Tag

Elon Musk

Browsing

By Sarah Perez

Elon Musk’s plan to reduce X’s dependence on advertising revenue by increasing paid subscriptions is still not taking off.

According to a new, third-party analysis of the X Premium subscription service by app intelligence firm Appfigures, X has pulled in approximately $200 million in in-app purchase revenue across iOS and Android since the original 2021 launch of the subscription formerly known as Twitter Blue.

There are some caveats to this figure. For starters, the sum is based only on those purchases made via the mobile app, not the mobile web or desktop web. That means the true sum is likely higher, especially given X offers a discount for web purchases.

Then there are the commission fees to consider.

After paying app store commissions, X will have made a minimum of $140 million, the firm estimates. However, that figure will also likely be higher because Apple and Google discount commissions from 30% to 15% in year two. (Appfigures doesn’t have a way to reliably calculate how many subscriptions are associated with each commission rate, we’re told).

For further context, though Twitter Blue was launched in 2021, it was relaunched in December 2022 as Twitter under Musk pushed into non-advertising revenue. Within the first three months post-relaunch, the service brought in only $11 million in mobile app subscriptions, per data from app data provider Sensor Tower. A year ago, the company now called X launched two additional subscriptions, Basic and Premium+.

Twitter blue check Twitter blue copy
Image Credits:Twitter

While there’s no way to definitively determine how many of X’s users are paying for X Premium subscriptions, there are ways to back into some estimates here, at least in terms of native mobile subscribers.

Currently, X continues to offer three subscription tiers: Basic, Premium, and Premium Plus with varying access to advanced features, like Grok AI, a blue Verified checkmark, and fewer ads, among others. The top in-app purchase (based on App Store data) is X Premium, which costs $11 per month on mobile.

In September 2024, X grossed $14.7 million through in-app purchases on mobile devices, according to Appfigures.

Since X is a private company with no obligation to share its user numbers publicly, one can only guess how many people are buying which subscription tier.

But if that revenue was generated mostly by its top in-app purchase, X Premium, that would equate to roughly 1.3 million paying users (i.e., $14.7M / $11).

If, instead, all the sign-ups were for X’s lowest tier, the $4 per month X Basic, then X could have gained as many as 3.7 million paid users during the month.

If we were to estimate that X’s paid users broke down by 70% on Premium, 20% on Premium Plus, and 10% on Premium Basic, that would equate to about 940,000 Premium users, 134,000 Premium Plus users, and 368,000 Premium Basic users. This split seems reasonable since X’s top three subscriptions (in order) are Premium, Premium Plus, then Basic. In total, those numbers combined would come to around 1.4 million paid users added during September.

Quarter by quarter, the picture does look a bit rosier for X Premium, as Appfigures’ estimates indicate that in-app purchase revenue growth jumped 30% from Q2 to Q3 after staying relatively flat in the prior period.

Image Credits:Appfigures (opens in a new window)

There are other in-app purchases available beyond X Premium to consider, like those for subscriptions to top creators on the platform. Elon Musk has a large following, for instance. Fortune reported last year that Musk was the most-followed user with 155 million followers, of which over 40,000 were subscribers — or .025% of his followers had subscribed. Today, Musk has 200 million followers. Assuming roughly the same percentage was subscribed, that would work out to around 50,000 subscribers. At $4 per month for the subscription, that would pull in around $200,000 per month in gross revenue.

Image Credits:X screenshot

Another user with a large subscription base is @stevewilldoit, as he follows anyone who subscribes to him. He currently follows 10,400 people on X. If three-fourths were subscribed, that would equal around 7,800 subscribers paying $5 per month, bringing in gross earnings of $39,000/month before X’s cut is removed.

Though rough estimates, these additional figures are also important because they’re a part of X’s plan to grow its user base via creator content.

Last week, the company announced it would begin to pay creators based on engagement they receive from X’s Premium subscribers, instead of a cut of ad revenue — a change clearly meant to boost X subscribers. On the one hand, given that X had reduced the ad load for Premium+ subscribers to zero, this could open up more possibilities for creators to make money. But paying for engagement also often incentivizes clickbait or controversial content, designed to get replies.

Regardless, Bloomberg reported earlier this year that X generated $1.48 billion in total revenue during the first 6 months of 2024, according to financial documents shared with regulators. In other words, subscriptions are still a very small piece of X’s pie.

