5 ms·

They're not even remotely priced at the magnitude to eat the whole planet. And yet, their market IS eating the entire world (except China, due to insular politi

They're not even remotely priced at the magnitude to eat the whole planet. And yet, their market IS eating the entire world (except China, due to insular political reasons). That points to me like they're significantly undervalued.

ericmay 5y ago
When you say they are you referring to Twitter specifically or social media/US tech companies in general? If you mean Twitter specifically I'd be interested in reading your thoughts on the "bull case" for this takeover. I like Twitter and use it to shout into the void from time to time. I wonder if it's just like.. a company and not a growth company? Like what if we just had Twitter with some monetization and then it just paid out dividends to shareholders? Why is that such a bad thing?
underwater 5y ago
What is Twitter's market? They seem increasingly like just another online community. Most of my feed is the same few Twitter influencers with high follower counts. The drama, conventions, and memes all make it feel insular and hostile to outsiders. Feels more like Tumblr than some global, open, platform.
- echelon 5y ago
  Twitter has all of the "smart people" and "money" on it, unlike Reddit, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, etc. Billionaires are tweeting each other in the open. Politicians. Reporters. CEOs, CFOs. No other social network is like that. It's the only thing keeping Twitter relevant. TikTok and Instagram have their celebrities and trend setters (which is where the ad dollars are), but you don't see anyone musing about "metaverse", "web3", and what their latest fund is going to pursue, geopolitics, OSINT, stocks, etc.
  - altdataseller 5y ago
    Those topics are only important to you and your bubble though. Not to the vast majority of regular Joes like my mom, grandmothers, people in 3rd world countries, etc.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - weq 5y ago
    LOL tiktok investors are not a thing? twitter won; no doubt - but there is no stick or way to money-tise that doesnt not turn into a facebook slow drain gurrgler on your userbase. this is the conundreum of social enagement based apps. Your a fad, and your only another fad away from history! GREAT long term investment? NAahhhhh. Traditional PUMP n DUMP stock. Billionaires get made, mom and pops get DESTROYED! Celebs will go wherever the endorsement money is. Life will continue. These apps wont.
  - foepys 5y ago
    I don't believe for a second that anything being tweeted by billionaires, C*Os, and politicians is not approved by some marketing and/or social media department. It's not like people are required to tweet, they choose to tweet. In the end Twitter is just the illusion of people talking to each other. It's all just to further their brand or to push their goals, not insight they give up for free. Sometimes someone slips up but this just results in even more carefully crafted tweets.
    - mschuster91 5y ago
      In the US, Elon Musk, the 45th and AOC are known to tweet on their own. For the 45th, it was easily discoverable if he tweeted on his own or not by looking on the app ID. In Germany, health minister Karl Lauterbach, foreign Minister Annalena Charlotte Alma Baerbock (yes, her parents really did name her 1312) as well as a boatload of MPs (most notably Katharina Schulze) also tweet on their own.
  - underwater 5y ago
    I can only generalise from my own experience. If I go onto "developer Twitter", there is a thriving ecosystem of thought leaders, developers attached to well-known project, etc. If I follow those people I feel like I am a part of a conversation between People Who Matter™. But if I compare that to my own firsthand knowledge of those same projects and what's happening in the ecosystem, I realise that there is very little overlap between reality and Twitter's projection of reality.
Barrin92 5y ago
just because you reach the whole world doesn't necessarily mean there's a good way to monetize it, at least without losing what makes the service attractive. Sure they could start slapping ads on everything, even paywall the site but at the end of the day there'd be significant competition eroding profits. Twitter almost makes more sense as an open protocol than a commercial service, which is basically what Mastodon is. It's even what Dorsey wanted to do at one point with Bluesky, not sure if that's still alive.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
I think the only thing that keeps them afloat is their importance to political figures who LOVE the short form sound bites. Of course that could just be the conspiracist in me :)
- AniseAbyss 5y ago
  The average voter prefers to base his/her opinion on a soundbyte. And I don't blame them people have actual lives and loved ones nobody has time to waste on democracy.

