Alusiizizi:


Bill Gates was over-rated. His only big leverage was really MicroSoft, which was actually a doomed enterprise when one considers Linux(which is the basis of the Android operating system in your smart phone), Musk on the other had is a full-service technocrat, from Space-X all the way to Neuralink, and you've got to keep in mind that a huge part of that 110% APR is due to the unseen, subtle synergy between such vast diversity of business interests.

Hmm

Baldwretch:
I just struck out the claims that are untrue.



I used a different font for your third claim because you're partially right.

TVS, video games, resorts, and the likes, but these are just a part of what we'd call entertainment.

There are many more means and aspects of entertainment, bro. Entertaining one's self is more varied and the means of getting entertained is more complex than you'd like to think. Even an extremely poor king in days gone by enjoyed some sorts of entertainment that the very rich of our days could not enjoy.

Like what exactly?

chimaxx:
.. does today's man have more virgin women than Solomon?

This is a different case. In Solomon's time buying and owning women was a thing. It makes more sense to compare modern day sex traffickers with king Solomon's harems and you'll see that the figures are not that different.

Meedon:


Guy you are wicked

🤓🤓🤓

Easybet1:
What will he do with all this money?? At the end of the day, highest is to eat quality food, drive car and die when it is time which is almost the same with every average human being. So what is the need for having trillion dollar??

this is a good way to console oneself as a brokie

You sure say some naija politicians no get this money already?

RodgersAkpafu:


and what is the stock market capitalisation predicated on ?

Performance on the stock market.

Newlymarried:


https://news.sky.com/story/amp/elon-musk-on-track-to-be-the-first-trillionaire-by-2027-according-to-report-13211518

It won’t happen because there’s a law to that in the USA

On Tinubu seeing this thread!

I think we are finished!!

Cos tinunubu will definitely want to beat Elion Mosk in this. He will definitely want to become the first trillionair in 2025 with every penny within his reach.

Everyday247:
Like what exactly?

Okay, you've asked a good question.

When I say "a poor king" I have assumed that absolute monarchy is the norm. Also, and like I said earlier, entertainment is more nuanced than we might think.

Whether a rich or poor king, the very rich of our days do not necessarily enjoy the perks of absolute monarchy. As you know, people have the most fun when they are unbounded - a poor king in days gone-by is able to do the seemingly unthinkable and stupid things just for the fun of it - they could hire circus dancers while another set of clowns fight themselves in the background, or watch public executions while his dance troupes entertain him. They could require their subjects to give a tenth, a fifth, or even a third of anything - especially farm produce - you can only imagine the pleasure of having to reap where you did not sow, lol!

The rich of our days do not necessarily have power, and as you know, wealth and power are different things. I would argue that having power gives you the leeway to enjoy certain entertainment which money cannot provide, at least not in the 21st century.

A poor king is used to being entertained by those whom his warriors conquer and even his subjects for free, but it would cost the very rich so much to afford these today and it might be unaffordable in the long run.

Go to school bro!

Akalia:
Who owns the asset(business), isn't the same founder?

Blazetrailer:
Go to school bro!

See this one forming woke. Bushman. Since when did it become embarrassing for someone to be inquisitive. I suppose people like you are not open to learning new things.

SmartPolician:
I think the world needs to re-evaluate how individual wealth is measured.

A man has a business idea, pitches it to venture capitalists and raises $200k in equity capital of 20%.

He sells 70% of his business in shares and raises another $700k.

The business is worth $1 million with founder owning 10% of the business or $100k.

He's called the world's richest man whereas he has only $100k out of the $1 million business value.

You're not making sense. You clearly don't understand the math involved in going public. If the shares are worth X amount of money, then you multiply that X by the numbers of shares they own. After that, you subtract any debts they own, and then you have their net worth. The percentage of the company they own is irrelevant to networth.

sreamsense:

You are still a chief custodian of that same curse because you are an African who can't make any impact for the same Africa than talking and complaining. Instead of complaining, bend down and work. Stop pointing fingers for other to do what you can't do yourself to change history of Africa. Don't expect anyone to do for you what you can't do for yourself. Show us the impact you and your family have made that affect Africa positively other than complaining and accusing leaders.

No one gives complainer an award. If you can not be parts of those who make that changes you are asking for to happen to Africa, you are not qualify to point fingers. You and I should bend down to make that positive changes happen for glory of Africa. Don't expect other Africans to be working for you while you come online to point fingers. Be part of the changes providers for Africa and not complainants

Nice talk.
No blame him na lack of creative ideals. We are only good at find excuses and pointing fingers

SocialJustice:
I think Elon Musk's growth rate will slow down. Making 110% APR on billions of dollars is plain crazy. Hedge fund managers in the mud.

