Business "Twitter Isn’t a Company Anymore": Twitter merged with "X Corp" - One-stop shop for net goy slop is officially on the road, boys!


Link | Archive


Twitter Isn’t a Company Anymore​

It’s been merged into a new entity called X Corp. Here’s what that could mean.
By Nitish Pahwa and Mark Joseph Stern
April 10, 2023 34:29 PM

cringe.png
In a court filing on Tuesday, April 4, Twitter Inc. quietly revealed a major development: It no longer exists. The company is currently being sued by right-wing provocateur Laura Loomer, who accused it of violating federal racketeering laws when it banned her account in 2019. Loomer has a Twitter account again, and her absurd lawsuit is bound to fail—but until it does, Twitter, as a defendant, must continue to submit corporate disclosure statements to the court. And so, in its most recent filing, the company provided notice that “Twitter, Inc. has been merged into X Corp. and no longer exists.” As the “successor in interest” to Twitter Inc.—that is, the survivor of the merger—X Corp. is now the defendant in Loomer’s suit. Its parent corporation is identified as X Holdings Corp.

It’s hard to know what to make of Musk’s transformation of Twitter into X Corp. (When asked for comment, Twitter responded with a poop emoji, as is its recent custom.) Elon Musk, who owns Twitter as well as X Holdings Corp., has not yet revealed this merger to the public. But it appears to have been on his mind since he first plotted his purchase of the social media company. In April 2022, Musk registered X Holdings I, II, and III in Delaware, three separate companies designed to facilitate his purchase of Twitter. According to that deal, Twitter would merge with X Holdings II, but keep its name and general corporate structure while continuing to operate under Delaware law. X Holdings I, controlled by Musk, would then serve as the merged entity’s parent company, while X Holdings III would take on the $13 billion loan that a group of big banks provided Musk to help cover the $44 billion purchase. (According to Twitter’s demands in its litigation against Musk, X Holdings I would be intended “solely for the purpose of engaging in, and arranging financing for, the transactions.”)
Here’s where things get interesting. As the merger agreement stated, X Holdings II would cease to exist as a functioning entity after merging with Twitter. So the official structure after Musk’s takeover was: X Holdings I oversees Twitter Inc., while X Holdings III handles the cash. The Nevada filings show this exact arrangement is no longer in effect.

According to the Nevada secretary of state’s online business portal, Elon Musk registered two new businesses in the state on March 9: X Holdings Corp., and X Corp. Then, on March 15, Musk applied to merge those Nevada businesses with two of his existing companies: X Holdings I with X Holdings Corp., and Twitter Inc. with X Corp. In the latter’s case, the articles of the merger mandate that X Corp. fully acquire Twitter—meaning that, for all intents and purposes, “Twitter Inc.” no longer exists as a Delaware-based company. Now it’s part of X Corp., whose parent company is the $2 million X Holdings Corp. And that means X Holdings I no longer exists, either. Both X Holdings Corp. and X Corp. now fall under Nevada’s jurisdiction instead of Delaware’s. (It seems an anonymous SPAC-trader tracker first broke this news.)
The structural overhaul was acknowledged in the Loomer case about three weeks after X Corp. was registered in Carson City. So far, it doesn’t appear that the changeover has been noted in other legal documents, much less announced to the public. Currently, the company known as “Twitter Inc.” is involved in a host of litigation: against the entire country of India over censorship concerns, against vendors who claim Twitter is not paying them what they’re owed, and against former Twitter employees who claim Musk violated labor laws when he fired them en masse last fall. As far as we can tell, there are no updates in any of those cases regarding Twitter’s transformation into X Corp.

So why is X Corp. now a thing, and why is it established in Nevada? Some vintage Musk lore may provide insight here.

Elon Musk has long been attached to the letter X, even outside of his kids’ names. In 1999, he founded X.com, an online bank that soon merged with another company to become PayPal. The letter appeared in other business ventures over the years: SpaceX, Tesla’s Model X car, the three X Holdings corporations, and “Project X,” the official SEC-recognized name for the Twitter purchase’s $13 billion bank loan. After completing the Twitter takeover in October, Musk claimed this purchase would “accelerate” the creation of an “everything app” that would be named—you guessed it—after the letter X. Such a “super app,” Musk has stated, could resemble something like China’s WeChat, the combination messaging/social networking/payment app that boasts a billion users; Twitter’s functions would play an important role in this megasize app.

It’s also possible that X is meant to be more of an everything company than an everything app. In late 2020, YouTuber and longtime Tesla investor Dave Lee tweeted that Musk should “form a holding company called X” to serve as the “parent company of Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink and Boring Company.” (Musk’s response: “Good idea.”) In that light, Musk’s choice of Nevada as home base for X Corp. takes on extra significance, considering the entrepreneur has established some of his largest ventures in the Silver State. In 2016, he opened a Tesla Gigafactory near Reno to produce electric vehicle batteries; earlier this year, he announced a $3.6 billion expansion of the facility in order to manufacture electric trucks. Nevada also hosts a few projects from Musk’s Boring Company, like the transit tunnel built under the Las Vegas Convention Center in 2021, and the still-in-development Vegas Loop. In 2020, when Musk threatened to move Tesla headquarters out of California in response to the state’s pandemic-shutdown measures, he proposed Nevada as a potential option before settling on Texas. With the new filing, Musk now operates at least three businesses in Nevada, one of which is now part of an overarching X company.