ericmay 5y ago

When you say they are you referring to Twitter specifically or social media/US tech companies in general? If you mean Twitter specifically I'd be interested in reading your thoughts on the "bull case" for this takeover. I like Twitter and use it to shout into the void from time to time. I wonder if it's just like.. a company and not a growth company? Like what if we just had Twitter with some monetization and then it just paid out dividends to shareholders? Why is that such a bad thing?

underwater 5y ago

What is Twitter's market? They seem increasingly like just another online community. Most of my feed is the same few Twitter influencers with high follower counts. The drama, conventions, and memes all make it feel insular and hostile to outsiders. Feels more like Tumblr than some global, open, platform.

echelon 5y ago
Twitter has all of the "smart people" and "money" on it, unlike Reddit, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, etc. Billionaires are tweeting each other in the open. Politicians. Reporters. CEOs, CFOs. No other social network is like that. It's the only thing keeping Twitter relevant. TikTok and Instagram have their celebrities and trend setters (which is where the ad dollars are), but you don't see anyone musing about "metaverse", "web3", and what their latest fund is going to pursue, geopolitics, OSINT, stocks, etc.
- altdataseller 5y ago
  Those topics are only important to you and your bubble though. Not to the vast majority of regular Joes like my mom, grandmothers, people in 3rd world countries, etc.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- weq 5y ago
  LOL tiktok investors are not a thing? twitter won; no doubt - but there is no stick or way to money-tise that doesnt not turn into a facebook slow drain gurrgler on your userbase. this is the conundreum of social enagement based apps. Your a fad, and your only another fad away from history! GREAT long term investment? NAahhhhh. Traditional PUMP n DUMP stock. Billionaires get made, mom and pops get DESTROYED! Celebs will go wherever the endorsement money is. Life will continue. These apps wont.
- foepys 5y ago
  I don't believe for a second that anything being tweeted by billionaires, C*Os, and politicians is not approved by some marketing and/or social media department. It's not like people are required to tweet, they choose to tweet. In the end Twitter is just the illusion of people talking to each other. It's all just to further their brand or to push their goals, not insight they give up for free. Sometimes someone slips up but this just results in even more carefully crafted tweets.
  - mschuster91 5y ago
    In the US, Elon Musk, the 45th and AOC are known to tweet on their own. For the 45th, it was easily discoverable if he tweeted on his own or not by looking on the app ID. In Germany, health minister Karl Lauterbach, foreign Minister Annalena Charlotte Alma Baerbock (yes, her parents really did name her 1312) as well as a boatload of MPs (most notably Katharina Schulze) also tweet on their own.
- underwater 5y ago
  I can only generalise from my own experience. If I go onto "developer Twitter", there is a thriving ecosystem of thought leaders, developers attached to well-known project, etc. If I follow those people I feel like I am a part of a conversation between People Who Matter™. But if I compare that to my own firsthand knowledge of those same projects and what's happening in the ecosystem, I realise that there is very little overlap between reality and Twitter's projection of reality.

Barrin92 5y ago

just because you reach the whole world doesn't necessarily mean there's a good way to monetize it, at least without losing what makes the service attractive. Sure they could start slapping ads on everything, even paywall the site but at the end of the day there'd be significant competition eroding profits. Twitter almost makes more sense as an open protocol than a commercial service, which is basically what Mastodon is. It's even what Dorsey wanted to do at one point with Bluesky, not sure if that's still alive.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

I think the only thing that keeps them afloat is their importance to political figures who LOVE the short form sound bites. Of course that could just be the conspiracist in me :)

AniseAbyss 5y ago
The average voter prefers to base his/her opinion on a soundbyte. And I don't blame them people have actual lives and loved ones nobody has time to waste on democracy.