Skip to content

Trump Media almost has revenue of $1 million

Big news today! Revenue at Donald Trump's social media company was up $70,000 in the second quarter:

If this growth trend keeps up, Trump Media might have quarterly revenue of $920,000 by the end of the year. That's almost a million dollars!

They also reported a profit of -$16 million. They reported nearly $20 million in operating costs, and God only knows what they spent that on. They also reported cash flows of -$344 million for the first six months of the year, offset by a bunch of gobbledegook I don't understand. What the hell is "Change in fair value of derivative liability"? I'm too lazy to look it up, sorry.

84 thoughts on “Trump Media almost has revenue of $1 million

  1. cld

    Wow, $20 million in operating costs!

    The nearby McDonalds and KFC's that fuel their prime attraction are really raking it in.

      1. treeeetop57

        Kevin said: “They also reported a profit of -$16 million.”

        Notice the minus sign.

        “They also reported a profit of -$16 million” means:

        “They also reported a profit of negative $16 million” means:

        “They also reported a loss of $16 million.”

          1. zic

            There are no '-' signs in Trumpland, it operates with a different set of numbers.

            So all considered, there was only a 15-million loss, and that was probably offshored to some tropical island with a big golf course.

  2. D_Ohrk_E1

    What the hell is "Change in fair value of derivative liability"?

    I find that context usually matters with a jumble of words that look like word salad. But on first pass, "fair value" = what I say its value is, "derivative" = an intangible item 'derived' from either other intangible or intangible items, and "liability" = owed. Put together, the company is on one or the other side of the ledger of a debt and decided that the value of that debt has changed. Which side it is on and what exactly are these potential items is where context would matter.

    1. Cressida

      I'm a retired CPA. "Fair value" = market value, basically, as opposed to cost. "Derivatives" are a complicated investment hedging vehicle. I'd interpret that line item as a (probably bad-faith, given who we're talking about) effort to comply with securities law.

      The question *I* would have about that line item is why it's on the statement of cash flows (which I gather it is, based on Kevin's description). A change in estimate is not a cash item. But I haven't seen the financials, so whatever - maybe there's a reason.

      1. D_Ohrk_E1

        I assume everything was done in bad faith. If they meant "market value" or even "fair market value", they would have said so, don't you think? Therefore, "fair value" could -- and I stress the point that I assume everything was done in bad faith b/c Trump -- mean "whatever I said it's worth".

        I also assumed there was bad faith, when considering the interpretation of "derivative". Derivative does not necessarily mean an instrument to hedge. But if you see a Trump company using the term, it could mean an instrument to hide some sort of cash flow, especially if Trump Media is calling it a "liability".

        1. cld

          Could you call a cryptocurrency a derivative, and then call that a liability if someone walked off with it and you don't know where it went?

        2. bbleh

          Concur it's possible "derivative" is being used ambiguously / inappropriately / outright falsely, but I'm thinking it might also apply to some of the various options / warrants / sale or repurchase provisions / what-have-you associated with some of the shares that the Felon himself owns, the details of which seem pretty murky.

          Most commentary I've seen is that DJT is a meme stock and the whole company is mostly a way to buy favor with the Felon by funneling money to him personally, which a lot of rich people (and countries) will do just to hedge their bets (speaking of hedging).

        3. Cressida

          Hi everyone. The above from D_Ohrk_E1 is one of the purest examples of mansplaining I have ever seen.

          I assume Kevin was looking at Trump Media's SEC filing. The financial information in a 10-Q has to conform with GAAP. Under GAAP, you cannot make up alternate meanings of "fair value" or "derivative." The words mean what I said they meant.

          1. ScentOfViolets

            Hey, hey, hey! I think the guy is a crank ... but I'm not going to dump on him just because of his opinions on the origin of COVID. I don't see any mansplaining here and I think you should give him the courtesy of a reply to any specific questions you may have before you take this tack.

