4 ms·

You know what is most amusing about this? I have more doubts about Facebook's long term business plans than Twitters. Twitter seems easily monetizable, and the

You know what is most amusing about this? I have more doubts about Facebook's long term business plans than Twitters. Twitter seems easily monetizable, and the fact that others are already doing it outside (twitpay, etc) is some validation. Facebook seems to be monetizable only through ads. Annoying, annoying ads. Both companies have potential valuation issues, however.

axod 18y ago
50% of twitter users aren't even using the twitter UI. Half their users aren't monetizable (By them). Is the same true about FaceBook?
- ryanwaggoner 18y ago
  I wouldn't think so...pretty much everyone on FB is using the FB ui, either web or mobile.
  - axod 18y ago
    Right... which means FaceBook has far better chance of monetizing users than twitter does.
    - ryanwaggoner 18y ago
      I was just responding to your comment, which sounded like you were making the point that, like twitter, half of facebook users don't use the FB ui.
      - axod 18y ago
        hehe I should have been clearer :)
ryanwaggoner 18y ago
If Twitter is "monetizable" through twitpay, then Facebook is much more monetizable through something similar.
- mikeryan 18y ago
  The issue isn't being able to make money - its the ability to make profits.
  - swombat 18y ago
    Yeah... it's a matter of scale. Twitter has 20 employees, a cash burn rate of $5m a year according to the article. Facebook has hundreds of employees and servers... probably a lot harder to make a profit.
    - axod 18y ago
      Last numbers I heard for FB were 800+ employees, and 10,000+ servers. Both just a tad excessive, although I guess you have to spend the VC money somehow.
    - ryanwaggoner 18y ago
      comparing apples and oranges. google has way more expenses than the coffee shop next door, but that doesn't mean it's harder for google to earn a profit. my personal opinion is that facebook users on the whole are a lot more engaged than twitter users. i know an awful lot of folks on twitter who use it as a broadcast medium rather than a place for conversation and connection. facebook seems to be a place where people actually connect with each other more. granted, this is all anecdotal.
nir 18y ago
But isn't it trivial for Facebook to offer Twitter's functionality (or do they already? Not an FB user ;)) and instantly have about x30 (AFAIK) larger userbase?
- mikeryan 18y ago
  The new design is very twitter like. Your facebook homepage is essentially a "life feed" - kind of twitter on roids.
- unalone 18y ago
  They don't offer exact functionality (they're not aimed at the same market), but they've got something close. Facebook already has ads, though, and they're evolving a business plan constantly. Twitter has nothing. So they have less experience with raising money and they've got more to lose.
  - swombat 18y ago
    I disagree. Twitter is already testing its adverts, and masterfully so imho. I've clicked on those ads that they have now already. And since they were interesting things, I'm likely to keep an eye on that area for the foreseeable future, to see if anything else neat crops up. Seems like an excellent way to roll-out ads... first, make the users look at the area where you'll place the ads, by putting interesting stuff there, and then put paid ads there. So long as most ads remain relatively interesting/targeted, I'll keep looking. And probably clicking, too. Consider also that Twitter users are very used to clicking on external links, because we do it all the time for links tweeted by others. I am much less likely to click on an external link in FB than on Twitter.
    - unalone 18y ago
      Huh! I didn't know Twitter was rolling out ads at all. Facebook has some excellent targeting. I've gone to a few Facebook links and if I wasn't broke I'd have bought some products, too. (Right now they insist on showing me the Twilight DVD, though, which irritates me.)
herval 18y ago
many others are monetizing over facebook as well - how is that a validation for twitter?

axod 18y ago

50% of twitter users aren't even using the twitter UI. Half their users aren't monetizable (By them). Is the same true about FaceBook?

ryanwaggoner 18y ago
I wouldn't think so...pretty much everyone on FB is using the FB ui, either web or mobile.
- axod 18y ago
  Right... which means FaceBook has far better chance of monetizing users than twitter does.
  - ryanwaggoner 18y ago
    I was just responding to your comment, which sounded like you were making the point that, like twitter, half of facebook users don't use the FB ui.
    - axod 18y ago
      hehe I should have been clearer :)

ryanwaggoner 18y ago

If Twitter is "monetizable" through twitpay, then Facebook is much more monetizable through something similar.

mikeryan 18y ago
The issue isn't being able to make money - its the ability to make profits.
- swombat 18y ago
  Yeah... it's a matter of scale. Twitter has 20 employees, a cash burn rate of $5m a year according to the article. Facebook has hundreds of employees and servers... probably a lot harder to make a profit.
  - axod 18y ago
    Last numbers I heard for FB were 800+ employees, and 10,000+ servers. Both just a tad excessive, although I guess you have to spend the VC money somehow.
  - ryanwaggoner 18y ago
    comparing apples and oranges. google has way more expenses than the coffee shop next door, but that doesn't mean it's harder for google to earn a profit. my personal opinion is that facebook users on the whole are a lot more engaged than twitter users. i know an awful lot of folks on twitter who use it as a broadcast medium rather than a place for conversation and connection. facebook seems to be a place where people actually connect with each other more. granted, this is all anecdotal.

nir 18y ago

But isn't it trivial for Facebook to offer Twitter's functionality (or do they already? Not an FB user ;)) and instantly have about x30 (AFAIK) larger userbase?

mikeryan 18y ago
The new design is very twitter like. Your facebook homepage is essentially a "life feed" - kind of twitter on roids.
unalone 18y ago
They don't offer exact functionality (they're not aimed at the same market), but they've got something close. Facebook already has ads, though, and they're evolving a business plan constantly. Twitter has nothing. So they have less experience with raising money and they've got more to lose.
- swombat 18y ago
  I disagree. Twitter is already testing its adverts, and masterfully so imho. I've clicked on those ads that they have now already. And since they were interesting things, I'm likely to keep an eye on that area for the foreseeable future, to see if anything else neat crops up. Seems like an excellent way to roll-out ads... first, make the users look at the area where you'll place the ads, by putting interesting stuff there, and then put paid ads there. So long as most ads remain relatively interesting/targeted, I'll keep looking. And probably clicking, too. Consider also that Twitter users are very used to clicking on external links, because we do it all the time for links tweeted by others. I am much less likely to click on an external link in FB than on Twitter.
  - unalone 18y ago
    Huh! I didn't know Twitter was rolling out ads at all. Facebook has some excellent targeting. I've gone to a few Facebook links and if I wasn't broke I'd have bought some products, too. (Right now they insist on showing me the Twilight DVD, though, which irritates me.)

herval 18y ago

many others are monetizing over facebook as well - how is that a validation for twitter?