The introduction of the new program followed moves from X that alienated some advertisers, such as suing a group over their ad boycott and CEO Elon Musk telling advertisers to “go f— yourself.” The company has since been trying to make amends, recently forging a deal to bring Unilever back into the fold.

Feature Image Credit: TechCrunch

By Sarah Perez

Sourced from TechCrunch

By Amber DaSilva

Musk is the Special Boy, and the law says you have to give him your money

Elon Musk’s relationship to Twitter advertisers over the past year can best be described as “adversarial,” but the Tesla CEO announced a new level of combativeness Thursday: He intends to take brands who took their ad spend away from the platform to court in hopes they’ll be criminally prosecuted for not paying him.

After Musk purchased Twitter last year, a mass of advertisers fled the site — largely due to the fear that their ads would show up alongside the antisemitic content Musk continues to push. Musk responded maturely, by telling the advertisers to “go fuck” themselves, with the full knowledge of what that antagonistic relationship would do to ad spend on the platform. Musk later walked back the statement, and brought on Linda Yaccarino as CEO to try and woo advertisers back, but a new report from the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary has given him the ammo he thinks he needs for a legal battle.

Musk’s weird new tactic does have some legal backing, thanks to a report from the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary. The report concerns the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, an effort from the World Federation of Advertisers and World Economic Forum that pushes to reduce “harmful content on digital media platforms.” No one wants their brand showing up right next to hate speech on social media, so GARM tries to reduce the chances of that happening.

The Committee on the Judiciary, apparently, has decided that that’s bad actually. The Committee refers to GARM’s actions — which, as a reminder, consist of “withholding ad dollars until platforms do Literally Anything about hate speech and misinformation” — as “seek[ing] to control online speech.”

An example is made in the report of GARM’s response to Spotify, a GARM member, platforming Joe Rogan’s podcast despite his batshit views on Covid-19 vaccination. As GARM attempts to minimize disinformation, the group apparently brought this contrast up to Spotify — a move that the Committee calls “attempt[ing] to pressure Spotify into censoring Joe Rogan due to his views.”

There is a difference between privately holding a view that is objectively, scientifically, provably false, and pushing that belief onto an impressionable audience. GARM can only affect the latter, and only in the most oblique way — encouraging member companies like GM, Mastercard, and Nike to withhold ad dollars. Yet somehow, this free trade between private corporations is censorship in the eyes of the House, and it’s provided Musk the legal basis he needs for a suit.

Musk revealed his intent to sue via tweet, of course, and didn’t expand on what his plans actually entailed. I, for one, am very interested to see what the courts say to the claim of “it’s illegal not to spend money on my website.” That’ll make for a fun precedent when the Supreme decides, 6-3, for Musk.

Feature Image Credit: Apu Gomes (Getty Images)

By Amber DaSilva

Sourced from jalopnik

By Elizabeth Napolitano

Elon Musk didn’t seem shaken by actor James Woods’ threat to stop using X if the social media platform moves ahead with a plan to eliminate a feature that lets users block others. “Then delete your account,” the billionaire tweeted.

The brusque reply, which the X owner posted to the site on Sunday, came after Woods, a one-time Musk supporter, vowed to leave the platform (formerly known as Twitter) if Musk stripped users’ ability to bar certain accounts from viewing and interacting with their posts.

“In the midst of a libel suit I was targeted by thirty trolls the defendant enlisted to harass me,” Woods said in a post last week when the news came out. “If [Musk removes X’s blocking feature], I will have no choice but to retire from this site.”

Musk, who calls himself a free speech absolutist, announced in a post last Friday that X would end users’ ability to limit their interactions with certain accounts except for direct messages, adding in a later post that the block feature “makes no sense” for the platform.

The planned change caused an uproar among some users, some of whom have also vowed to leave X if the feature is removed.

“I will absolutely delete my account and leave this app if X attempts to even *test* this policy, wrote one user. “It’s absolutely sick and disgusting.”

“As a female climate scientist, blocking is the only thing that makes my engagement here on Twitter/X possible,” another user said.

It remains unclear if or when X might remove its blocking button. If the change goes into effect, X could be removed from the Google Play and Apple app stores, potentially deepening the social media platform’s financial troubles. Both digital storefronts require apps involving user-generated content to offer a blocking feature.

