4 ms·

I think it's fair to say that we have a post-twitter, or elon-twitter era when all of a sudden Twitter has a bunch of competition that it's never really had bef

I think it's fair to say that we have a post-twitter, or elon-twitter era when all of a sudden Twitter has a bunch of competition that it's never really had before. I wouldn't say it's Threads' era, but it does seem like something has happened. Something has to be said about about the fact that now Meta decided to launch a Twitter clone.

soperj 3y ago
Why? Did something have to be said when Google launched Google+? Or any of the other social platforms?
- Karrot_Kream 3y ago
  Yes that was definitely an era of its own when there was lots of stiff competition for social networks.
- q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 3y ago
  My memory is hazy of those years, but I do think it was a bit different. IIRC, G+ was a defensive maneuver. G was terrified of FB, who was executing successfully on many fronts and putting pressure on advertising revenues. And so G tried to make G+ happen. By contrast, in this case, Twitter keeps shooting itself in the foot. (I guess that's what happens when you lay off huge swaths of the company and demand that engineers print out their code on paper.) So Threads (and others) are moving into the vacuum that's been created. So things right now feel like much more of a competitive land-grab, and it's not entirely clear who's going to win (or even why/how they'll win, or even what the victory conditions look like).
- sanderjd 3y ago
  Pretty sure Threads has more users in less than a week than G+ ever had...
  - soperj 3y ago
    I wouldn't trust uncorroborated numbers that aren't even talking about daily active users.
mjfl 3y ago
but Twitter didn't even matter when it was just Twitter. Twitter was a minor, failing social media site up until Musk bought it.
- kalupa 3y ago
  not sure that's been corrected yet. Seems to be becoming more minor and more failing
  - nancyhn 3y ago
    By what metric?
    - dspillett 3y ago
      The increased number of viable competitors (in terms of mind-share, I'm not suggesting there has been significant movement in terms of capabilities in the last twelve months) and the level of interested in then certainly makes twitter's position rather less comfortable than it might otherwise have been. There certainly seemed to be a number of advertisers who reduced, or entirely removed, their commitments to purchase space on the platform. While many have since reversed somewhat on that, many have not or have not completely unless there has been a major change this quarter (the just full figures I've seen reported in were for 2023Q2 and IIRC the total advertising sales were down >55% compared to 2022Q2). That is two fairly negative indicators with demonstrable evidence. Do you have any positive metrics in mind?
  - aksss 3y ago
    I'm guessing they're financially healthier on the opex side of things than they've ever been. I mean, they've never been profitable, the revenue loss was reactionary and it's not crazy to think that will come back as Twitter hits record user minute metrics and such. Thread is probably going to be robbing its own revenue from other Meta platforms more than Twitter's, I'm guessing. I read somebody today remarking that Twitter was an indignation machine, but I think twitter is very productive if you're following people who produce content or information rather than following political pundits and reporters.

soperj 3y ago

Why? Did something have to be said when Google launched Google+? Or any of the other social platforms?

Karrot_Kream 3y ago
Yes that was definitely an era of its own when there was lots of stiff competition for social networks.
q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 3y ago
My memory is hazy of those years, but I do think it was a bit different. IIRC, G+ was a defensive maneuver. G was terrified of FB, who was executing successfully on many fronts and putting pressure on advertising revenues. And so G tried to make G+ happen. By contrast, in this case, Twitter keeps shooting itself in the foot. (I guess that's what happens when you lay off huge swaths of the company and demand that engineers print out their code on paper.) So Threads (and others) are moving into the vacuum that's been created. So things right now feel like much more of a competitive land-grab, and it's not entirely clear who's going to win (or even why/how they'll win, or even what the victory conditions look like).
sanderjd 3y ago
Pretty sure Threads has more users in less than a week than G+ ever had...
- soperj 3y ago
  I wouldn't trust uncorroborated numbers that aren't even talking about daily active users.

mjfl 3y ago

but Twitter didn't even matter when it was just Twitter. Twitter was a minor, failing social media site up until Musk bought it.

kalupa 3y ago
not sure that's been corrected yet. Seems to be becoming more minor and more failing
- nancyhn 3y ago
  By what metric?
  - dspillett 3y ago
    The increased number of viable competitors (in terms of mind-share, I'm not suggesting there has been significant movement in terms of capabilities in the last twelve months) and the level of interested in then certainly makes twitter's position rather less comfortable than it might otherwise have been. There certainly seemed to be a number of advertisers who reduced, or entirely removed, their commitments to purchase space on the platform. While many have since reversed somewhat on that, many have not or have not completely unless there has been a major change this quarter (the just full figures I've seen reported in were for 2023Q2 and IIRC the total advertising sales were down >55% compared to 2022Q2). That is two fairly negative indicators with demonstrable evidence. Do you have any positive metrics in mind?
- aksss 3y ago
  I'm guessing they're financially healthier on the opex side of things than they've ever been. I mean, they've never been profitable, the revenue loss was reactionary and it's not crazy to think that will come back as Twitter hits record user minute metrics and such. Thread is probably going to be robbing its own revenue from other Meta platforms more than Twitter's, I'm guessing. I read somebody today remarking that Twitter was an indignation machine, but I think twitter is very productive if you're following people who produce content or information rather than following political pundits and reporters.