4 ms·

If you read the article, you should know the primary concern is not the profits or revenues but rather the decline in product engagement/growth. What is your re

by zaidf 13y ago

If you read the article, you should know the primary concern is not the profits or revenues but rather the decline in product engagement/growth. What is your response to that? Your comment doesn't even make a single mention of the #1 reason to be very concerned about twitter.

antics 13y ago
Thanks for the spirited reply, Zaid, but I never said I disagree with any of these points. I'm responding specifically to the ridiculous notion that profit could not possibly be in the future of a post-IPO Twitter, not this stuff about whether Twitter is actually in trouble. If you want to take issue with my position you should probably respond to something I actually said. It is less productive to pretend I am debating a different set of issues and then complain when I don't address these other issues. (I also don't appreciate your assertion that I didn't read an article from which I cited specific factual statements. Obviously I did. This is all particularly annoying, since you seem to believe something that I think is mostly true, and not on something which I concretely disagree; it makes it seem like you're hunting for a disagreement and not conducting this conversation in good faith.)
- zaidf 13y ago
  Timeline views were down nearly 7%, suggesting users were refreshing their feeds less often. (1) Twitter makes most of its revenues from timeline views (2) Timeline views are declining (3) When a recently IPO'd company's biggest money making product is on the decline in terms of usage, that is hardly a rosy picture.
  - antics 13y ago
    Sure, it is certainly debatable that "rosy" was the right choice of words here (it probably was a bit bombastic). But unless your plan is to claim that it is impossible to be optimistic about this situation (which is more or less the position I have taken issue with), then I'm not interested in having this discussion. I'm open to the possibility is wrong; I'm not open to the idea that this debate about the semantics of "rosy" is the most interesting thing to be said here. Sorry if this is a bit blunt.

by zaidf 13y ago

antics 13y ago

Thanks for the spirited reply, Zaid, but I never said I disagree with any of these points. I'm responding specifically to the ridiculous notion that profit could not possibly be in the future of a post-IPO Twitter, not this stuff about whether Twitter is actually in trouble. If you want to take issue with my position you should probably respond to something I actually said. It is less productive to pretend I am debating a different set of issues and then complain when I don't address these other issues. (I also don't appreciate your assertion that I didn't read an article from which I cited specific factual statements. Obviously I did. This is all particularly annoying, since you seem to believe something that I think is mostly true, and not on something which I concretely disagree; it makes it seem like you're hunting for a disagreement and not conducting this conversation in good faith.)

zaidf 13y ago
Timeline views were down nearly 7%, suggesting users were refreshing their feeds less often. (1) Twitter makes most of its revenues from timeline views (2) Timeline views are declining (3) When a recently IPO'd company's biggest money making product is on the decline in terms of usage, that is hardly a rosy picture.
- antics 13y ago
  Sure, it is certainly debatable that "rosy" was the right choice of words here (it probably was a bit bombastic). But unless your plan is to claim that it is impossible to be optimistic about this situation (which is more or less the position I have taken issue with), then I'm not interested in having this discussion. I'm open to the possibility is wrong; I'm not open to the idea that this debate about the semantics of "rosy" is the most interesting thing to be said here. Sorry if this is a bit blunt.