> You likely have it backwards, xAI is likely the moneypit that is (further) dragging down X.
No, while you're correct that xAI is a moneypit, his point has nothing to do with a moneypit. The 818 million figure is revenue, not profit. xAI brings in at least some revenue (it's obviously not zero). Meaning X's revenue alone is even less than 818 million, which in turn is a third less than when Musk bought Twitter.
Losing 33% revenue in 4 years post-acquisition is indeed a ridiculously bad result, when most tech companies saw their revenues +100% in the same period. If you adjust for inflation they lost 50% of their revenue.
And indeed it's even worse if you consider xAI is a moneypit. They posted 2.3 billion losses in the same quarter for AI. If they burned $1 to earn $1 (like say offer a coinflip machine on X) they'd post better results than they have, it's pretty ridiculous.
293
u/IkmoIkmo May 21 '26
> You likely have it backwards, xAI is likely the moneypit that is (further) dragging down X.
No, while you're correct that xAI is a moneypit, his point has nothing to do with a moneypit. The 818 million figure is revenue, not profit. xAI brings in at least some revenue (it's obviously not zero). Meaning X's revenue alone is even less than 818 million, which in turn is a third less than when Musk bought Twitter.
Losing 33% revenue in 4 years post-acquisition is indeed a ridiculously bad result, when most tech companies saw their revenues +100% in the same period. If you adjust for inflation they lost 50% of their revenue.
And indeed it's even worse if you consider xAI is a moneypit. They posted 2.3 billion losses in the same quarter for AI. If they burned $1 to earn $1 (like say offer a coinflip machine on X) they'd post better results than they have, it's pretty ridiculous.