Erin ConroySo, it seems like not everyone has noticed that #Bluesky is the only social media competitor that Musk never banned & always allowed to advertise itself to Twitter users.
Isn't that interesting.
afufa, vc., esq.They are intrinsically linked. Bluesky received $13M from Twitter.
This is an article from 2019, when Jack Dorsey announced he would be funding a team to explore a decentralized standard for social media. If the bet to move towards Mastodon-like social media works, Elon would be a fool to get rid of it.
Twitter plans to build 'decentralized standard' for social networks
Twitter Inc plans to set up an independent research group to create an "open and decentralized" system for social networks, CEO Jack Dorsey said on Wednesday, which could relieve pressure on the company to appease critics of its content policies but also give rise to a new...
Thanks for the replies. So, I'm aware of these sources, texts & the lawsuit, of course. Big gaps remain in the story of how & why - & importantly, when - Dorsey & Musk came to an agreement about Twitter, & with what goals. This all happened during the time that Dorsey was stepping down/being pushed out as Twitter CEO, for the second time. We may merely interpret the available facts differently.
But what is your source for the claim Musk paid Bluesky $13m?
If he did actually pay Bluesky $13m after their late 2021 splitting off from Twitter & incorporation as a separate PBLLC , why? What did he get in return?
(Query: how exactly did that happen, legally? How could they just take the money and run? What consideration did the new PBLLC owners give in exchange for ownership & whatever resources Twitter had provided to the project? It makes no legal sense.)
These are great questions and things to consider. Unfortunately, I am not a lawyer so I’m not sure of how corporate law works. But, it would be interesting to do a deep dive on how they actually managed to pull this off.
@aa1217 You probably know this but your handle (esq.) indicates that you are a lawyer.
fyi I assumed you were, based on that.
CrazyMyra@chargrille @aa1217 Dorsey paid the $13m in March, according to Crunchbase, which details that funding round.
Can you see edit history of Crunchbase? When I looked at it several weeks ago iirc Twitter was the source, not Dorsey. Also, contemporaneous tweets talk about that $13 million having come from Twitter, *not* Dorsey.
@chargrille @aa1217
Hasn't been edited as far as I know. This is what I saw a month or two ago, and what I still see today
Hasn't been edited as far as I know. This is what I saw a month or two ago, and what I still see today
Thanks. Based on announcements from Twitter, I don't think that information is correct.
What is Crunchbase's source? Who put that information up? It looks like a lot of people can edit these profiles.
@chargrille @aa1217 I don't know its sources, but it's a fairly reliable (in terms of basic company info like this) site used mainly by VC types looking for new places to invest. I don't think it can be edited except by staff.
It's owned by TechCrunch, which is itself part of Yahoo, and has been around for about 15 years
It's owned by TechCrunch, which is itself part of Yahoo, and has been around for about 15 years
@chargrille @aa1217 The BlueSky project was funded by Twitter until last year. The amounts aren't directly reflected in the annual reports because it was an "operating cost" as opposed to a separate investment, but it was mentioned on Twitter (by Dorsey, I think) as being in the $3m region. I don't know if that was annually or in total.
Believe whatever you want. I regard Crunchbase as reliable enough for this purpose
Believe whatever you want. I regard Crunchbase as reliable enough for this purpose
@OutOnTheMoors
I don't believe anything in particular at this point, I'm just looking for reliable sources. Without knowing how that # got there, I can't rely on it. What I saw in contemporaneous tweets indicate that Twitter provided $13m in funding to Bluesky. I've been through this type of thing enough in work for large business clients to know that the devil is in these details & it's amazing how sloppy rich men & enormous companies (& white shoe legal firms!) actually can be.
Also, devious and contemptuous of both laws & contracts.
@chargrille Always.