• Ledivin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    They probably got evicted – Musk constantly threatens to not pay rent… who knows, maybe he actually followed through.

    • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      85
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Its landlord, SRI Nine Market Square, in early 2023 filed a suit against X for more than $3 million in unpaid rent. SRI Nine Market sought to extend Twitter’s line of credit to $10 million as an assurance that future rent would be paid. Other vendors also have sued X for failing to pay its bills. But in January of this year, SRI Nine Market dropped the case, Reuters reported. It’s unclear why.

      Sounds like he did follow through.

      • ImWaitingForRetcons@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Considering SpaceX’s track record… I’m very eager for Elon and his other billionaire buddies to get on a rocket headed for Mars.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          It has a fabulous track record, what are you talking about? Falcon 9 has had like 1 anomaly in the last 300 flights.

          • ImWaitingForRetcons@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’m referring to the rockets intended for travelling to the moon and beyond (primarily the Starship), which has already failed thrice, has innumerable issues and massive cost overruns.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              That’s ridiculous, all launch vehicles have cost overruns. And judging Starship by a pre-production vehicle is also hilariously out of touch. Wait until they’re launching payloads and then make your point.

              • ImWaitingForRetcons@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                Look, I understand your point. And to be fair, they genuinely are reading new ground with reusable rockets. But not only are competitors catching up, cost overruns and time delays do matter in the context of NASA, considering how their budgets keeps getting negatively affected and the Artemis project is suffering setbacks. They don’t have the scope to tolerate what’s happening.

                • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Sure, it might matter if there were any other alternative… like what, SLS? If you want to talk about cost overruns and time delays, look no further. That rocket costs over a billion per launch. Maybe New Glenn will surprise us?

                  If there were literally any other way, I’d want NASA to pick it for Artemis. Heck, some sort of lander system assembled in orbit from multiple Falcon Heavy launches would be my vote.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          They can call it the “Trytanic” or something and we can all laugh when it gets hit by an icy comet

    • Vanon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      “You can’t fire me, I quit!”
      “Sir, this is a Wendy’s San Francisco. Please just leave.” “You’ll be hearing from my lawyers!”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Without paywall: https://archive.ph/xymp1

    TL;DR: They’re moving the SF office to Austin.

    But do read this part:

    The latest update from Yaccarino suggests it’s the San Francisco office, specifically, that is the thorn in X’s side. And it’s an about-face for Musk, who tweeted a year ago that, despite incentives to move out of San Francisco, X would not move its HQ out of the city. “You only know who your real friends are when the chips are down,” he waxed poetically on X. “San Francisco, beautiful San Francisco, though others forsake you, we will always be your friend.”

  • sudo42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why is it always Austin, the most liberal, left-wing city in Texas? If they’re trying to get away from “woke”, they should be moving to REAL Texas. Some town nobody’s even heard of.

    They’re posers. They want to look like Texans, but they move to liberal-ville.

    1/2 /s

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The employees that now have to spend an extra 2-3 hours commuting probably care quite a bit.

        • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          To be fair, the tech job market is in a pretty shit position right now. For many people it’s not possible to leave their current job, even if they hate it (ask me how I know).

          • crawancon@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            I understand the sentiment, but if they are specifically working at Twitter it’s not due to economic forced conditions.

            they chose to stay after Elon took over and the job market isn’t soooo bad that a year later they could be gone…

        • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          For a lot of them, absolutely. Not all though. A lot of tech companies have been cutting back lately, and it’s pretty rough out there for certain roles. I know a lot of people that have been sticking out jobs they hate for a year+ while they interview and try to find something with similar comp.

  • fubarx
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    Twitter moving to mid-market was pretty controversial because of the tax breaks the mayor lavished on them. But a lot of condos went up in the area.

    Wondering if anyone still working at Twitter bought a condo just so they could be within walking distance of work.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    Moving a corporate headquarters, in this case presumably one where a huge proportion of the business operations actually happen, is expensive. What could go wrong?

    • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      My employer closed down its former HQ on the east coast & moved it to Austin in 2019. Much of the old HQ contained engineering teams. The CEO explained that all engineering was shifting to 100% remote so that they could start hiring the best tech talent they could find no matter where they lived. All non-technical jobs (finance, HR, marketing, etc) were moved to an existing office in Austin, where he said it would be relatively easy to hire from the talent available in that area.

      I’ve been working remotely for 5 years now and really enjoy it. I’m also working not only with folks from all over the US, but globally now as well.

  • Zier@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    You mean he’s not moving to Florida or Texas or Alabama? The places where America’s “smartest” folks live?