101–110 of 119 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sure you can pull a digg and expect more money, but actually lose your users to a competitor. i 'd definitely quit twitter if it starts doing things like what facebook did to FB-page owners by holding their audience hostage for ransom. I think twitter, like reddit, inherently don't have high monetization potential because their format doesn't appeal to the massive audiences which flock to fb / instagram
>> but actually lose your users to a competitor Twitter would be incredibly hard to supplant at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how is an activist shareholder different from an activist?
An activist shareholder owns part of the company and has additional ability to effect change through voting shares. An activist without any shares cannot attend the shareholder meetings, etc. for example.
Why does Twitter need to have a huge market capitalization and return for investors? Can't it just be the "global heartbeat of the information age", as the author so humbly (/s) puts it?
Even if I was an inventor that wanted to build one of these things for no personal benefit, until it was profitable (under some business model), it could not sustain without the goodwill of grant-givers or the greed of investors that knew their money would be returned to them under some sort of risk-adjusted time-based return calculation.
In other words - who can afford to do something like this for free? (Now - I am not a fan of Twitter, so if the answer was "no one", it wouldn't hurt my feelings, but I guess some people think that it is important somehow?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how is an activist shareholder different from an activist?
An activist shareholder owns part of the company and has additional ability to effect change through voting shares. An activist without any shares cannot attend the shareholder meetings, etc. for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With that attitude why even have CEOs? Company’s been built, it should just run itself. Let’s just have CEOs step down as part of the IPO process. Literally nothing could go wrong. I’m proud of how Apple was able to dig itself out in the 1990s all by itself through the will power of the board and executive team. I mean what with Steve’s many South American getaways. Jack spends half days at two companies and as such…
No, I didn't say they aren't involved at all, but they don't need to be involved with day to day operations once they have consistent flow of revenue coming in. They should be finding ways to unlock the next growth multiplier not sitting at a desk in SF worrying about operations.
Man, why does a simple blog need so much JavaScript? (Sorry, I know this is not the most productive of comments, but I am genuinely curious to know. Also, if not me, someone else is inevitably going to say it, I suspect).
Similar question is that why does it matter how much JavaScript there is?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I didn't say they aren't involved at all, but they don't need to be involved with day to day operations once they have consistent flow of revenue coming in. They should be finding ways to unlock the next growth multiplier not sitting at a desk in SF worrying about operations.
I mean sure, but running around Africa for 6 months yelling about Bitcoin hardly seems relevant to Twitter's operating model.