6 ms·

Somewhat tangentially, I feel Twitter sort of stopped innovating after they got big. If Google as a search engine can do Gmail, Glass and driverless cars, why h

by capex 13y ago

Somewhat tangentially, I feel Twitter sort of stopped innovating after they got big. If Google as a search engine can do Gmail, Glass and driverless cars, why has Twitter made tweeting the only business they do?

eric_cc 13y ago
I guess I don't have an issue with a company that tries to do one thing really well.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  Agreed.
stonemetal 13y ago
They got big but they haven't gotten profitable. I could see branching out and taking risks if they had profits to invest. Without profits branching out is a distraction from not dying.
nostromo 13y ago
By buying Crashlytics and MoPub they have branched out a bit.
muzz 13y ago
There was an article comparing the lack of innovation between Twitter and Facebook. One of its most salient insights was that Facebook's product was the vision of the founder, whereas Twitter was almost an accident, and thus there is a "don't screw it up" mentality at Twitter that limits product innovation.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
rgbrenner 13y ago
Might want to click on the link and scroll down to the financial statements. Twitter lost $70 million during the first half of this year. In fact, they didn't make a dime in 2010, 2011, or 2012 either. I don't think I need to post Google's profits for comparison. One is a vibrant growing company. The other is struggling to stay alive. One has billions to invest in new ideas. The other needs to raise money before they burn through it all just doing what they already do. Twitter doesn't have a dime to invest in new ideas, unless that idea solves the profitability problem they already have. And btw, for all that google has invested in, they are still an advertising company - 98% of their revenue. They make a bit off gmail from ads (I assume), but they haven't made anything from glass or driverless cars. This is hardly the type of innovation that Twitter needs.. where is the money going to come from for what are essentially research projects.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  There's too much of this ignorance being couched as sound financial analysis here time and time again. Twitter's revenue's are exploding: $28,278,000: revenue generated in 2010, $106,313,000: revenue generated in 2011, $316,933,000: revenue generated in 2012 $253,635,000: revenue generated in the first half of 2013. They could easily be profitable if they cared to. They don't. They shouldn't. They have this fantastic opportunity to build a platform that touches everyone's lives. They have easy access to capital. Seize the day! They don't need to run Twitter like you run a corner store.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - yapcguy 13y ago
    It's like I stepped off a time machine and I'm in 1999 reading the Yahoo Finance message boards.
    - jusben1369 13y ago
      Right. Because the world has 30 - 50 years of successful tech companies that utilized venture capital to create lasting companies of value. But you want to pick the bubble year. You want to make the next Google Glass? The next self driving car? You have two choices. Work with a very large company who will use profits from their existing businesses to subsidize your efforts for years with loss making. Or start your own company and raise capital to sustain yourself while you build a super duper company that's defensible. I think they're both great routes to take. One of the main reasons Twitter is IPO'ing is that their competition (FB and Google) have a massive war chest. They need to have the ability to stay competitive.
      - yapcguy 13y ago
        So they are going to raise a war chest to do battle, hooray! Before they spend the money, will they refund the taxpayers of San Francisco for the tax break they got?
readme 13y ago
Google didn't really go full on expansive product company until after their IPO. Maybe twitter will do the same.
pfarrell 13y ago
Storm, mesos, and bootstrap are some very interesting projects that have come out of twitter. If they figure out how to do ads in a way that doesn't make you roll your eyes, ignore, or feel creepy, they could be standing in front of a newish form of advertising as google did a decade ago
NKCSS 13y ago
They do sideprojects that are well received. Maybe not as far out of their main business than Google does, but Twitter's BootStrap can be seen as a huge success.

by capex 13y ago

eric_cc 13y ago

I guess I don't have an issue with a company that tries to do one thing really well.

jusben1369 13y ago
Agreed.

stonemetal 13y ago

They got big but they haven't gotten profitable. I could see branching out and taking risks if they had profits to invest. Without profits branching out is a distraction from not dying.

nostromo 13y ago

By buying Crashlytics and MoPub they have branched out a bit.

muzz 13y ago

There was an article comparing the lack of innovation between Twitter and Facebook. One of its most salient insights was that Facebook's product was the vision of the founder, whereas Twitter was almost an accident, and thus there is a "don't screw it up" mentality at Twitter that limits product innovation.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

rgbrenner 13y ago

Might want to click on the link and scroll down to the financial statements. Twitter lost $70 million during the first half of this year. In fact, they didn't make a dime in 2010, 2011, or 2012 either. I don't think I need to post Google's profits for comparison. One is a vibrant growing company. The other is struggling to stay alive. One has billions to invest in new ideas. The other needs to raise money before they burn through it all just doing what they already do. Twitter doesn't have a dime to invest in new ideas, unless that idea solves the profitability problem they already have. And btw, for all that google has invested in, they are still an advertising company - 98% of their revenue. They make a bit off gmail from ads (I assume), but they haven't made anything from glass or driverless cars. This is hardly the type of innovation that Twitter needs.. where is the money going to come from for what are essentially research projects.

jusben1369 13y ago
There's too much of this ignorance being couched as sound financial analysis here time and time again. Twitter's revenue's are exploding: $28,278,000: revenue generated in 2010, $106,313,000: revenue generated in 2011, $316,933,000: revenue generated in 2012 $253,635,000: revenue generated in the first half of 2013. They could easily be profitable if they cared to. They don't. They shouldn't. They have this fantastic opportunity to build a platform that touches everyone's lives. They have easy access to capital. Seize the day! They don't need to run Twitter like you run a corner store.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- yapcguy 13y ago
  It's like I stepped off a time machine and I'm in 1999 reading the Yahoo Finance message boards.
  - jusben1369 13y ago
    Right. Because the world has 30 - 50 years of successful tech companies that utilized venture capital to create lasting companies of value. But you want to pick the bubble year. You want to make the next Google Glass? The next self driving car? You have two choices. Work with a very large company who will use profits from their existing businesses to subsidize your efforts for years with loss making. Or start your own company and raise capital to sustain yourself while you build a super duper company that's defensible. I think they're both great routes to take. One of the main reasons Twitter is IPO'ing is that their competition (FB and Google) have a massive war chest. They need to have the ability to stay competitive.
    - yapcguy 13y ago
      So they are going to raise a war chest to do battle, hooray! Before they spend the money, will they refund the taxpayers of San Francisco for the tax break they got?

readme 13y ago

Google didn't really go full on expansive product company until after their IPO. Maybe twitter will do the same.

pfarrell 13y ago

Storm, mesos, and bootstrap are some very interesting projects that have come out of twitter. If they figure out how to do ads in a way that doesn't make you roll your eyes, ignore, or feel creepy, they could be standing in front of a newish form of advertising as google did a decade ago

NKCSS 13y ago

They do sideprojects that are well received. Maybe not as far out of their main business than Google does, but Twitter's BootStrap can be seen as a huge success.