hair out over any decision he makes or anything he says in the media.

I'm not subject to the same biases, so naturally it is far easier for me to give my objective opinion/analysis.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955918#Comment_120955918

More like making a molehill out of a (small) mountain if the collapse in advertising revenue is anything to go by.

It's less about the name he chose or why he chose it and far far more about WHY he did it.

Changing the name of a company with the kind of brand recognition that Twitter had makes absolutely zero business sense.

What is the upside here for Musk and his company?

Today if you google "X" , x.com/twitter.com is the 8th result after a bunch of links for a movie called X and the wikipedia entry for the actual letter X.

If you google "twitter" or "Tweet" then the twitter.com homepage is the 1st result. and EVERY other result is about the brand.

THAT is the problem , that is brand awareness,visibility, value etc.

That is what Musk has flushed for some reason of no perceptible business value.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955918#Comment_120955918

You're conflating criticism with controversy. I mean firstly when Xbox came out, for years people were still making jokes and calling it Sexbox. But even then it's not that anyone thinks 'X' has suddenly become a porn site (in the same way no one thought the Xbox was a porn machine), it's that the letter X in urls is most commonly used for porn sites.

People discussing and criticising an awful marketing/branding decision does not constitute a mountain.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955971#Comment_120955971

These so called professionals frequently get things wrong. There have been lots of examples of very expensive brand changes led by highly paid "professionals" who have made a complete balls of it.

Such as what? I think you'd be hard pressed to find as global a brand which has undergone as large - and as complete - a change as Twitter. I can think of New Coke which was a total disaster, although IIRC that was "merely" a change in the recipe Stateside. Beyond that, most global rebrands tend to play it safe. A new logo perhaps, a rejig of the name - but nothing wholesale like this. It's equivalent to Apple rebranding itself to "TBA".

I'm not subject to the same biases, so naturally it is far easier for me to give my objective opinion/analysis.

How enlightened of you. Respectfully but that's horse-radish. In fact your prior paragraph lets slip that you are biased towards a presumption that opinions on Twitter or Musk are coloured by emotion, ideology or rage - therein lies your own bias. We all have them, but better to have them admitted than affect objectivity where none exists. Declaring yourself above the fray doesn't really wash though, and is automatically quite passive aggressive.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955918#Comment_120955918

My point is largely that it's such a generic name that it can't even get to the top of a search result. The porn thing is pretty relevant since he intends to make it into a do everything app or whatever. So "x video" will just outright lead to porn. It's a known brand killing its brand name, it's not smart or innovative. And it's not gonna do anything for its fiscal woes cause it makes the platform seem even more unpredictable and volatile. It's less so a controversy and more just a stupid move.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955971#Comment_120955971

Sure, because when people are giving an objective analysis they use phrases like:

Spotty teenager \ silly blue bird \ withdrawal symptoms \ echo chamber \ so called professionals / "professionals" in quotes.

You have no idea what the reference to "settling ideological scores" is about, then go on to post this:

it is amusing to someone like myself on the outside, watching people tear their hair out

Way to go discrediting your claims to objectivity in such an obvious manner.

If you want a textbook case of someone getting things wrong:

Overpaying for a company by billions because you bid too high and legally had to proceed with the bid despite trying to back out!

Overseeing a huge drop in advertising revenues.

Those are the actions of Elon Musk.

https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/12/elon-musk-admits-he-only-bought-twitter-because-he-thought-hed-be-forced-to/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABE9jxyieKOnO1wtRre7MhFK_0Li-OgAeJH4A3pW6giYmnhc6dJuDFCRmu4twCh1A76UcK1gSk5JLyQCbARmfN1QqV4elwagZaELwCs5mL2O0voP-hv6S9HBhaKeGOX5YvFngkDBuExMy0eqSBhj689XVBT1Tk66GXCXonagBbgJ

And to re-iterate the business stupidity of the rebrand...

