4 ms·
>Twitter which has a product that isn't even in Disney's wheelhouse. I am confused why Disney is even in this conversation at this point. One can view the Twit
by jasode 10y ago
>Twitter which has a product that isn't even in Disney's wheelhouse. I am confused why Disney is even in this conversation at this point.
One can view the Twitter business in multiple ways.
If one sees Twitter as a technology platform that builds on what IRC/XMPP did before, the Disney connection makes zero sense. (E.g. Disney is not a tech company and they wouldn't be the kind of company that would bring back a developer API.)
However, one can also see Twitter as a media entertainment business and the technology platform behind the scenes as an irrelevant detail. Disney does already own the ABC Broadcasting network and ESPN.
Looking at Twitter via the lense of "media outlet" isn't that strange if you look at the top-100 Twitter profiles:
http://twittercounter.com/pages/100 http://twittercounter.com/pages/100
One will notice it's mostly entertainment celebrities including singers Katy Perry (93M), Justin Bieber (88M), Taylor Swift (81M), etc. The list also includes media channels such as Youtube, CNN, ESPN, BBC, etc.
Sure, many people have touted the social ideals of Twitter and its empowerment of user-driven bottom-up journalism. It's a "global consciousness" for news. However, it's interesting to note the relatively low number of followers for famous journalists compared to the entertainment celebrities: Christiane Amanpour (1.8M), Louis Theroux (1.5M), Glenn Greenwald (743k), Malcolm Gladwell (422k), Bob Woodward (15.9k), etc.
If you see Twitter as a media/broadcast business, an acquisition by Google/Apple doesn't make any sense.
If you see Twitter as a technology platform to sell more digital ads, an acquisition by Disney makes no sense.
All that said, we've seen one media company (Rupert Murdoch) buy a web company (MySpace) and that didn't turn out so well for a variety of reasons.
- ebbv 10y agoThis is a good explanation of why people think it made sense for Disney to buy Twitter, but I don't buy it. The problem with this approach is that Twitter doesn't own any of those big celebrities or have any way of enforcing them staying on the platform. When you buy the record label that Katy Perry has a deal with, you're buying it because Katy Perry has a deal in place to make N more records for that label. When you buy Twitter because Katy Perry is on it, you're not getting anything. She could shut down her Twitter tomorrow and tell all her followers she's only on Instagram.
- imaginenore 10y agoNo matter which way you look at it, Twitter is yet to prove itself as a successful business. They haven't had a positive net income quarter ever, they keep burning through the investors' money. In the last quarter they lost $107M (on $602M of revenue). https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ATWTR&fstype=ii&ei=l232V4vNHYbfsgHpi4XoAQ https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ATWTR&fstype=ii&ei=l2...
- Retric 10y agoI am usually very skeptical for synergy arguments, but Disney could make it work. Twitter as an influence platform is far more powerful than twitter as a profit engine. Disney as a brand is a small chunk of the giant corporation that is Disney the company. If they get a few million / year benefit each across Pixar, Lucasfilm, Marvel Entertainment, Touchstone Pictures, ESPN, American Broadcasting Company (ABC) etc that's significant value. From the other side they can cheaply cross promote Twitter from all those media companies. Disney has long been about about merchandising not just entertainment, and they are a surprisingly innovative tech focused company. Arguably, they could get most of this from the data feed for minimal outlay, but owning twitter let's them develop the kind of tools useful for themselves. So, think faster AB testing for commercials not just cash. Much like how Pixar does a lot of software development even though they make money from movies.
- cwilkes 10y agoI'm not sure what you mean by "Disney as a brand is a small chunk". Name one person that doesn't know Disney or what they offer.
- Retric 10y agoDisney the company owns things like ABC, A&E, and ESPN that are not part of Disney the brand. AKA, if you are watching ESPN you don't think Disney in any way shape or form. https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/the-walt-disney-company-reports-record-quarterly-earnings-for-the-first-quarter-of-fiscal-2016/ https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/the-walt-disney-company-rep... There is increasing crossover with Star Wars, and Pixar. However, they both started off independent so have strong brand identity on their own. PS: The only really unifying concept with Disney is entertainment and abusing IP laws to squeeze ever more money from ever blander content.
- gkilmain 10y agoI'm thinking there could be some nice synergies with ESPN. All of the scoreboards on espn.com provide a twitter feed. All of the team pages do too. The feed provides insight to a game that you'd never experience from your couch.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- mburst 10y agoTwitter also has the rights to stream some Thursday Night Football games this season.