According to Elon Musk, His main motivation for buying Twitter was and is the protection of freedom of speech. An explanation we have seen thousands of opinions and reflections over the last few weeks, with the conclusions of those who contradict each other the most. In comparison, what I have not seen is not a thousandth of thoughts about other possible motivations, other than purely ideological (in the broadest sense).

And it is so that even though the billionaire is a declared fan of freedom of speech, we must not forget that we are talking about a $ 44,000 million operation, part of which will come from Musk ‘s pocket, and another part of the credits that the founder of Tesla received for this purpose. Even speaking of Tesla, it has been commented these days that it is possible that it will sell part of its stake in the company in order to finance part of its Twitter purchase.

Maybe it’s because I’m a little unbelieving in that regard, but I have a hard time swallowing that the main motivation for buying Twitter is ideological. I would believe it if the operation had a tenth of the value it had, or if Musk’s personal assets were the current value multiplied by 10. This means that the impact on his personal and professional economy was quite limited, not as will happen in this case.

True or not, he seems to have had to start making numbers and the bills may not work out. So how can we read in Yahoo! Finance, Elon Musk would consider charging companies and public entities to use Twitter. According to the reports, a small amount, but still a fairly clear way to try to get back at least part of what was invested in the purchase.

The monetization of the service has been for many years A concern for those responsible for Twitter. It is true that advertising revenue is remarkable, but it is well known that trusting all or the vast majority of the monetization capacity of any type of company and service in a single source is at least very risky. This explains why we have seen some movements in this regard in the last two years, such as Twitter Blue.

Even so, and though it might work, I see two problems in this possible way of monetization. The first, of course, is that depositing a payment, no matter how small, This can lead someone to wonder if they should stay on Twitter or not. This would of course depend on the price, but however low it may be, it is well known that the obligation to pay is one of the most dissuasive elements when it comes to using an online service or not.

And secondly, it makes sense to try to establish yourself as a priest of freedom of speech, but then want to hand over the cash register to those, in this case companies, who want to take advantage of it on Twitter. Or is it, in fact, the moral postulate of Elon Musk? “Freedom of speech for those who can afford it«? Personally, and I specify that this is an opinion, it suits me much more to the character.