Most of the world’s biggest advertisers have stopped buying ads on Elon Musk’s X, exclusive new data shows::Musk and X CEO Linda Yaccarino have recently stated that most of the company’s top-spending advertisers from last year have returned.

    • YⓄ乙 @aussie.zone
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      Not uplifting enough. He still got Tesla , space x and tons of other companies he has invested in.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    just two of its clients had purchased ads on X last month. That was down from 31 brands in September last year,

    This is a drop we have not seen before for any major advertising platform,

    Come on Elon, you got this. 😜

    Ebiquity said its analysis appears to contradict statements made by X CEO Linda Yaccarino

    Yes that’s what I thought, a bit of reality distortion and gas lighting the public will surely solve this. 😋
    Remarkable how much Elons tactics for the past few years remind me of Trump.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Remarkable how much Elons tactics for the past few years remind me of Trump.

      He’s just the Gen X version of Trump.

  • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Does anyone else consider it plausible that flushing $44 billion is worth the cost if it removes that meddlesome social media platform that activists rely on to syndicate human rights abuses and document all the other terrible stuff that happens around the world?

    There’s something way sketch about this entire narrative

    • silverbax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Or, Elon Musk is just an idiot doing the same idiot things he’s always done.

      • OrangeJoe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        This absolutely feels like a Hanlon’s razor type situation especially given what we have learned about Elon musk over the last 5 or so years. The whole evil genius shtick just doesn’t fly anymore. He’s an idiot who just happens to have made enough good or lucky business decisions in the past to get him where he is now.

    • UnspecificGravity@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s impossible to say what anything is worth to a person who can lose 44 billion dollars and still have so much money left that the next 10 generations of their lineage won’t ever have to work again.

      It’s insane to think of that as a trivial amount of money, but musk could literally lose 99% of his money and it wouldn’t impact his life at all, except for his hobby of bankrupting corporations.

      • stifle867@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        As obscenely wealthy as he is, that wealth comes from bis assets not cash in hand. $20B of the $44B paid was cash, some of which was from selling some of his Tesla shares. Further to that, Tesla stock dropped so significantly it caused his net worth to drop by a further $30B.

    • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Did he actually paid 44B of his own money? How much of the money came from saudi investors and twitter leverage debt?

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I don’t think the exact amount is known, but he got money from a lot of sources and the bulk of it was Elon’s own money (or at least, his own assets). He also sourced a lot of money from other American billionaires (Larry Ellison for example).

        It’s likely the Saudis invested very little… although they did invest enough that Elon has to have given them something in return.

        Nobody involved in that purchase expected to make money on it. The price was far too high.

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t consider that plausible. I think must didn’t really want to buy Twitter but fucked up and was forced to.

  • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    When it says advertising, it always makes me think they mean product placement in the comments.

  • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s paywalled and I’m a little confused by the apparent disparity between the title and the claim that most of the advertisers have since returned?

    Which is it?

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I am sure you can trust everything out of X. Just like you can trust Musk. If I remember correctly he claimed it was the Jews 😱 who were to blame for the decline in X advertisements. I guess he correctly identified the problem and fixed it. /S 😆

      • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yeah, I have no trust in Musk or X. I’m just trying to understand the actual circumstances. Just because I want X to fail and Musk to go bankrupt, doesn’t mean I should uncritically examine headlines that conform to my hopes and expectations.

        Edit: So the full story is the major advertising conglomerate is all but calling X and Musk liars. Delicious.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      The claim in the headline is based on one agency seeing only 2 of its 28 clients using X.

      The X statement says that about 90% of its biggest spenders from last year are advertising again.

      These could both be true. My opinion is that the first doesn’t mean much and the second is damn lies.

  • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Just hypothetically, jokes and feelings aside for discussion sake, if we assume Elon had a plan after taking over (whether he did it by mistake or whatever) what do you think it could be?

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      To use the platform to support rightwing candidates in fachist/ hostile takeovers of democratic governments.

    • snaggen@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Saudi Arabia felt Twitter was a problem, so they paid Elon to take it down in a way it wouldn’t come back.

    • lloram239@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The goal with the X rename was to make a western equivalent of WeChat, that’s a Chinese app for chatting, social media and payment. While X was the name of the payment company Elon had before it got turned into Paypal.

      Crux is, outside of the name change, we have yet to see “X” gain any more features that would bring it closer to WeChat, it’s still just a broken version of Twitter.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Ebiquity, which works with 70 of the top 100 top-spending advertisers, according to media research company COMvergence, said that just two of its clients had purchased ads on X last month.

    Ebiquity said its analysis appears to contradict statements made by X CEO Linda Yaccarino who said in an on-stage interview last month that “90% of the top 100 advertisers have returned to X in the last twelve weeks alone.”

    An X spokesman clarified that the 90% figure referred to X’s 100 top spenders from the prior year, and declined to publicly comment about Ebiquity’s findings.

    Twitter’s largest clients have typically also been among the biggest spending global advertisers, such as Amazon, Unilever, Coca-Cola, and IBM, Bloomberg previously reported, citing data from the analytics firm Sensor Tower.

    A number of advertisers have stopped or drastically reduced their spending on X over the past year, amid concerns about the content it hosts and the general reliability and effectiveness of its ad platform.

    A review of data from Sensor Tower conducted by progressive watchdog group Media Matters found that while some advertisers had technically returned to purchasing ads on X, they were doing so at just a fraction of the level of their previous spend.


    The original article contains 535 words, the summary contains 203 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • resin85@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    Visa, for example, spent $10 in the 12 weeks to October 6, compared to $77,500 during the same period last year, according to Sensor Tower’s data.

    I’m no business genius like musk, but I’m gonna take a guess that wouldn’t even pay the bills for the ridiculous X sign he put on the roof and then had to take down.

    • blady_blah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      That seems like really low numbers. Ex-Twitter is (in theory) a multi-billion dollar company and Visa should be a “whale” of a client… $77.5k is nothing for advertising revenue. A drop in the expense budget. That’s not even one software engineer. How does the company stay afloat if numbers look like that?

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    I live in Ireland so there was always limited advertising on Twitter. There might be the odd campaign but it was blessedly free of ads in general. Then one day I logged in and it was a tidal wave of hot garbage - ads in Turkish, trade fairs in Chinese provinces, African NGOs etc. Just absolutely irrelevant bottom of the barrel dreck every 2 or 3 tweets in the feed. No matter how much I blocked there was more just like it.

    I don’t know if this was an aberration, a bug or a cynical attempt to screw over advertisers by draining their wallets. I just uninstalled Twitter and used the web version with an ad blocker. I don’t even see this shit any more. I wonder if the advertisers are still getting charged though. I hope they are though since paying $$$ for minimal engagement might convince them how worthless the platform is.