          2. QuakerInBasement

            I hear you. But the businessman in question does have a track record of playing silly buggers with "fair market value."

      2. QuakerInBasement

        "The question *I* would have about that line item is why it's on the statement of cash flows"

        Oh! Yes. ABsolutely. Margin call maybe?

        1. QuakerInBasement

          The notes to the 10k say this:

          Derivatives

          The Company evaluates its financial instruments to determine if such instruments are derivatives or contain features that qualify as embedded derivatives in accordance with ASC Topic 815, "Derivatives and Hedging”. Derivative instruments are initially recorded at fair value on the grant date and re-valued at each reporting date, with changes in the fair value reported in the statements of operations. Derivative assets and liabilities are classified in the balance sheets as current or non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement or conversion of the instrument could be required within 12 months of the balance sheet date. The Company accounts for the warrants and earnout in accordance with the guidance contained in ASC 815-40. The Company has determined that the warrants qualify for equity treatment in the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

          It sounds like there's a hint in there, but I can't make sense of it.

          ;

          1. valuethinker2

            So a derivative is a contract on a future event.

            Like a future, or an option. A stock option is a form of derivative. We specify the right to cause the company to issue a share of stock, at a future date up to an expiry date, at a price set now.

            There are warrants - tradable stock options, in effect. (An exchange option has no effect on the share capital, if exercised. A stock option or warrant, if exercised, increases the number of shares in issue by 1, and the company receives the exercise price of the warrant).

            Fair Value just means market value.

            So why a change in the value of a future contingent event (the exercise of the warrant because it is more "In the Money" ie stock price > warrant exercise price) counts as a cash flow I am not sure? Perhaps the greater probability that such an event will occur, leading to a cash inflow to the company if it does. However Cash Flow statements are backwards looking, not forecasts.

    2. memyselfandi

      A possible answer is value of future options owed to Donald Trump. With the crash in stock price the money owed Donald is much less.

      1. cld

        It's like when Dr. Strange explored 16 million different possible timelines to end up with the only one where Thanos was defeated.

        But, unlike everyone else, I don't think he exhibits a lot of indication of Alzheimer's. I think he's severely cognitively abnormal and always has been, and now he is showing the ordinary decline of age at the same time as he has extraordinary pressure and anxiety from every direction imaginable. Any one of his problems would be enough to leave most people stunned with distraction. He really needs to spend about five years at a health spa. Say, Club Fed.

  3. Jasper_in_Boston

    They reported nearly $20 million in operating costs, and God only knows what they spent that on.

    Well, if there's any justice in this world, most of it went toward Donnie's salary as CEO. Management brilliance doesn't come cheap!

    Also, at the rate they're going, sometime in the next decade Trump media will have caught up to the average McDonald's franchise in revenue terms.

      1. NotCynicalEnough

        I actually think they could break even eventually as the users on Trump Social have self identified as the easiest marks in the world. It won't be big name advertisers like P&G or Microsoft, but there are plenty of people hawking overpriced survivalist gear, worthless "collectibles", etc. Trump himself seems to have made $300,000 selling the worlds ugliest basketball shoes for example.

        1. bbleh

          I'd be willing to bet that a big chunk of that, like much of his business revenue at this point, is just people looking to buy favor with him in case by some horrible mischance he DOES win.

          That is, Truth Social, sneakers, what-have-you -- they're all just ways for people to bribe him quasi-legally.

      2. aldoushickman

        I'd be shocked if the RNC/Trump campaign weren't deliberately overspending on Truth Social ads as a way to funnel money to an operation Trump owns.

  4. zic

    Sounds like the hedge of their hedge needs some hedging.

    I just think we need to pull it out by the roots. I bet Walt can drive a tractor.

    1. ddoubleday

      It doesn't have anything to do with campaign finance, it is a legalish bribery scheme that will transfer money directly into Trump's pocket. His quiet period for option cashout expires before the election, so people hoping to curry favor with the next President will be taking a big risk on the outcome. If current polling trends continue, there may not be much of a market for him to dump shares into.

