Fidelity values X at ~72% below Elon Musk's purchase price, meaning Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Al Saud would be down $1.4B and Dorsey and Ellison $720M each
Elon Musk bought Twitter with a combination of his own money, bank loans and capital raised from friends and associates.
The losses matter because Musk’s acquisition drew capital from a defined group of outside backers, including Prince Alwaleed and Larry Ellison through the 2022 investor financing round. Fidelity’s estimate makes the implied burden on those investors more visible, even though it is not a transaction price.
First-order effects
Fidelity continues to carry its X investment at a steep discount to the takeover valuation, crystallizing a large paper-value gap for its fund investors.
At Fidelity’s implied valuation, Prince Alwaleed faces the largest cited paper loss, while Dorsey and Ellison each face substantial unrealized declines relative to their original stakes.
Second-order effects
Because X is privately held, Fidelity’s mark becomes a prominent reference point for investors, employees, and prospective counterparties assessing the value of its shares in the absence of a public market price.
The gap between the acquisition price and portfolio marks raises the hurdle for any future equity issuance or employee-share valuation to be accepted at materially higher levels.
Third-order effects
The episode underscores how private-company valuations can reset gradually through investor marks rather than a single market-clearing event, leaving stakeholders to navigate competing reference prices.
If similar marks persist, highly leveraged or sponsor-backed technology buyouts may face greater scrutiny over whether acquisition-era valuations can be supported by later private-market funding and compensation benchmarks.
The trend: Private-market portfolio marks are becoming a more consequential signal of value for major technology platforms that lack a continuously traded public share price.
New: Twitter's top eight investors are an estimated $5 billion underwater on their deal with Elon Musk, based on Fidelity's updated valuation of a stake that would take its contribution down from $316M to $88M. “Elon's done a tremendous amount of wealth destruction,” one aggriev…
The article is not clear on why these “investors” put money into Musk's vanity site. They did not perform any due diligence and it was well known at the time of the purchase that he was nothing more than a very wealthy right wing shitposter with crazy ideas. I think the loss of…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Dang they could have paid me Elon's 54 billion dollar salary and I would have run the profitable business into the ground faster and more efficiently. 🤭
There are 2 types of Musk Twitter investors: dolts who thought he'd grow Twitter, and authoritarians who knew he'd destroy it. — The latter weren't investing in Twitter, they were investing in Musk killing it, or at least its utility as a site for sharing information & dissenti…
NEW: Twitter's top eight investors are an estimated $5B underwater on their deal with Elon Musk, based on Fidelity's updated valuation of a stake that would take its contribution down from $316M to $88M. “Elon's done a tremendous amount of wealth destruction,” says one investor.
Musk's Twitter investors have lost billions in value - Musk bought Twitter with a combination of his own money, bank loans and capital raised from friends and associates. …
Musk's Twitter investors have lost billions in value Elon Musk bought Twitter with a combination of his own money, bank loans and capital raised from friends and associates. …
Musk's Twitter investors have lost billions in value | Elon Musk bought Twitter with a combination of his own money, bank loans and capital raised from friends and associates. …
Musk's Twitter investors have lost billions in value | Elon Musk bought Twitter with a combination of his own money, bank loans and capital raised from friends and associates. …