4 ms·

6% is pathetic increase and stronger sign how little people engage on the platform. The engagement ratio of Instagram to Twitter is several orders of magnitude

by robertp 11y ago

6% is pathetic increase and stronger sign how little people engage on the platform. The engagement ratio of Instagram to Twitter is several orders of magnitude off. You look are Redbull on both platforms. Twitter they have average of 40 retweets and 150 likes/faves, plus some replies. Instagram they have 50-80k likes and 100 to 1k comments. Even if twitter had 1000% increase that would not help the platform where there is so little active engagement.

kosievdmerwe 11y ago
6% is a pretty substantial increase for just changing the icon and name of the action. Hell it's a pretty substantial change in general for a feature that is presented so prominently. Either way, how do you propose Twitter gets to Instagram volumes other than through lots of incremental changes? Instagram didn't get where it is today in one fell swoop.
- 27182818284 11y ago
  >in one fell swoop. Not all the way, but a team of 13 did pretty darn well in just two years--enough that it then caused Facebook to make an offer
hagbardgroup 11y ago
Could also be that it's easier to bot Instagram.
jonknee 11y ago
Comparing Redbull on both platforms is pretty meaningless. There are other users who have way more followers/interaction on Twitter. Redbull has a brand that fits nicely with Instagram (photos of extreme athletes), while something like @BreakingNews makes tons more sense on Twitter.
- nsgi 11y ago
  They also post a few times a day on Twitter vs about daily on Instagram, so the interactions are split between more posts. Other users post many more times a day (most likely because they are posting text rather than photos/videos), so they have more posts to compete with.
  - jonknee 11y ago
    Yes, but photos of extreme athletes is literally perfect for Instagram. They also advertise quite a bit which is how I see their posts on their. Twitter isn't a great venue for sharing epic photos, it's much better for current events.
mahouse 11y ago
They are pretty different platforms. Twitter is mainly read-only and they will not change that, ever. They should start being happy at what they have instead of mourning forever.

by robertp 11y ago

kosievdmerwe 11y ago

6% is a pretty substantial increase for just changing the icon and name of the action. Hell it's a pretty substantial change in general for a feature that is presented so prominently. Either way, how do you propose Twitter gets to Instagram volumes other than through lots of incremental changes? Instagram didn't get where it is today in one fell swoop.

27182818284 11y ago
>in one fell swoop. Not all the way, but a team of 13 did pretty darn well in just two years--enough that it then caused Facebook to make an offer

hagbardgroup 11y ago

Could also be that it's easier to bot Instagram.

jonknee 11y ago

Comparing Redbull on both platforms is pretty meaningless. There are other users who have way more followers/interaction on Twitter. Redbull has a brand that fits nicely with Instagram (photos of extreme athletes), while something like @BreakingNews makes tons more sense on Twitter.

nsgi 11y ago
They also post a few times a day on Twitter vs about daily on Instagram, so the interactions are split between more posts. Other users post many more times a day (most likely because they are posting text rather than photos/videos), so they have more posts to compete with.
- jonknee 11y ago
  Yes, but photos of extreme athletes is literally perfect for Instagram. They also advertise quite a bit which is how I see their posts on their. Twitter isn't a great venue for sharing epic photos, it's much better for current events.

mahouse 11y ago

They are pretty different platforms. Twitter is mainly read-only and they will not change that, ever. They should start being happy at what they have instead of mourning forever.