X responded to CBS MoneyWatch’s request for comment with an email saying, “We’ll get back to you soon.”

Boosting free speech — or revenue?

In another post, Woods challenged interpretations of X’s policy change as a step toward promoting free speech on the site, speculating that the decision had more to do with boosting the site’s ad revenue.

“Users of X are mere pawns to turn the site into an electronic shopping mall,” Woods said in a post on Saturday. “The man I thought was a defender of free speech is just another greedy capitalist.”

Last month, Musk revealed the social media company’s advertising revenue had plunged roughly 50%. X also faces competition from alternative blogging platforms like Meta-backed Threads and Bluesky.

By Elizabeth Napolitano

Sourced from CBS News

By Siladitya Ray

Topline: Twitter owner Elon Musk has said he plans to transform the social media platform into a so-called “everything app,” an idea he has given little detail about, but whose blueprint can be found in Tencent’s WeChat, which is used by more than a billion users to do everything from sending text messages, making payments, booking flight tickets, playing games and even hailing a cab.

Key Facts

With more than 1.3 billion—mostly Chinese—monthly active users, the Tencent-owned WeChat, or Weixin, is the world’s best-known and biggest “everything app” used by consumers, businesses, celebrities and even Chinese government agencies.

WeChat launched in 2011 as a simple messaging app, similar to the Meta-owned WhatsApp, but has since evolved as one of the major gateways to the internet and e-commerce for many of China’s 1 billion internet users.

Despite starting off with only text messages, WeChat now allows its users to do a multitude of other things like video calls, payments, e-commerce, accessing the news, and official government announcements.

WeChat also serves as a platform for other “mini-apps,” which allow users to access a third-party service like ride-hailing or restaurant booking without having to download a separate app that would require its own account.

Surprising Fact

A testament to the popularity of WeChat was visible back in 2020, when the Trump administration was pushing to ban the app in the U.S. A particular clause of the proposed ban, which barred U.S. companies from carrying out “any transaction that is related to WeChat,” raised the possibility of the super app being removed from Apple’s App store. A survey on Chinese social media found that 95% of the country’s iPhone users would be willing to ditch their smartphones and switch to another brand if Apple’s devices could no longer be used to access WeChat.

Key Background

Musk is not the first executive from Silicon Valley hoping to ape WeChat’s success in the U.S. In 2019, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that his company ought to learn from and even emulate WeChat. Musk himself has admitted that his keenness on building an “everything app” predates his plans to acquire Twitter but he believes that transforming Twitter into “X” helps accelerate the process “by 3 to 5 years,” compared to starting from scratch with a new app.

What To Watch For

However, Musk’s ambitions, like every other silicon valley “super-app” dream before it, faces some key hurdles. The biggest one is integrating payments. One of the key elements of WeChat’s success is that alongside Ant Financial’s Alipay, it is one of the two biggest payment platforms in China—where the use of mobile payments is ubiquitous. Most of WeChat’s other integrations are built around its payments feature and it can be used by anyone with a Chinese bank account. Seemingly aware of this, Musk says he wants to transform Twitter into a Paypal competitor and even make it the “biggest financial institution in the world.” However, this plan will rely on Americans’ willingness to change their payment behaviour. Data shows that more than 80% of all Chinese adults use mobile payments, in comparison with less than 33% of U.S. adults.

Feature Image Credit: NurPhoto via Getty Images

By Siladitya Ray

I am a Breaking News Reporter at Forbes, with a focus on covering important tech policy and business news. Graduated from Columbia University with an MA in Business and Economics Journalism in 2019. Worked as a journalist in New Delhi, India from 2014 to 2018. Have a news tip? DMs are open on Twitter @SiladityaRay or drop me an email at [email protected].

Sourced from Forbes

By Joel Rosenblatt and Bloomberg

Twitter employees sued the social media company claiming it refuses to pay 2022 bonuses, despite promises that they would be paid out at 50% of their target amounts.

Twitter has a cash performance bonus plan that is paid out annually and in the months leading up to Elon Musk’s acquisition of the company in October, executives, including former Chief Financial Officer Ned Segal, said the bonuses would be paid, according to the lawsuit filed Tuesday in San Francisco federal court.

“Twitter refused to pay employees who remained employed by the company in the first quarter of 2023 any bonus,” the employees said.

