I have to disagree because I feel “the point” is profitability. My comment shows a direct issue with profitability when liberal-swayed advertisers have to exit because of a network’s new direction.
I do understand your argument though. That’s another massive layer that will be impossible to overcome.
That was never the point. The point was that it would either change, or die from the $13bn debt the purchase saddled Twitter with.
The “heavy debt” that drives Twitter’s cashflow into the negative is a direct result of the purchase.
I have to disagree because I feel “the point” is profitability. My comment shows a direct issue with profitability when liberal-swayed advertisers have to exit because of a network’s new direction.
I do understand your argument though. That’s another massive layer that will be impossible to overcome.
“liberal-swayed advertisers” citation required
Are they “liberal-swayed” or do they just not want their ads appearing next to posts calling for the death of Jews?