      1. Josef

        I sincerely hope so. Though the people who will lose most are his cult members who invested money in the fraud that is Trump Media. I feel sorry for them. But on the other hand I feel as if they deserve it for believing a con man like Trump.

        1. Five Parrots in a Shoe

          A fool and his money are soon parted.

          I've read a couple articles about some of the ordinary working-class people who are putting money into Truth Social. They seem to understand perfectly well that the company's fundamentals are shaky as hell, but they are investing anyway - and investing more than they can afford to lose - because they really believe that Trump needs and deserves their help.

          Fools.

          1. cld

            It's the same psychology as with people who send all their money to tv preachers.

            Why shouldn't this be considered a national health crisis?

          2. emjayay

            Or as Dr. John Bridges wrote in "Defence of the Government of the Church of England" back in 1587:

            If they pay a penie or two pence more for the reddinesse of them..let them looke to that, a foole and his money is soone parted.

        2. KJK

          I usually feel sorry when people, especially non wealthy people, get taken by a con artist.

          Don't feel sorry at all for the schmucks who invest in Trump. They have been warned about him for over a decade.

          1. memyselfandi

            It's decades. When you are informed that no american financial institution will work with him (the only ones willing to lend him money for real estate investments were the Russian mob and NBC as part of the cost of the apprentice tv show, i.e. they wrote it off the moment they made it). You would have to be insane to invest with him.

  5. ProbStat

    'What the hell is "Change in fair value of derivative liability"?'

    It looks like there were essentially some call options -- either from convertible debt or from employee/investor options -- on DJT stock, so value went up when price was high and now has dropped.

  6. mudwall jackson

    why in the world would any legit business advertise on X let alone trump's piece of crap? what's the business model? the only reason why anyone would want to subscribe to truth social is to keep up with the incoherent rantings of a 78 year old man who is in cognitive decline and, if he loses the coming election, will slip quickly into oblivion.

    1. emjayay

      As suggested in another comment, maybe businesses selling overpriced crap that might appeal to gullible right wing rubes - in addition to the overpriced Trump branded crap that appeals to gullible right wing rubes

      I'm not going to chance whatever going to that thing might do to my email and computer (the internets are already sending me ads that are missing their target me by a mile) by checking it out myself, but I'm curious: what advertisers are there now?

      1. mudwall jackson

        that might very well be true but how much can a site with little in the way of an audience command in the way of rates? not much ...

  7. mudwall jackson

    btw the latest nyt siena college poll has harris up four points among likely voters in pa., wisc. and mich., 50-46 in all three states.

  8. Justin

    Some grifts work, some don’t. Given how often the news media reposts content from there, I’m guessing most of the users are bloggers or “journalists”. Sad. Does Mr. Drum have an account?

    1. Joseph Harbin

      The Harris campaign has an account. It follows one user, DJT, and does one thing (per what I've read), dragging Trump on crowd sizes.

      Revenue for Truth Social: $0
      Value for Harris campaign: Priceless

  9. golack

    DJT stock price is a little more than $26, down from a high of over $70. That's after they dumped a lot more shares onto the market. Too lazy to look up change in company's valuation, and to see if they have burned through all their cash on hand yet.

    1. Joseph Harbin

      Stock scam launched end of March, which means (iirc) that Trump has about 6 more weeks before he can dump shares at whatever the inflated price is at the time.

      Good chance that's the end of the damned thing.

  10. lower-case

    someone needs a nap and his binky

    In an angry phone call to a Times reporter on Friday afternoon, Mr. Trump denied that he was making any changes to his team, saying he was “thrilled” with his top advisers, Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, and asking why he would even want to make such a change.