Since Musk took over, Twitter has lost more than half its advertising revenue as brands stopped trusting the site to remove violent, pornographic and hateful content. Twitter also shed more than 75% of its employees, through layoffs and resignations. The site has been roiled by technical difficulties, including during a recent launch of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ campaign for president.

The proposed class-action complaint on behalf of current and former Twitter employees employed in the first quarter of 2023 who didn’t receive their bonus was filed by Mark Shobinger, who was Twitter’s senior director of compensation until late last month. The job entailed overseeing executive and incentive pay and in November expanded his responsibilities to include employee compensation globally, according to the suit.

Twitter has disbanded its media relations department and doesn’t respond to requests for comment.

Since Musk’s acquisition, the company has been sued numerous times for allegedly failing to pay its bills, including rent, and by former employees for severance and back pay.

The social media company has traditionally set a target for its bonus plan, which is funded throughout the year and pays out at least 50% of the target annually, according to the lawsuit.

“Both before and after Musk’s acquisition was completed in October 2022, Twitter’s management continuously promised the company’s employees, including plaintiff, that their annual bonus for 2022 would be paid under the Bonus Plan,” the employees said in the lawsuit.

Because Twitter reneged on various promises to its employees, including its refusal to pay the bonuses, Shobinger said he quit. He sued for breach of contract.

Feature Image Credit: Chesnot/Getty Images

By Joel Rosenblatt and Bloomberg

Sourced from Fortune

By Aisha Counts, Tom Maloney and Bloomberg

Twitter is now worth just one-third of what Elon Musk paid for the social-media platform, according to Fidelity, which recently marked down the value of its equity stake in the company.

Musk has acknowledged he overpaid for Twitter, which he bought for $44 billion, including $33.5 billion in equity. More recently, he said Twitter is worth less than half what he paid for it. It’s unclear how Fidelity arrived at its new, lower valuation or whether it receives any non-public information from the company.

Fidelity first reduced the value of its Twitter stake in November, to 44% of the purchase price. That was followed by further markdowns in December and February.

Twitter has struggled financially since Musk took over. After saddling the company with $13 billion of debt, Musk’s erratic decision making and challenges with content moderation led advertising revenue to decline by 50%, Musk said in March. An attempt to recoup that revenue by selling Twitter Blue subscriptions has so far failed to take off. At the end of March, less than 1% of Twitter’s monthly users had signed up.

Twitter didn’t specifically respond to a request for comment.

Musk’s investment in Twitter is now worth $8.8 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, which uses Fidelity’s valuation to calculate the value of his holding. Musk spent more than $25 billion to acquire an estimated 79% stake in the company last year.

The latest markdown erases about $850 million from Musk’s $187 billion fortune, according to the index. Despite Twitter’s issues, Musk’s wealth is up more than $48 billion this year, largely due to a 63% surge in Tesla Inc.’s share price.

Feature Image Credit: Ludovic Marin—AFP/Getty Images

By Aisha Counts, Tom Maloney and Bloomberg

Sourced from FORTUNE

By

  • Tesla released what might have been its very first commercial.
  • Tesla’s Asia account on Twitter posted a 2-minute driver testimonial.
  • Elon Musk said last week that the company will begin advertising for the first time in its history.

Tesla might have already revealed its very first commercial less than a week after Elon Musk said the company would begin advertising for the first time in its history.

The electric carmaker rolled out a 2-minute Twitter video on its Tesla Asia account called “Drive to believe.” The video appeared to give a peek into the company’s plans for its upcoming ad campaign, which could rely on driver testimonials.

If so, it’s rolling out ads in a relatively low-key way: The Tesla Asia account has only 172,000 followers compared to its main account’s 21 million. It’s not clear if this is indeed the brand’s first advertisement, though many people on Twitter have hailed it as such.

The brand has relied heavily on word-of-mouth in the past — in addition to Musk’s promotion on social media. Last week, Musk called the Tesla promotions on Twitter “preaching to the choir.” Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment on the video.

In the video, a Model 3 owner and a mother of two kids said she was initially drawn to the vehicle because of its technology, but has grown to appreciate the car even more due to its safety measures. The video highlights several Tesla features, including the car’s Autopilot feature, infotainment system, and the Tesla app — as well as the “ease” of using an electric car for everyday drives.

