GIVE ME YOUR MONEY OR I'LL SUE!

[Elixir]

Elon Musk's X sues Lego, Nestlé and more brands, accusing them of advertising boycott​

What a great sales pitch, eh?
"Buy advertising on my crappy-assed platform or I'll sue you for some made-up shit, with the power of the White House behind me!"

Since when is it illegal to not give Leon your money? (He's already in your pocket for the taxes you pay to support his Space-X contracts and more.)

Lawyers for X argued that in a competitive market, social media platforms should have the option to set their own brand safety standards that are "optimal for that platform."

But in a competitive market, advertisers should not be free to decide where when and how to spend advertising dollars in a way that is optimal for that Company?
Fuck Leon.

 

[southernhybrid]

Who knew it was illegal not to advertise on X? What did we know? How did we know it?

Fuck Muskrat and the turd he rode in on!

 

[scombrid]

Yet the pretend libertarians still support him. Well at least they won’t have to suffer government employees with pronouns in their email signatures.

 

[Ford]

I guess Free Speech means you are free to only tell Elon that the changes he made to Twitter are awesome and that he's awesome. He's literally suing over hurt fee fees.

 

[laughing dog]

How is this not the definition of a frivolous lawsuit?

 

[Elixir]

How is this not the definition of a frivolous lawsuit?

Not if the apricot approves.
Orange is The Law now.

 

[TomC]

How is this not the definition of a frivolous lawsuit?

I'd go a step further.
Musk has degraded the value of the product so much that customers are losing the willingness to pay for it. Broadcasting that, rather than improving the value of the product, is idiocracy.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

“A U.S. District Judge in Texas has recused himself from a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s X days afterNPR drew scrutiny to the judge’s investment in Tesla and questions about Musk using the court to engage in “forum-shopping.”

It’s Texas. Leon can probably find -or be assigned - a less scrupulous judge pretty easily. As first lady he can shop it around as necessary.

 

[Harry Bosch]

How is this not the definition of a frivolous lawsuit?

It's an incredibly frivolous lawsuit. Musk's attorney's stated, according to the link: "Lawyers for X argued that in a competitive market, social media platforms should have the option to set their own brand safety standards that are "optimal for that platform." Fair enough. But then advertisers should also have the option to spend the dollars that is optimal for their company!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So the capitalist is arguing for communism in advertising?

 

[Patooka]

There is a literal video of Leon telling advertisers to "go fuck yourself".

Fucking moron.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Yet the pretend libertarians still support him. Well at least they won’t have to suffer government employees with pronouns in their email signatures.

Or government employees at all once they most of them are driven out or fired.

 

[Bomb#20]

Who knew it was illegal not to advertise on X? What did we know? How did we know it?

It isn't illegal, and Musk isn't claiming it is. There's a critical word NPR left out of its reporting: "antitrust".

How is this not the definition of a frivolous lawsuit?

It's an incredibly frivolous lawsuit. Musk's attorney's stated, according to the link: "Lawyers for X argued that in a competitive market, social media platforms should have the option to set their own brand safety standards that are "optimal for that platform." Fair enough. But then advertisers should also have the option to spend the dollars that is optimal for their company!

But Musk did not argue he and Mark Zuckerberg and Sergey Brin have the option to collude with one another to set a common brand safety standard that's optimal for all three platforms.

So the capitalist is arguing for communism in advertising?

So the labor activism fanboy "Jimmy Higgins" is arguing America went communist way back in 1890 with the passage of the Sherman Antitrust Act?

I'm not a lawyer; I'm not qualified to judge whether the defendants' actions are technically in violation of anti-collusion laws or not; and I don't think anyone else in this thread is qualified to judge that either. We'll have to see how this plays out in court. But there are all manner of things companies have a perfect right to do individually that they are not allowed to do in concert with a bunch of other companies. It is not a betrayal either of capitalism or of buyers' freedom of choice to shut down illegal combinations that are acting in restraint-of-trade.

 

[Elixir]

Musk did not argue he and Mark Zuckerberg and Sergey Brin have the option to collude with one another to set a common brand safety standard that's optimal for all three platforms.