    (In the same call, Mr. Trump threatened to sue The Times over a story about his description in Thursday’s news conference of a near-death experience on a helicopter ride with Willie Brown, the former California politician. Mr. Brown denied ever having flown on a helicopter with Mr. Trump.)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/10/us/politics/trump-campaign-election.html

  11. dausuul

    This is way off topic, but that's sort of the point. I just found out that Ukraine invaded Russia a few days ago. They've seized a chunk of territory in Kursk and pressing forward. How was this not banner headline news?

    I realize it's election season, and the question of whether the Democratic VP candidate should or should not describe the Republican ticket as "weird" is of paramount importance, and obviously the rest of the world doesn't actually matter, we're the U.S. for God's sake. But still! Even if you don't care what happens to Ukraine, you'd think the American appetite for a good war story would justify some splashy coverage.

    1. golack

      The Guardian has been covering it, but...
      1. The information has mainly come from Russian war bloggers.
      2. The Ukrainians have only recently acknowledged that they are doing it, i.e. it's not just one of the anti-Putin Russian groups doing a border raid.
      3. War "experts" are confused on the strategic value of this incursion, so no definitive narrative.

      As a raid behind enemy lines, it's been spectacularly successful. But it's still just one raid...unless it's not. The Russians were caught flat footed, and despite claims from the Kremlin, they haven't mounted much of a defense yet. The Ukrainians would not have launched this unless they were confident that they could break through and wreak some havoc. The lack of push back means that instead of just quickly withdrawing, they have to seriously consider pushing forward. Maybe follow Wagner's group lead and march on Moscow?

        1. cld

          I thought the idea was to draw away Russian forces from the south, then attack them in transit, but the Russians don't seem to have fallen for it.

          1. golack

            You're right, the Ukrainians want to relive pressure on other sections of the front. I don't know if the Russians didn't fall for a trap, or are just not capable of responding to the incursion. I only say that because reports from Moscow keep saying they've destroyed the troops that crossed the border...and then a Russian column is ambushed or another town is taken...

          2. KenSchulz

            I’m skeptical of that suggested rationale; as others have pointed out, the numbers would have been more effectively used defensively than offensively. However, there are two outcomes which are favorable to the Ukrainian cause: 1) the more pessimistic among Western observers have been saying that the Ukrainian forces are thinly spread, while Putin has the potential to surge a huge number of conscripts into battle. This operation is evidence that Russian forces are also weaker than the West thought. It is one thing to leave the border with Finland undefended, as Russia has done for a year or more — it is quite another to fail to defend the border with the country with which one is at war. 2) Putin has a pressing need to deflect blame from his own stupid mistakes; he needs scapegoats. Demotions and re-assignments to follow, i.e. disruption in the Russian command structure.
            Of course, if the Russian high command had any self-respect or professional pride, they would dump Vladimir Vladimirovich before he dumps them. But they were promoted for their unswerving loyalty to the President, not for brilliance at strategy or planning.

            1. valuethinker2

              Quite likely the Ukrainians can see that an externally enforced ceasefire is going to happen.

              The Germans have just slashed military aid to Ukraine next year by 50%. Even if Marine Le Pen is not the next President of France (she will be, most likely) the RN has blocking power in Parliament (given that the parties of the far left are also against backing Ukraine).

              In that scenario, Ukraine needs something to swap with Russia for *its* territory that they lost since Feb 22nd 2022.

              It doesn't hurt to embarrass the heck out of Putin either, and cause ructions in the Russian supreme command.

    2. Gilgit

      I've been following the Ukrainian attack. Of course, I have no idea where most people get their news these days. I saw it mentioned on my YouTube recommendations page thingy. Many people on there are crazy fools, but it isn't hard to figure out which ones will lie to you and which ones will act like journalists. Seriously, it isn't that hard - you just have to care about finding out which ones are on there for propaganda purposes and which ones aren't.

