Valuation isn't the same as cash.

That's an extremely misleading scale.

NOTHING IN YOUR REEL IS FUNNY. YOU COULD HAVE USED YOUR IVY LEAGUE NEUROSCIENCE DEGREE TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. INSTEAD YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEATH OF AMERICAN COMEDY AND THE DECLINE OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION. I AWARD YOU NO POINTS, AND MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON YOUR SOUL.

You realize that "market cap" is not "money in the bank", right? That those shares which lost that value are publicly traded and not sitting in a company vault?

I can just hear the cartoon sound affects on this graph

Imagine 100 people paid $100 to go to see the Barbie premier, $10,000 in total value. Then when you and your friends get to the door you suddenly start to believe Margot Robbie isn’t attractive enough to play Barbie. Everyone sees you selling your tickets and now everyone is trying to sell their tickets at once. There are no buyers for your tickets at $100, so you sell your tickets for $20. $10,000 before now equals $2,000. The $8,000 difference isn’t anywhere, it’s simply gone. 😉

This was an extra retarded tweet, congrats!

Yeah, you're certainly no economist that's for sure...

Please Index

As a statement you’re right - all these Fintwit here thinking you implied selling shares to fund it 🙃

It’s true, not an economist whatsoever!

1 year

What's their net profit tho?

Wut?

Not how it works at all. Dumb comments like this only hurt/distract from your cause.

I am an economist. I can't help but note that Netflix experienced a big run up over the course of 5 days and then returned to its prior level.That $18B "loss" is no more real than the previous $18B gain. And, FWIW, that chart looks really different if you start the Y axis at 0.

Ask yourself honestly when was the last time you saw any content and Netflix and genuinely felt that it was a good use of your time

Me when I use a misleading scale on a graph

Looks like a buy to me

Why should Netflix pay for their special privileges? If an writer or actor can be replaced by a better and cheaper AI it’s only right to do it (because the consumers get a better product). If an writer or actor is actually good and confident in her skills there’s no reason to be afraid of AI. Guess you would have been among those people demanding companies stop building railroads to safe the poor workers (who actually did not become poorer but richer — same will happen with AI; everyone will benefit).

Yeah, you're definitely not an economist

It's because too many people were sharing their passwords.

I think you could argue that they lost that value because what the writers are asking is not worth that to the viewers.

Wall Street doesn't think a prolonged strike will be good for business? That's odd.

After all the private equity-owned entertainment media said their password sharing crackdown was a "great success". x.com/ZackBornstein/status/1…

Well, actually it would be shareholders who lost the money. And even that isn’t accurate, as it’s just paper losses until they sell it.

I am once again tapping the MARKET CAP IS NOT REAL MONEY sign

That's not how it works my dear brother in Christ

Correct! You are no economist.

I think all the blue check economist comments have clarified that Netflix normal market fluctuations in value, which is deemed acceptable and therefore minimal, is roughly equal to the total financial requests from the writers. So the writers are NOT asking for too much.

That's not how stocks work. It's not like that was money on their hands, and that they lost.

Did it though? Or did Netflix lose $0 but shareholders lost $18b? Share price != balance sheet ?

What fell was the value of the company, and that value comes from the pockets of people who own stock: regular people, pension funds, millionaires, casual investors, retirees, all of them.

"I'm no economist, but..." 🤣🤣🤣🤣