Why in the world would he argue that? Especially if they did, or might want to collude in the future? Collusion is common in business, and holds a fuzzy boundary with straight up open cooperation. I might solicit a manufacturer to give me a break on their product even though I can’t afford to order their minimum, because my Company’s new widget which includes their item, can open up a new market horizon (use for their existing product) for them, and help me open New Account XYZ who is currently a competitor account, but if captured will easily enable us to meet your minimum and blah blah - collusion?
No, IMO. Just markets at work. But whothehell knows. I only know it’s not robustly enforced, if at all.

I know that the GSA was extremely reticent to get involved with stuff like that. I don’t believe they would ever revoke or deny a contract on the basis of accusations of collusion unless it was litigated first, even if the entity had an abysmal record of complaints about it from bidding competitors.
I don’t know if there’s any love lost between those two, musk and Zooks. They might be dancing in synch purely because they have the same noble objectives.

 

[Bomb#20]

Musk did not argue he and Mark Zuckerberg and Sergey Brin have the option to collude with one another to set a common brand safety standard that's optimal for all three platforms.

Why in the world would he argue that?

No reason he would. But the earlier posters were accusing Musk of hypocrisy over all this, so I was pointing out X would have to be colluding with other platforms for the charge to be valid.

 

[crazyfingers]

So Xwitter's value has dropped about 80% since Musk took it over and turned it into a right-wing cesspool that many major brands are reluctant to advertise on for fear that their products will appear next to Nazi content.

Now, as most people could have guessed, Musk is also destroying Tesla. It was simple to predict. Tesla had appealed to relatively well-off people who believed in global climate change and that mindset typically leans liberal. Musk's headlong plunge into right-wing politics, his DOGE cruelty, his overseas promotion of the German far right are hurting Tesla.

He has backed the far-right, pro-Russian, anti-Muslim party in German y, called the British p rime minister an “evil tyrant” who runs a “police state,” and stated recently about a U.S. neighbor and major Tesla market, “Canada is not a real country.”

But it's not just money.

NEW YORK (AP) — Elon Musk’s car company is required each year to report to investors all the bad things that could happen to it, and the latest version lists every imaginable threat from costly lawsuits to out-of-control battery fires to war and another epidemic.

But there’s barely any mention in the latest annual update of Musk’s full-bore entry into right-wing politics, which some experts say is turning off potential customers who don’t share his views.

“It’s marketing 101: Don’t involve yourself in politics,” said New York brand consultant Robert Passikoff. “People will stop buying your products.”

It may be too late.

Tesla sales plunged 45% in Europe in January, according to research firm Jato Dynamics, even as overall electric vehicle sales rose. That comes after a report of falling sales in California, its biggest U.S. market, and the first annual drop globally for the company last year.

If the Security Exchange Commission wasn't in the pocket of Trump, I'd guess that Tesla and Musk would be in serious trouble for making misleading statements to investors. But, the SEC won't lift a finger.

So all that can happen is that Musk loses even more net worth. The more the better but I'd rather see him in jail.

Musk's embrace of right-wing politics risks turning off car buyers and sinking Tesla's stock

Elon Musk appears be to turning off potential Tesla buyers with his embrace of far-right politicians around the world, analysts say, and the hit couldn't come at a worse time.

apnews.com

 

[TomC]

Now, as most people could have guessed, Musk is also destroying Tesla. It was simple to predict. Tesla had appealed to relatively well-off people who believed in global climate change and that mindset typically leans liberal. Musk's headlong plunge into right-wing politics, his DOGE cruelty, his overseas promotion of the German far right are hurting Tesla.

I'm curious.
Although not curious enough to invest any effort.

How much advertising does Tesla pay for on X? Is it increasing or declining?
Inquiring minds want to know.

But not very much.
Tom

 

[crazyfingers]

Now, as most people could have guessed, Musk is also destroying Tesla. It was simple to predict. Tesla had appealed to relatively well-off people who believed in global climate change and that mindset typically leans liberal. Musk's headlong plunge into right-wing politics, his DOGE cruelty, his overseas promotion of the German far right are hurting Tesla.

I'm curious.
Although not curious enough to invest any effort.

How much advertising does Tesla pay for on X? Is it increasing or declining?
Inquiring minds want to know.

But not very much.
Tom

Interesting question. If he's not advertising full bear on Xwitter, he should sue himself.