Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Elon Musk tweeted on his official account on Sunday that Twitter would be changing its logo to an “X” and that all the birds will be disappearing from the platform.
“Tired of running your massively popular online service? Call BrandWreckers™ , your one-stop shop for dismantling user loyalty and brand reputation. Call now and lose your first 10k users for free!”
You know I wonder if we could create a non profit that exists only to buy things and then donate them (IP, closed source, whatever) to the public domain. If you had a savvy board, such an organization could do a lot of good.
What’s savvy about getting paid just for your time? You need to get paid for expertise, opportunities, networking… that’s at least 10%, since a non-profit wouldn’t have preference shares.
I’m leery about a percentage just because I perceive a conflict of interest. Overall compensation of 10% might be about right, but tying actual compensation to the cost of stuff that is bought creates a perverse incentive to overspend on things. That’s money donated for the betterment of humanity, not so I can have a 3 acre swimming pool.
I think you are looking at it kind of wrong, in that: with a savvy board, the first savvy thing they would do, would be to guarantee their own self-benefit, going head first into a conflict of interest… meaning you can’t have a project like that driven by a savvy board, instead you need an altruistic, idealistic, etc. board… but then, a non-savvy board, would be much likely to just squander the money, or get swindled out of it, so… I don’t think a project like that would ever work as expected.
I grew up poor in Australia, and no one really had pay TV around me - least of all the people I hung with. Over the years, you’d still learn through other TV shows and movies that HBO was the channel with the good stuff.
Why change that? Why lose such branding? Have they become associated with something that they don’t want to be? If not, leave great enough alone.
I just saw a trailer for an adventure time spin off on a youtube channel called “Max” and though it was a random channel that post trailer lol. Granted i rarely watch anything and while i know about HBO i don’t ever remember watching anything from them.
I watched a South Park movie for the first time in years. In this one they traveled into the future. Everything had Max or Plus added to the name. It seemed pretty spot on with where we are going
Twitter and Reddit are both lessons in how to kill a community and a brand.
Lessons for whom? I have several things I would like to kill but lack the requisite trillions to execute my vision.
Sounds like a Kickstarter idea if I’ve ever seen one.
“Tired of running your massively popular online service? Call BrandWreckers™ , your one-stop shop for dismantling user loyalty and brand reputation. Call now and lose your first 10k users for free!”
“All you have to do is point!”
You know I wonder if we could create a non profit that exists only to buy things and then donate them (IP, closed source, whatever) to the public domain. If you had a savvy board, such an organization could do a lot of good.
Something like this must already exist, right?
A savvy board would get a 10% cut on each transaction, count me in!
I mean they would need to be paid, but idk about a percentage. Mostly just to fairly compensate them for the time spent vetting deals.
What’s savvy about getting paid just for your time? You need to get paid for expertise, opportunities, networking… that’s at least 10%, since a non-profit wouldn’t have preference shares.
I’m leery about a percentage just because I perceive a conflict of interest. Overall compensation of 10% might be about right, but tying actual compensation to the cost of stuff that is bought creates a perverse incentive to overspend on things. That’s money donated for the betterment of humanity, not so I can have a 3 acre swimming pool.
But IDK maybe I’m looking at it wrong.
I think you are looking at it kind of wrong, in that: with a savvy board, the first savvy thing they would do, would be to guarantee their own self-benefit, going head first into a conflict of interest… meaning you can’t have a project like that driven by a savvy board, instead you need an altruistic, idealistic, etc. board… but then, a non-savvy board, would be much likely to just squander the money, or get swindled out of it, so… I don’t think a project like that would ever work as expected.
Would be the largest one if we want to go after facebook
You can throw Warner Brothers Discovery in there while you are at it (HBO now stupidly referred to as “Max”)
HBO has changed their branding like 5 times in the last few years I swear.
They’re literally a household name.
I grew up poor in Australia, and no one really had pay TV around me - least of all the people I hung with. Over the years, you’d still learn through other TV shows and movies that HBO was the channel with the good stuff.
Why change that? Why lose such branding? Have they become associated with something that they don’t want to be? If not, leave great enough alone.
C-suite executives I guess.
I just saw a trailer for an adventure time spin off on a youtube channel called “Max” and though it was a random channel that post trailer lol. Granted i rarely watch anything and while i know about HBO i don’t ever remember watching anything from them.
I watched a South Park movie for the first time in years. In this one they traveled into the future. Everything had Max or Plus added to the name. It seemed pretty spot on with where we are going
I get the feeling that these execs need a plan to increase profits every quarter, and this is one of the gotos.
Maybe the CEO is just a big Image comics fan and forgot the second X in Maxx.