Re: Follow the money
Twitter holds the debt (13B owed to a consortium of banks mostly, costing 1.5B interest annually), not him personally, although the fact he owns a large portion of twitter that he paid (real, not paper money) for, and that portion of funds will not be "paid back" to him in a bankruptcy, but in the primary type of bankruptcy Twitter would get permission to continue operating, restructure that debt to the extent agreed upon by all (or such agreements foisted on them by the legal system in bankruptcy court), and he would still own that portion of the company. His shares have indeed lost lots of value and would go the rest of the way in a bankruptcy, but he'd still own Twitter, and it would still be operating (if they still have users...). He's pledged a hell of a lot more in collateral but the banks appear to not plan to hold him to that anyway, knowing he'll weasel out of that in favor of restructuring.
I'm not suggesting this is brilliant business sense or anything like that, its the type of self-serving, grabbing as much value as possible without generating any for others, business sense that libertarians believe in as their lord and savior as they justify ripping people off or stealing others' work as being equivalent to actually creating value for people. I was just saying watch out for those types of people because they tend to continue being good at extracting value out of partners. Its an expensive megaphone but he's now dabbling more and more in politics and I'm worried about what he might end up finding X/Twitter useful for.