Both are probably true: Twitter leadership could not focus or execute, and the Board also wanted to close the deal. What’s likely missing from the employee per

Both are probably true: Twitter leadership could not focus or execute, and the Board also wanted to close the deal. What’s likely missing from the employee perspective is that Twitter’s inherent non-focus actually attracted fresh content and contributors at some scale. Also that the company burn rate and debt was a threat at a very different scale. Agree that the offering price and foolishness of the buyer was too good to pass up, but the particularities of Twitter leadership also helped set up an opportunity cost in the overall deal. Twitter never pursued ads as ruthlessly as Facebook.