“It is one of the greatest gifts that my kid can have in terms of their future,” the woman in the video says.

Musk made the announcement on turning toward advertising after having shunned it previously after a shareholder at the event, Kevin Paffrath — also known as the YouTuber Meet Kevin — suggested that the company needs to do more to let non-Tesla fans know about the company’s products.

Musk told CNBC’s David Faber later that day that he’d only just made the decision at the event. He said Tesla didn’t yet have a clear strategy yet for advertising. Still, the CEO told CNBC he thinks that, in general, ads should be “informative and entertaining” without causing users to regret the time they spent watching them.

Musk told CNBC that he hopes to use ads to combat what he said was misinformation about the brand’s pricing, as well as promote its safety features.

In the past, Musk has said he hates advertising. He’s said Tesla prefers to put its money toward research-and-development rather than promotional content.

By

By Justin Bariso

Buffett’s recent comment has a little to do with Musk, more to do with emotional intelligence, and everything to do with being intentional about how you run your business.

“Elon is a brilliant, brilliant guy.”

That’s how Warren Buffett described Elon Musk at Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholder meeting this weekend. It was in response to a question directed at Buffett’s business partner Charlie Munger, as to whether Munger thought that Musk overestimates himself.

Munger does believe that, although he added that “[Musk] is very talented” and that “he would not have achieved what he has in life if he hadn’t tried for unreasonably extreme objectives.”

“He likes taking on the impossible job and doing it,” explained Munger. “We’re different, Warren and I. Warren and I are looking for the easy job that we can identify.”

Buffett concurred. “If we can do it playing tic-tac-toe, we’ll do it,” he said.

But it’s what came next that really stands out. Describing the way Musk runs his companies, Buffett said this:

“It takes over your life in a way that just doesn’t fit us. There have been important things done by Elon already. It requires … a dedication to solving the impossible. And every now and then he’ll do it. But it would be torturous to me or Charlie.

“I like the way I’m living.”

Buffett’s answer has little to do with Musk, more to do with emotional intelligence, and everything to do with being intentional about how you run your business.

Namely, do you want to be:

A disrupter?

Or an investor?

To clarify, “investor” here isn’t talking about traditional investors who manage financial assets. Rather, it’s referring to owners who are building a business with the aim to generate future passive income.

Let’s take a closer look at each of these types of business owner and see what you can learn from it. (By the way, if you enjoy this article, you might want to sign up for my free course, which uses real-life examples like this one to help you and your team build emotional intelligence.)

Disrupters focus on changing the world

As a disrupter, Elon Musk’s primary goal is to change the world–he wants to disrupt the status quo and alter how humanity lives.

To accomplish this goal, Musk and other disrupters like him work extremely hard to do things in a completely different way, and then relentlessly try to demonstrate why that new way is better.

For example, with his companies, Musk has tried to move the world to:

  • use renewable energy instead of fossil fuels
  • consider life on Mars and beyond
  • change the way they use social media

As you can imagine, to initiate this type of change is extremely difficult. That’s why disrupters must be workaholics. They have to go all in.

As Musk himself once put it: “Nobody ever changed the world on 40 hours a week.”

Investors focus on changing their life

Investors could care less about changing the world. Rather, they’re interested in leveraging what they learn about the world to make money.

Investors focus on identifying opportunities. Then, they use proven formulas that they can repeat. In Buffett’s case, this has meant focusing on slow but steady growth in his businesses, and then investing capital from those businesses in what he describes as “an outstanding company at a sensible price” (as opposed to mediocre or risky companies at bargain prices).

For others, that might mean investing time or money to design or refine a product or service, create content, build marketing funnels, etc.–all with the goal of earning profits that compound over time, so they can have the freedom to live life on their terms.

While many investors also end up workaholics, the beauty of this type of business is you don’t have to work crazy hours to accomplish your goal. Buffett, for example, once told PBS that he has “no desire to get to work at 4:00 in the morning” and usually sleeps “eight hours a night.”

How to run a business: The choice is yours

Which brings us to the key lesson in how to run your business:

You have to make a choice. Do you want to be a disrupter or an investor?

Here is where emotional intelligence comes in. By using the rule of recentering, you must idenitfy what your primary business goals are. Do you want to change the world? Or is your business a means to an end?