If Bill Gates did not give half his wealth to charity, he should already be a trillionaire.

Whoever gave Elon the Tesla Idea, is a genius.

It is a shift from the usual.

Solve one major problem within or outside your locality, and become rich.

The money is with the people, find a legit way to collect it from them

RodgersAkpafu:


SmartPolician is right
this conversation is ABOVE your pay grade

little man, clapp for your self.mumu

If youare still asking that type of stupid question under the guise of being inquisitive after the poster broke it down into the most basic level of explantion with a primary school example , then adult schooling is the only option left for you or better still, you continue to face your recharge card selling business...dont bother learning anymore.

Akalia:
See this one forming woke. Bushman. Since when did it become embarrassing for someone to be inquisitive. I suppose people like you are not open to learning new things.

Elxandre:

Performance on the stock market.

I see

so how come a company that has recorded back to back to back negative EPS carry billions and billions of dollars in valuation ?

just thinking out loud

RodgersAkpafu:


SmartPolician is right
this conversation is ABOVE your pay grade

You're easily influenced by foolish ideas because you don't know basic financial concepts. His example doesn't make sense if you understand math. Look at the chart below of a hypothetical IPO.

RodgersAkpafu:


I see

so how come a company that has recorded back to back to back negative EPS carry billions and billions of dollars in valuation ?

just thinking out loud

It's kind of funny but it's often the case.

Blue3k:


You're easily influenced by foolish ideas because you don't have ignorant to basic financial concepts. His example doesn't make sense if you understand math. Look at the chart below of a hypothetical IPO.

what is this one saying?
the person had a point, especially for private companies


if you sell 50% of your business for £500k even if that business has not made a cent and is burning cash,
your business valuation will increase to £1m right after that

Same business that may have shareholder fund of 200k subsequently because of cash burn 🔥

or the above is not making sense to you?

Elxandre:

It's kind of funny but it's often the case.

thats precisely my point

it's funny
Cocacola that is making serious money and have reserves will be valued less in the same market than a company that is all hype, burning money and making losses

Cathie Wood disciples

RodgersAkpafu:


what is this one saying?
the person had a point, especially for private companies


if you sell 50% of your business for £500k even if that business has not made a cent and is burning cash,
your business valuation will increase to £1m right after that

Same business that may have shareholder fund of 200k subsequently because of cash burn 🔥

or the above is not making sense to you?

I'm saying both of you are ignorant of basic math or financial concepts. Yes the business valuation is based on what some else would pay for it like anything else. The investors base value on cashflows present and future.

Elon buying Twitter for an inflated price changed the valuation. This is ultimately why the previous Board of directors sold it to him. He was crazy enough to make the offer knowing it was burning money 💰.

Blue3k:


I'm saying both of you are ignorant of basic math or financial concepts. Yes the business valuation is based on what some else would pay for it like anything else. The investors base value on cashflows present and future.

Elon buying Twitter for an inflated price changed the valuation. This is ultimately why the previous Board of directors sold it to him. He was crazy enough to make the offer knowing it was burning money 💰.

now you are talking stvpid.

The fact that that IS HOW valuation tends to be done this way does not mean that the valuation methodology cannot be critiqued and tested and questioned.

A business with negative net assets getting a 500k equity investment which in turn values the company at £1m at a whim, while is the way we do it in the venture capital space, doesn't mean that it is not without some flaws.

assuming the founder owns 30% stake in the company struggling

that's how his value in the company has turned to 300k
just like that.

you don't see why this should be looked at with some eyebrows ?

Blue3k:


I'm saying both of you are ignorant of basic math or financial concepts. Yes the business valuation is based on what some else would pay for it like anything else. The investors base value on cashflows present and future.

Elon buying Twitter for an inflated price changed the valuation. This is ultimately why the previous Board of directors sold it to him. He was crazy enough to make the offer knowing it was burning money 💰.

l

and twitter valuation now has gone to shit
it has haemorrhaged so much and with ad revenue almost drying up because of his foolishness and lack of emotional intelligence

how much is the valuation of twitter today ?

Blazetrailer:
If youare still asking that type of stupid question under the guise of being inquisitive after the poster broke it down into the most basic level of explantion with a primary school example , then adult schooling is the only option left for you or better still, you continue to face your recharge card selling business...dont bother learning anymore.

