4 ms·

That's not what the SEC filings say. The SEC filings say that up to 5% of the number of monetizable daily active users (i.e., the number of users after eliminat

That's not what the SEC filings say. The SEC filings say that up to 5% of the number of monetizable daily active users (i.e., the number of users after eliminating bots) may be bots--or, in other words, the techniques that Twitter uses to detect bots have up to a 5% false negative rate. No one is saying that 5% of Twitter's users is bots, except for when Musk is trying to put those words into Twitter's beak.

martin8412 4y ago
They don't just say up to five percent are bots - They say that their methodology might be flawed and the actual number could be higher or lower.
hef19898 4y ago
In addition, one could make the claim that monetizeable bots cannot have a material adverse effect since they are still generating revenue and profits.
- saalweachter 4y ago
  I mean, the point of Twitter's statement is to try to bound the risk. They could fix their methodology, or their advertisers could sue them for charging them for bot views, and the magnitude of the risk is ~5% of their mDAU, according to Twitter. A company with 95% of its revenue coming from bot-clicks and a company with 5% of its revenue coming from bot-clicks might make the exact same amount of money, but one is substantially more screwed in the future.
hartator 4y ago
> No one is saying that 5% of Twitter's users is bots, except for when Musk is trying to put those words into Twitter's beak. "In its disclosures, Twitter claims to have nearly 238 million monetizable daily active users (“mDAU”) who participate on the platform, and tells its investors that this userbase metric is a bellwether for its ability to generate revenue and the “best way to measure [Twitter’s] success . . . .” I think they are talking about this number being significant less than 238 million. "They show that in early July fully one-third of visible accounts may have been false or spam accounts—resulting in a conservative floor of at least twice as many false or spam accounts as the 5% that Twitter discloses for the entire mDAU population." They are talking about the same after bot removal 5%.
- vehementi 4y ago
  That logic is nonsense, 3rd party observers have no way to know what twitter counts as a daily active user. They *could not possibly* make any such estimate.

martin8412 4y ago

They don't just say up to five percent are bots - They say that their methodology might be flawed and the actual number could be higher or lower.

hef19898 4y ago

In addition, one could make the claim that monetizeable bots cannot have a material adverse effect since they are still generating revenue and profits.

saalweachter 4y ago
I mean, the point of Twitter's statement is to try to bound the risk. They could fix their methodology, or their advertisers could sue them for charging them for bot views, and the magnitude of the risk is ~5% of their mDAU, according to Twitter. A company with 95% of its revenue coming from bot-clicks and a company with 5% of its revenue coming from bot-clicks might make the exact same amount of money, but one is substantially more screwed in the future.

hartator 4y ago

> No one is saying that 5% of Twitter's users is bots, except for when Musk is trying to put those words into Twitter's beak. "In its disclosures, Twitter claims to have nearly 238 million monetizable daily active users (“mDAU”) who participate on the platform, and tells its investors that this userbase metric is a bellwether for its ability to generate revenue and the “best way to measure [Twitter’s] success . . . .” I think they are talking about this number being significant less than 238 million. "They show that in early July fully one-third of visible accounts may have been false or spam accounts—resulting in a conservative floor of at least twice as many false or spam accounts as the 5% that Twitter discloses for the entire mDAU population." They are talking about the same after bot removal 5%.

vehementi 4y ago
That logic is nonsense, 3rd party observers have no way to know what twitter counts as a daily active user. They *could not possibly* make any such estimate.