This morning in a well argued post, Ed Lee suggests the automaker, Tesla, should be valued more than Twitter.  Why am I pointing your attention to it?  The post is partly based on a back-and-forth Ed and I had on the issue. Yesterday, I responded to Ed’s assertion on Twitter:

“How upside-down is our society when Tesla is worth less than Twitter?  (on projected and rumoured valuations)”

With an admittedly flippant reply:

“Why would this signal an “upside-down” society?  A communications tool worth more than a company, seems about right to, me Ed.”

Now, one of the clear downsides to Twitter is the limitations of using only 140 characters per message.  My response clearly suffered from not being clear.  A second drawback to Twitter is speed; I’d dashed this tweet off and sent it long before realizing I’d meant to add the word “car” before company.  More to the point, my tweet didn’t even really capture what I wanted to say in response to Ed.

In retrospect, my responses should have been:

“How upside-down is our society when we attempt to judge ourselves on the relative valuation of two companies.”

It’s what I meant to say, but it isn’t what I said.  I think it’s important to reflect on lessons learned.  I learned Twitter can create deficit between what you say and what you mean.  More re-reading and editing of tweets is in order.

On the substance of the matter; Ed’s right.  I’m not.  Like I said, it’s a well argued post.  Take a read.  Let me know what you think.  Can society be judged on the relative valuation of companies?  Twitter worth more than Tesla?