https://www.reuters.com/technology/problem-with-x-meta-microsoft-hundreds-more-own-trademarks-new-twitter-name-2023-07-25/

sameoldname

I was driving home last week and part of the route back from work takes me down a road that has a 2 kilometer long straight with a tree-surrounded crossroads right before a bend. As I'm about half way down the straight I see a vehicle poking its nose out at the junction and before it has even started pulling out I start cursing to myself. Why? Because even though I can only see about the first meter of the vehicle I can already see that it has a green body and yellow wheels, which means I'm now probably going to be stuck behind a John Deere for the next 5 kilometers of bends. Because of strong branding I could tell what I was looking at from a kilometer away based on nothing more than the colours I was seeing.

What Musk has done is the equivalent of John Deere painting their machines black and changing the name because it's "cool".

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955971#Comment_120955971

"I am a being of pure objectivity with no bias. You peons and your valid criticisms of someone amuse me"

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955918#Comment_120955918

LOL ignoring all the other incorrect things your posting ill just point out that your core argument here is completely incorrect, microsofts own leaked internal docs showed in 2017 only 10% of xboxes were owned by under kids under 18..... with the average age being 33

And like others have pointed out it has been ridiculed ever since it came out for its name, the sexbox the x-bone etc etc

If microsoft were to suddenly change the name from x-box to something else they would be getting similar criticism to elon for throwing away decades of brand recognition

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955978#Comment_120955978

He has said before, that he doesn't care about taking big risks and possibly losing money and even possibly failing. Which is clearly evidenced by his past business decisions.

He's certainly not unusual in the entrepreneurial space with this attitude. He frequently admits that his decisions have the potential to be a financial mistake, and yet he's still willing to do it anyway. Obviously he's not really like most of the general public, he thinks differently and acts very differently. This is why I'm never inclined to bet against the guy. He's way more successful that 99.9% of the people who consistently criticise his decision making. I'm just an interested observer in what he gets up to really... so I'll wait and see how things pan out with this latest venture.

I'm liking the "X" change anyway. I'm going to predict that it will be a successful re-branding in the long term. But we'll have wait and see what else he has planned, and what the overall strategy is.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956038#Comment_120956038

He has said before, that he doesn't care about taking big risks and possibly losing money and even possibly failing. Which is clearly evidenced by his past business decisions.

Which would be nice if Twitter wasn't saddled with incomparable mountains of debt thanks to the $44 billion takeover - and the 50% loss in advertising revenue admitted to by Musk himself adding its own financial pressure. Meanwhile Twitter Blue has not taken off as a huge money-maker, and only served to devalue the product's core pillars. Other companies like Tesla are having their own problems, not least the ongoing farce of the Cybertruck, or boondoggles like the Hyperloop.

We've seen from prior communications that his running of Twitter has been at best described as "Ad hoc" when results on the field show a company pivotting in ways that defy common sense. You don't need to be a chef to know the steak you just got can bounce against walls - so you don't need to be a successful CEO to observe, objectively if you will, that Twitter is being run in a way charitably summarised as "mercurial".

As the saying going, past results do not guarantee future performance, and whatever large changes Musk made to the automotive and rocket industries - it's not a blank cheque to the presumption all decisions WRT Twitter are good ones.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956038#Comment_120956038

Okay but the above logic is assuming he is engaging some genius that nobody can discern. This ignores the fact he overpaid and partially did so for a 420 joke. That he's lost a huge amount of advertisers and has publicly complained about this. That the platform has become more unstable and he's actively not paying the actual bills for background services.

So indiscernible genius sounds more like an inability to defend the mess he's making of the platform. I also think it's a pretty big sign of how things are going when he's not boasting about record breaking traffic etc.

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956067#Comment_120956067

Yes, "mercurial"... I think this is a very apt phrase to describe his approach.

