4 ms·
The companies were advertising on Twitter, despite the relatively weak performance. They considered it worth the spend prior to activist pressure. If Twitter'
by memish 4y ago
The companies were advertising on Twitter, despite the relatively weak performance.
They considered it worth the spend prior to activist pressure.
If Twitter's ad performance was best in class, they would be less likely to fold.
We seem to be in agreement about how this works?
- mhoad 4y agoI can see you seem to be one of the very passionate for Elon types but you are fundamentally misunderstanding WHY advertisers are leaving in such high numbers. I promise you it has nothing to do with “activist groups” and everything to do with erratic and unpredictable management that is scaring them away.
- summerlight 4y agoYou get the entire point wrong. Advertisers decided to allocate their budget to Twitter not because of its status quo, but its promise on improvements. In fact, there has been significant developments on Twitter advertising and many advertisers thinks it's worth to experiment with the platform. And not Elon decide to void that promise, so advertisers pulled their budget. It's pretty easy to pull their budget it's relatively smaller than other platforms while the risk is not yet fully assessed. This is so simple story, there is no place for so-called "activists" for the major role to play.