      I also have a bunch of podcasts that I listen to and it has been discussed on a couple of them. Again, to get useful information you have to actually care if they are lying to you or not. It isn't that hard to tell who is reliable.

      Where do you get your information? I'm not trying to be mean or anything. I honestly don't know anymore where most people get their news. Every so often someone will mention their source, but other than that I really have no idea.

      Well, it isn't that hard to figure out where MAGA folks get their news. And apparently some people get their news from Facebook. (I assume these are same the people who will believe almost anything. Like, since Dobbs happened under Biden, if you are for abortion rights you need to vote against Biden.)

  12. kaleberg

    Change in fair value ... usually means they made a loan or investment and had to write it off as worthless. Odds are Trump just cut himself a check, though other grifters are involved. The usual mechanism is to either "lend" the money or buy a share in some "business opportunity". There is no intention of that loan being payed off or that business opportunity being profitable.

    1. jte21

      Yeah, but it was the fair value of some "derivative" liability. Sounds like the company was taking positions in derivative contracts or something that went south. Why would a social media company need to be involved in any derivative investments? Are they making side bets on Bitcoin with investor cash? Is that legal?

  13. Justin

    In a private meeting with Donald Trump last week, FBI agents and other law enforcement officials offered the former president new, previously undisclosed details about the 20-year-old Pennsylvania man who came close to assassinating Trump at a rally last month, sources familiar with the meeting told ABC News.

    Over more than 90 minutes on Aug. 1, law enforcement officials described shooter Thomas Crooks as a strikingly intelligent man who scored higher than 1500 on his SAT pre-college exam, but who also may have been struggling for years with an undiagnosed disorder, said the sources, who were briefed on the meeting.

    Smart man. Died a hero, even if he failed to save us from ourselves.

    Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

  14. lower-case

    wapo says trump campaign internal emails hacked

    "[trump campaign] Any media or news outlet reprinting documents or internal communications are doing the bidding of America’s enemies and doing exactly what they want.”

    A spokesman for Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Cheung’s statement is a marked change in tone from the 2016 campaign, when Trump repeatedly touted internal Democratic emails and other documents released by WikiLeaks that U.S. officials suspected had been stolen by Russia.

    “I love WikiLeaks,” Trump said while campaigning against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in October 2016, after the organization had posted online tens of thousands of emails hacked from the account of Clinton’s campaign chairman.

    “This WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable,” he said two days later, as the site posted daily troves of internal Clinton campaign emails. “It tells you the inner heart; you gotta read it.”

    1. jte21

      Yeah that's pretty rich to see the Trump campaign now decrying foreign hacking of their campaign, if that's even what happened. They've offered no evidence at al to back that up, however, so I think until an investigation is complete we can safely assume it's complete bullshit and this was some disgruntled employee or some kid with cheeto-stained fingers in his basement taking advantage of what was probably unbelievably crappy IT security by the Trump campaign because they're too cheap to hire quality people.

  15. Josef

    From an article I just read...
    "In a Friday statement, CEO Devin Nunes said the company's plans are to build out a Truth+ streaming service and "explore numerous other possibilities for growth, including mergers and acquisitions." Who are they going to merge with and what can they afford to buy? What a scam.

    1. jte21

      Shorter Nunes: "We're definitely doing stuff, yessireee. Big, bold, businessy-sounding things. Please send money."

      You're right -- this is classic businesese bullshit. Anytime a company's press release says they're "exploring" something, followed by vague handwaving (e.g. "possibilities for growth"), it means they're full of shit and failing badly. Every time. This will all end in bitter recriminations, SEC investigations and probably indictments within the year.

      1. valuethinker2

        OR Trump wins. In which case you will find some external actor doing a deal which is very lucrative for Truth Social.

        During the first Trump administration, and before, bribes paid via business deals with Trump (and Kushner) business assets were quite open.

  16. scopeland

    “ Change in fair value of derivative liability”. they bet either for, or aghast, against themselves and lost.

Comments are closed.