Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 361 posts

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#351

Post by SixSigma »

jshevek wrote: post #257
SixSigma wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not with these guys in charge I hope : “I believe we need to build a platform that respects and amplifies every voice in a way that the world needs to hear it . I trust that the world will amplify and retweet and have conversations where appropriate .” [1] Which means "Kill the cops" is ok but "#StopEnslavingSaudiWomen" gets your account banned. [2] [1] http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/06/02/jack-dorsey-blms-de...…

You are not wrong, but linking to Breitbart probably damages your credibility.

When most media is paying Clinton [1] calling doubts on credibility is laughable tbh. especially in an age where if one is piqued one can right click ... search and go look at places you trust.

[1] http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/clinton-foundati...

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#352

Post by tkxxx7 »

msravi wrote: post #319
gaius wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? http://fortune.com/2016/03/20/twitter-algorithm-social-marke... If you don't even notice it, the algo has got you...

Wow, didn't know that either. But I don't "follow" people. Rather, I simply add them to different lists (finance, news, science, tech, right, left, etc.) and use tweetdeck to follow the multiple lists. I wonder if they're also messing with the lists... In any case, as far as I can tell, I seem to be getting all the tweets of people in the list in chronological order.

that's a good point too, I have a couple lists I look at for close friends and such and only go onto the timeline every now and then

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#353

Post by imagist »

astrodust wrote: post #234
imagist wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number I cited was their claimed active users. I'm not sure why you consider $29 per human user a steal. There are two sides to a transaction--what you pay and what you get for it. What exactly do you think investors are getting for their money here?

Just compared to other industry metrics.

That's exactly why we're in a bubble. "Because other people are paying even more" is a really bad reason to pay too much for something. But that's the entire basis of Twitter's price--it's people investing in Twitter because other people are investing in Twitter (and other such companies) with no concern for whether that investment will ever return a profit.

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#354

Post by tsycho »

deepfriedbits wrote: post #69
bad_user wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google learnt from its mistakes with Google+ and is eager to not repeat them Google has learned nothing from their mistakes. As evidence their real name policy is still active. Contrast with Twitter where a lot of users have fake names. And yes, you can find hateful users on Twitter and I know of some folks that have been harassed, but the community I'm active in is very professional and civilized and the conversat…

> Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. There's no way for example to cross-post on both Twitter and Google+. Apps like TweetDeck aren't possible for Google+. Is this true? Buffer allows you to cross-post to Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

Google+ has a significantly more powerful API for its trusted partners, such as Hootsuite. And maybe Buffer, unless they are doing some headless browsing hacks. Their public API is read only for strategic reasons. Unless you have a clear business case or plan on how to monetize APIs, opening them up can actually backfire very easily. The biggest example of this is Twitter itself, which has been trying to lock down its APIs since they are basically losing both money and direct access to users through them. But closing them now is causing further hurt, on user trust and goodwill.

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#355

Post by tn13 »

tragic wrote: post #197
tn13 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 350 million active users, that's about $29 per user Name one other platform which has Obama, Trump, Hillary, Beiber, JK Rowling, Pope, United Airlines, Marc Anderseen, Borrat, Bozo the Clown all engaging in two way communication with their fans and haters ? I think an investor should worry less about $29 per user metric and worry more about the incompetence of the top management which has failed to generate revenue…

> Obama, Trump, Hillary, Beiber, JK Rowling, Pope, United Airlines, Marc Anderseen, Borrat, Bozo the Clown With the likely exception of Andreesen, all you're getting are particularly fragmented and discombobulated press releases from 'their people' (in house or consultant PRs). I could live without them.

I live without Twitter perfectly. But most people care.

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#356

Post by erklik »

Pxtl wrote: post #118
gxs wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People always write them off, but I do wonder if it's more of an emotional write off or the fact that as non twitter users, they refuse to see value because they personally don't see value. I'm not a twitter user or advocate but: 106.31M 316.93M 664.89M 1.4B 2.22B That's their revenue over the past 5 years. Their R&D cost last year was over 800M. I'm not saying they are Google, I'm not saying they are LinkedIn, but t…

Yes, I think a large part of the hate that Twitter gets is from people who see Twitter as a silly product, like Snapchat or something. Yes, Twitter has challenges in monetizing, and yes, Twitter is weird , and yes, Twitter hasn't made a profit yet. But fundamentally, Twitter is still the preferred platform for following media, celebrities, politicians, internet-famous-people, and quick ad-hoc public communication wit…

Hell. Most of tech-support is through Twitter. My tweet carries a large amount of power compared to a phone-call to tech-support.

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#357

Post by Pxtl »

erklik wrote: post #356
Pxtl wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I think a large part of the hate that Twitter gets is from people who see Twitter as a silly product, like Snapchat or something. Yes, Twitter has challenges in monetizing, and yes, Twitter is weird , and yes, Twitter hasn't made a profit yet. But fundamentally, Twitter is still the preferred platform for following media, celebrities, politicians, internet-famous-people, and quick ad-hoc public communication wit…

Hell. Most of tech-support is through Twitter. My tweet carries a large amount of power compared to a phone-call to tech-support.

Yup. Twitter carries the implicit threat of "satisfy me or I'll make a public stink". It's the closest we non-journos can do to putting a mic in their face and demanding answers on camera.

Re: Twitter may receive formal bid, suitors said to include Salesforce and Google

#360

Post by thehenster »

panarky wrote: post #326
skewart wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Also, not only does Twitter have great brand recognition but also individual tweets can have far greater reach than Twitter's user numbers might suggest. A lot of non-users see Tweets - embedded in news stories, shared around the internet, or shown on TV. And lots of non-users hear about things that happen on Twitter. That said, while that brand recognition and reach is scarce and hard to reproduce, it's not ne…

Problem #1: 90% of Twitter is shit [1] Problem #2: It's expensive to support millions of users who post shit Problem #3: Twitter's revenue base is too small for its cost base Solution: Eliminate advertising and charge $20 per 1000 tweets. Free to read, costs a tiny bit to tweet. People who post shit will disappear. People who have an audience and something to say won't bat an eye at this low cost. If this weeds out 8…

Interesting idea. Would you charge the same amount in poorer countries? Twitter's multicultural/multilingual user base is such a good thing.
Post reply on HN