No matter which path he chooses, Musk’s X faces a difficult future. A now-tech-skeptical Congress would undoubtedly cast a close eye over an American version of WeChat, as would regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission now taking a firmer stance against tech monopolies. And investors might not be happy if Musk tries to stuff each of his separate companies into X Holdings Corporation. For now, his Twitter is likely to garner only more scrutiny, making the big X he just put on it all the more fitting.
 
Last edited:
Don't care. Glad he bought it, if only to kill it later.

That was always his goal. He has been focused on building a new kind of payment system since departing from Paypal over the direction it was being taken. The Everything App is a fucking terrible idea he is fixated on.
Isn’t he just trying to create an American WeChat?
 
The upside here, if he actually manages to make a working payment processor, is that your favorite feeders and fascists might be able to recieve money via something that's not bitcoin, if only for a little while.
Not a chance lol. Musk grovelled at the ADL's feet immediately after buying Twitter. He is not our guy.
 
Last edited:
Companies changing their name to diversify away from their old business model happens all the time. If you think this is some sort of rare or dangerous occurrence you have worms for brains.

In technology, Apple dropped "Computer" to focus more on technology and non-computer ventures (like Apple TV+), Google reorganized to the parent company being "Alphabet Incorporated", Facebook became Meta Platforms.

In retail, F.W. Woolworth eventually became Foot Locker to focus on its shoe specialty stores, Zayre became TJX Companies after it sold off its old main discount store brand, Dayton-Hudson became Target because their discount store brands were far more successful than their old line department store brands (which had been phased out by that time anyway)...
 
So from what people have hypothesized, Twitter is dead due to literally retarded contracts and unfireable employees who would get 10s of millions of dollars due to clauses within their retarded contracts.

The Company X is trying to skirt around those.
Reminded of that post in US Politics general where some of the contracts had absurd shit like 9 digit severance packages if they were ever laid off or fired.
 
If you think this is some sort of rare or dangerous occurrence you have worms for brains.
worms for brains.png

Shit, they're onto us!

This mostly got my noggin joggin' because of his tweet last october (to quote: "Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app") and his remarks about WeChat (link). I, for one, can't fucking wait until he makes soylent enjoyers pay 8$+tax for a basic tier checkmark that unlocks GrubHub and shared Uber drives.

The future is bright.
 
Last edited:
Reminded of that post in US Politics general where some of the contracts had absurd shit like 9 digit severance packages if they were ever laid off or fired.
Yeah, other people on the website formerly known as Twitter and Substack (ADL hate site, btw) are digging into it. It basically was an adult daycare for the relatives of Glowies, Politicians, and Whores (Celebrities), the few actual tech people were either loyal to the party and helping censor people or busy in the infrastructure.

I used to know a lot of Ron Paul Libertarian Software and Hardware Engineers and all those guys get replaced by a gaggle of Indian guys who are barely as good as them. Most of the Infrastructure guys who are left either built it or basically are the only ones who can navigate it.
 
Yes. And it's likely to be a disaster for many of the same reasons WeChat is a disaster for the Chinese people.

I think the most telling thing is how the main reason a lot of "people" have a issue with it is purely because it's Elon doing it and he is a Bad Man with Wrong Opinions, and not because of the fundamental horrible problems of a centralization of the entire internet like that.

If Twitter was still owned by the Glowies and their Yes Men the journos would be cheering like mad at every single change and be literally vibrating with joy at the idea of a american WeChat.
 
It was obvious a Western WeChat would appear. It's just too good of a business opportunity.

Then again, the audience might not be as receptive, and competition laws are not what they are in China, so I'll wait and see before making any assumption on where this might go. Most recent tries to revolutionize online behavior turned out to be fads, this could very well be the case here as well.
 
Last edited:
Why is this useless journofaggot taking swipes at Laura Loomer's lawsuit (particularly mocking it and claiming it will "obviously fail") when it is literally the engine with which he "uncovered" this earth-shattering news he's breathlessly repeating to us?

Most of the Infrastructure guys who are left either built it or basically are the only ones who can navigate it.
DevOps (formerly known as "Systems Administration" before we wised up and started charging developer rates for being willing to prop up developers who don't even know what "root" is while keeping the lights on) is -- for the time being -- a very lucrative and (more importantly) stable little niche in the IT world. All the fancy pipelines and automation in the world are well and good, but companies (especially small- and mid-sized ones) all seem to understand the value of having someone on staff who knows how to roll back a fucked up deployment before the developer who pushed it even realizes he broke something.
 
I cant wait for the day when the owners of the Chinese and American uni-corps duel each other to death in Taiwan so one of them can finally achieve total global monetization.
All will be Goyslopp, Goyslopp will be all.
 
Back