3 ms·

Because they make no money!

• TeMPOraL 10y ago
  That's why we can't have nice things - for longer than just a while, at least.
  • nsns 10y ago
    Perhaps we could, by adopting the way Firefox, Wikipedia, Internet Archive et al. operate.
    • mixedCase 10y ago
      Doesn't Firefox rely on search engine backing?
      • swift 10y ago
        Yes, they do. They are struggling to reduce their dependence on it but have not seen much success.
• gkya 10y ago
  Can't they charge for things like verified accounts, too big photos, etc.; organise paid talks/forums of very high-profile users and sell gear and pro-grade client software? I don't use Twitter but I guess many organisations, companies and celebs alike wouldn't care to pay for these. They could also start a cheap <handle>@twitter.io mail service.
  • adw 10y ago
    They'd have to sell a heck of a lot of those to justify their valuation.
    • jacquesm 10y ago
      So don't. Just run it as a profitable business.
    • gkya 10y ago
      Well something is better than nothing.
  • swift 10y ago
    "Wouldn't care to pay for these" means the same as "wouldn't like to pay for these": it means that they would not be interested in paying for them. I suspect you meant to use a phrase like "wouldn't mind paying for these". I hope this is helpful and doesn't come across as a pedantic correction. =)
    • gkya 10y ago
      > wouldn't mind Yes that's what I meant. Thanks, it's helpful, "care" is a bit ambiguous indeed, sorry :)
• goseeastarwar 10y ago
  EPS isn't far from zero. There are plenty of levers to pull to run Twitter as a profitable business given $2B rev/yr. You're seeing some of it already with them freeing up vacant office space, and I wouldn't be surprised if they did that because they're scaling back hiring.
  • flyinglizard 10y ago
    Arguably, Twitter is worth more to someone (likely an old school media giant) as a strategic platform than it's worth as a business. Twitter has immense influence that it's unable to monetize. Yes, it generates revenue, but that's true of nearly business with that large of a user base; but the real influence of Twitter as a cross-connnect between all layers of society and as a tool for creating trends isn't really tapped into.
    • rhizome 10y ago
      In your estimation, which old school media giant(s) could successfully increase Twitter's value? Could they do it without relying solely on old-school strategies copied from the radio, TV, and print advertising they already know how to do?
      • flyinglizard 10y ago
        I admit such strategies have failed more often than succeeded. It's difficult to create "organic synergy" without alienating users (who tend to be suspicious of such mergers in the first place). But Twitter has unique power at news breaking and creating direct dialogue around events, and it's surely worth a premium above the bare financials. The value created is not by making Twitter better, but leveraging it's abilities to the benefit of the buyer. What's a company worth as a stand alone entity and what's it worth as part of a greater organization are two different things. I could totally see someone like Newscorp buying them.
        • type0 10y ago
          > I could totally see someone like Newscorp buying them. I do too, but I don't see any bright future for Twitter and its users in this case.