The answers to these questions will in turn influence your decisions, and help you decide what type of business you want to run.

For example, disrupters do practically anything for the business, because they believe they are serving a greater good and pushing humanity forward. They’ll work nights, weekends, and vacations until they’ve gotten the world’s attention. Then, they continue to do so–to make sure they’re not disrupted themselves.

Investors may also work crazy schedules–but, often, only until they discover the “formulas” they can repeat. For many investors, the goal then is to make the business as easy to run as possible.

As time goes on, I see fewer people trying to disrupt, and more trying to invest. And no wonder, because if truly successful, investors have more control over their lives.

Opportunities to:

Spend more time with family.

Spend less time doing things they hate, and more time doing things they love.

Spend less time working, and more time living.

Of course, you still have to be intentional about making those choices. But it all starts with answering that pivotal question:

Do want to be a disrupter or an investor?

The choice is yours. Choose wisely.

Feature Image Credit: Getty Images

By Justin Bariso

Sourced from Inc.

Concerning!

Twitter has been a disaster since Elon Musk bought the company last fall: Advertising dollars vanished, the site breaks all the time, and it’s now explicitly a home for the worst people on Earth.

And there’s no reason to think any of this will change as long as Musk owns the thing. Because Musk = Twitter. Full stop.

Fine. What about Tesla, the EV company that made Musk wealthy enough to buy Twitter in the first place? That company has also been tightly linked to Musk’s persona, and it seems like it’s doing just fine: Tesla says the last three months of 2022 were its best quarter ever. We should get another update from the company in April.

So here’s an open question: Will Musk’s behaviour on Twitter, and as Twitter owner, ever have an effect on Tesla?

If you have followed the Musk Twitter saga carefully, you’re well aware of Musk’s penchant for saying and doing things you might find repellent. This month, for instance, he publicly mocked a fired employee for his disability. The only real surprise about that incident was that Musk ended up apologizing for it, calling it a “misunderstanding.” A few days later, Musk started tweeting his support for Jacob Chansley, the “QAnon Shaman” who participated in the January 6 riot and who is in jail after reaching a plea deal with federal prosecutors.

But people on Twitter spend a lot of time thinking and talking about Twitter. Most people don’t use Twitter. Do they know or care about what Musk is doing there — and if so, will it change their opinion about owning a Tesla?

Some data suggests it could already be happening.

For starters, Tesla is no longer the only game in town when it comes to EVs. Plenty of automakers now compete in the market, and they seem to be making headway. A year ago, for instance, 17 percent of potential EV buyers told surveyors at YouGov that their first choice was a Tesla — more than any other brand. Now that number has dropped to 9 percent, outpaced by both Toyota and BMW.

That sentiment seems to be turning up in actual sales, too. Tesla’s US market share declined to 58 percent in the fourth quarter of 2022, down from 78 percent a year earlier.

There are multiple reasons why you might want to buy an EV that isn’t a Tesla. YouGov says potential buyers say price is most important to them, and Teslas have never been cheap. Safety is also a big consideration for buyers, and recurring reports of Tesla’s issues — like steering wheels falling off and multi-car pile-ups — may not help.

While YouGov hasn’t asked would-be EV buyers if their opinion of Musk affects their opinion of Teslas, it has asked the general population about their opinion of Tesla — and it has been going down since last spring, when Musk first announced that he was going to buy Twitter, and then spent months trying not to buy the company. In November, shortly after Musk bought Twitter, Tesla’s “net favourability” score became negative, meaning more people disliked the company than liked it.

There is, however, potential upside for Musk: While more people dislike Musk than before, more people also like Musk than ever before. Whether those new Musk fans are Tesla buyers, or will ever become Tesla buyers, is a question we can’t answer at the moment.

Again: It’s possible that an expanded EV market, and the head start Tesla earned itself by more or less creating that market, will be enough for Tesla to enjoy record sales for years to come, regardless of Musk’s antics at Twitter.

But it’s been a very long time since car buyers associated their car purchase with the man running the car company — if the words “Lee Iacocca” mean anything to you, you are likely not a young person. We’ve never had a car company run by a guy who’s so addicted to Twitter that he bought the whole company. Now we’re running a real-world experiment to figure out if that was a good idea.

Feature Image Credit: Karim Sahib/AFP via Getty Images

Sourced from Vox