I think you need to avoid taking Musk’s word at face value and instead look at his actions. Avoiding paying rent and severance is not what a financially healthy company does.

The only logical reason I can think of to not pay something you know you’re legally obligated to pay is if you’re intending to declare bankruptcy to avoid paying. Otherwise you’re going to end up paying and pay a load of legal fees on top.

I guess one alternative is effectively taking a risky loan: you are running low on cash but you have a large cash flow coming in the future. Stop paying rent, eventually after a protracted court battle pay your debts with that future cash flow and the legal fees are “interest”.

Neither feels like the actions of a financially healthy company.

Judging by the quality of ads that are being presented on twitter these days (when I see any at all), this is very obviously not true, no matter how much Elon claims otherwise.

Twitter still has to pay severance for the staff they fired - plus arbitration fees, damages, etc.

And other lawsuits will be coming in soon now that they got rid of their content moderation staff.

He needs 1b a year just to service the debt.

> Advertisers have come back

Which advertisers, for what price?

We will never know the true revenue of Twitter because it is no longer a traded company nor are they in any obligation to publish data of this kind publicly.

Which major advertisers are coming back?

A lot of that staff he got rid of were exactly people necessary to run large ads sales operation.

Twitter's accounts payable is telling a different story.