Bushman. Abeg swerve.

RodgersAkpafu:


now you are talking stvpid.

The fact that that IS HOW valuation tends to be done this way does not mean that the valuation methodology cannot be critiqued and tested and questioned.

A business with negative net assets getting a 500k equity investment which in turn values the company at £1m at a whim, while is the way we do it in the venture capital space, doesn't mean that it is not without some flaws.

assuming the founder owns 30% stake in the company struggling

that's how his value in the company has turned to 300k
just like that.

you don't see why this should be looked at with some eyebrows ?

Companies don't exist for one day in time. This why people project into the future. This is why valuation are based on multitude of factors. You would think a pharmaceutical company is worthless until the breakthrough drug occurs. Anyone with foresight knows that isn't the case by reading the phase 2-3 trial of upcoming drugs.

You can question the methods but your reason examples are subject to the same. This method obviously works better. You both don't seem to get the percentage of the company owned is irrelevant. What matters for networth is the asset price and how much is owned. Nobody cares if you don't think the stock is worth that amount, just like nobody cares how much you think a liter of petrol is worth.

SmartPolician:
I think the world needs to re-evaluate how individual wealth is measured.

A man has a business idea, pitches it to venture capitalists and raises $200k in equity capital of 20%.

He sells 70% of his business in shares and raises another $700k.

The business is worth $1 million with founder owning 10% of the business or $100k.

He's called the world's richest man whereas he has only $100k out of the $1 million business value.

your reasoning is wrong, thats not how valuation work.

for instance, having only 10 percent investment in a business, you only get valued for only what your 10 percent is worth.

from your assumption, he can't be richest cos he only own 100k

sreamsense:

It will be gibberish to you since you are only born to complain. Who knows maybe you even inherited that same complaint from your parents. Problem is not wheather your tree can make a forest, the problem is weather that your tree is even noticed for positive impact at all in the same forest. If you think your leaders are the only problem of Africa, are your father and mother not also Africans that can contest to become leaders that will make changes for that same Africa.

Every african can not be complaining like you and make any change. Those that are making their own positive impacts in the same Africa are ruled by the same leaders you wail about everyday as your own hindrance of making impact in the forest of Africa. Dangote can't make any meaningful impact for Africa if he comes online to wail like you on daily basis. Where some Africans are seeing breakthrough, you are seeing obstacles and complaining as if complaint will offer solution.

If you think Africa leaders are not doing well in their capacities, they don't have two heads; they are human beings like you, go and join politics and begin to make that small changes till you are known and change Africa you think others are doing well or tell your parents to join politics so they can change that Africa of your dream. Enough of complaint, get down to work; don't behave like lazy youths. Do more work and complain less.

my dad retired as a director office of the Auditor General and I work with a government agency level 12 and also into Agriculture. So you don't even know what you are saying keep on supporting bad leaders and blaming lazy youths

SmartPolician:
I think the world needs to re-evaluate how individual wealth is measured.

A man has a business idea, pitches it to venture capitalists and raises $200k in equity capital of 20%.

He sells 70% of his business in shares and raises another $700k.

The business is worth $1 million with founder owning 10% of the business or $100k.

He's called the world's richest man whereas he has only $100k out of the $1 million business value.

Tesla Inc is valued over 700 billion ATM, Elon Musk's value is the combination of his portfolio both in Tesla and other of his numerous companies..

In this life you can either become a 100 percent owner of a very small business or a 10 percent owner of a very big business, your ideas alone won't build a company as big as Tesla, during the early days you need good directors, they are rich already and they have wealth of experience, you need to give them option of stock, you need good lawyers, you need to give them stock, you need funds, lots and lots of it, investors won't hand their millions of dollars to you unless you are selling a part of the business to them, all these collective effort is what differentiate a Tesla from a one man small business..

Furthermore, diversification is one of the law that the rich don't joke with, if you have 100 percent of a business and the business the business get burnt then you're definitely in problem, it is also a form of sharing the risk to a larger pool of people.

..

Doylestown92:


Elon Musk is the CEO of Twitter, meaning, he's the owner on paper. Because Larry Ellison, P. Diddy and the Prince of Saudi each own much shares in Twitter than Elon Musk. Musk is the fourth person on the ownership percentage.

Trash. Musk single handedly bought Twitter for $40b cash and changed the name to x,to become same Brand like his space x company.
Wat da hell do u smoke