I agree, his past achievements don't guarantee success - he admits this himself. But I would trust his decision making ability by orders of magnitude more than many of the so-called experts and self professed know-it-alls who frequently aim their invective in his direction.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956122#Comment_120956122

Not an especially Objective attitude to simply demean others as "so called experts" worthy of contempt (and who are they anyway that are so called) - indeed who self professes as being a know it all either?

Presumption of strategy or nous is not backed up by the actions thus far. And indeed again, the objective analysis would be to take the actual quantitative results of Musk's reign of Twitter - not a presumed competency by the man himself. By definition objective attitudes are dispassionate, while you're clearly not.

Kevrano

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956038#Comment_120956038

You really cannot see your own bias, can you? This "casual observer" schtick doesn't really hold up in the context of your posts.

I really didn't have much of an opinion on Musk until he bought Twitter. But he's made a site I used everyday unwelcoming and unusable. His tweets with negative comments on minority groups, which are thinly veiled attempts to ingratiate himself with the right wing, tell me what kind person he is. *That* is what I judge a person on, not their business acumen.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956187#Comment_120956187

If he bought Twitter for the brand and the userbase to "kick-start" his new everything app , then he has royally f*cked that part up.

Fundamentally - Had he truly wanted to create this "everything app" called X he would have been infinitely better off taking a small chunk of the $44B he spent buying Twitter and started from scratch.

He could have built an app from the ground up that does everything he wants for a tiny fraction of $44B.

Kevrano

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956280#Comment_120956280

Am I right in thinking he didn't plan to buy Twitter, he just posted some bold claim on Twitter and was held to it?

Harika

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956314#Comment_120956314

He signed paperwork, that was the issue. Else he doesnt care what he said/tweeted/xed yesterday.

Kevrano

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956324#Comment_120956324

He does seem to act on impulse, which would/should be a red flag to investors

Run Forest Run

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956280#Comment_120956280

But would you not need to wait a few years to see how his venture pans out?

Very few big business ventures, especially ones that involve significant alterations to the original business model, are likely to be successful overnight. Common sense and historical precedent would tell you that these things take time to bed in and find their feet so to speak. From some of the interviews I've watched with Musk, he seems to be looking at this with longer term objectives. And not necessarily all of them being financial or profit driven either. I get the sense there is some altruistic motive here too.

I think he understands that this may involve angering a few people, who do not share his vision. But that's part of life really, particularly in such a polarised society that we are currently living.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956314#Comment_120956314

He signed paperwork and agreed to buy it without any of the normal "due diligence" and then couldn't back out of it.

He also made the price per share offer valuation based on an Internet meme about cannabis - He chose $54.20 because he wanted to have 4/20 in the number because 4/20 is a cannabis meme - The actual share price at the time was around $45.

Basically, his childish mentality and obsession with 4/20 cost him about $5B as they probably would have accepted an offer in the $47/$48 range if he was really serious.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956351#Comment_120956351

Whether or not "X" is ultimately successful is almost secondary to be honest.

And let me also say , I couldn't care less about Twitter , don't use it and never really got the point of it.

He bought Twitter for $44B and in the short time he has owned it, he has destroyed almost everything of value that it had to offer.

The only reason to buy a Twitter and then essentially tear it down and replace it with something completely new is because you are buying the brand or the user-base. He has fundamentally and terminally damaged both of those things with his actions to date.

Like I said , he could have taken maybe $5B and built "X" from scratch.

If he ultimately builds "X" into the everything app he claims, it will not for a moment alter the fact that he essentially set fire to $44B for no good reason.

Ashbourne hoop

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120956038#Comment_120956038

It really wont be a successful rebrand. People will still say Twitter, tweets, retweets etc. Its a monumental stupid decision to re-brand something that has global, everyday recognition, even from people who don't use Twitter. The re-brand is just another in the list of stupid decisions he has taken since buying it for ridiculous money. It's become a cesspit with the worst of the worst being highlighted on it through the "for you" section, a contradiction in terms if ever there was one.

He seems determined to ruin the site, and I don't think it's by accident either.