Live data from Hacker News

Threads users down by more than a half

bbc.com

271–280 of 566 posts

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#271
post #228

It’s super funny to see people framing that as Threads failing. They totally may fail. But even after that initial drop (which is expected, for something that managed to get so much hype) they’re likely still the biggest app in the history in terms of DAU in few weeks after the launch. And if there’s one thing Meta knows how to do is to copy successful idea and slowly grind the growth till it dominates market.

There seems to be a desire to watch Meta fail, and that's reflected in the media coverage around Threads. This is broadly true of many large tech companies, but particularly Meta/Facebook.

Well yeah. The honeymoon is over and we've seen how morally bankrupt these companies are. Twitter has someone who posted child abuse images (as a warning or something) but doesn't ban them because they create engagement. Meta bought a VPN company and paid people (I think in some cases kids/teens) to use it so they can slurp up their entire internet browsing. Amazon has people pissing into water bottles so the founder can ride a giant dick into space.

These are awful companies (not all awful employees) with awful leadership.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#273

In other news, man-child wars between tech bros end with both failing to find product fit and alienating all their customers. Facebooks growth was because it was where your friends were posting. Twitter growth was because of where influential people posted that you were interested in their (brief) thoughts. X was a failed payments platform that eventually became PayPal and sold to eBay (due to eBay being their only t…

You're trying to bring in money, though, not people.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you just be specific about why the first example brought up doesn't apply, instead of letting the other person put themselves out there to advance the discussion and finding little details to accuse them of bad faith? The idea that forgetting that Google failed horribly with Google Video before buying YouTube is a "smell" of bad faith is weird.

I did regarding the timelines, then they pivoted to including HN threads in the comparison when my original statement was about articles. I don't know what you're talking about regarding Google Video, I did not mention it.

To lift the kimono:

It's often easier to search within a specific timeframe on Hacker News itself given Algolia search's excellent date-range functions, and the fact that HN itself is strongly time-oriented. There are doubtless other stories elsewhere, but it would be more tedious to track those down and verify that they actually came from the period under consideration.

It's also possible to search via comments, with one useful set of terms being "Google+" and "ghost town", an assessment which was being thrown about early on.

And we can link directly to the HN threads and see what contemporaneous discussions were like and how they characterised the issue at the time.

By contrast, date-ranged General Web Search on, say, DuckDuckGo or Google is often confounded by Web pages which have inaccurate date indicia, or have been misclassified as to time by search engines. It's much more tedious to try to find specific content matching time criteria, though the universe of total such articles is obviously larger. Fortunately for this case, Google+ was of sufficient interest to HN that there were numerous submissions concerning it submitted early on, many of course highly syncophantic, but also concerning the rather fumbling rollout and weak adoption.

Amongst other possible archives, Google+ itself is no longer extant, and so cannot be searched. Its own search features did not afford date-ranged search, though I'm well aware that there was much early hand-wringing over the "brutally unfair" stories (in the framing of G+ advocates) circulating at the time.

Reddit might be another useful trove, though I'm avoiding that for the time being. Search there is limited to only the initial story title and, in a limited number of cases, the "self-text" content of text-based posts. Pointedly, comments aren't searchable on Reddit itself, and so the potential match space is far more constrained than it is on Hacker News.

Despite those limitations, in answering your own historically uninformed vague hand wave that the response to Facebook's Threads launch is exceptional, I'd given numerous specific and quantified examples from a roughly comparable time period for Google's G+ launch strongly suggesting otherwise.

Yes, the data I brought to bear are subject to a strong availability heuristic. But the evidence presented is rather stronger than your own none-at-all offerings.

Cheers.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#275

This is being reported in a strange way. We don't typically write about startups gaining initial signups and then compare them to the active users as if they lost something by not getting 100% of them to engage. Do we even have numbers for what percent of twitter users actively engage versus total user base? I don't think they are doing very bad considering it's mobile only right now.

We don't expect the number of active users to ever fall in an startup. You are correct in that this was unavoidable because the original number was artificially inflated in a non-sustainable way. But well, that would be a huge red flag for a startup too. It is less so for a giant company like Meta, as they can eat the loss from forcing the market, but it is still ridiculous, even for a company as large as Meta.

That's not accurate.

There's often an early "tyre kicker" phase, with people signing up to explore a service. Or to ensure that others don't misappropriate well-known account handles.

User attrition / retention rates for sites, services, and apps are well-studied and closely watched.

E.g., "Retention rate on day 30 of mobile app installs worldwide in 3rd quarter 2022, by category"

https://www.statista.com/statistics/259329/ios-and-android-a...>

General social media growth (or plateau) trends as of 2021 / Pew:

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media...>

The highest retention rate listed is 11.3%, for the news category.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#276

It’s super funny to see people framing that as Threads failing. They totally may fail. But even after that initial drop (which is expected, for something that managed to get so much hype) they’re likely still the biggest app in the history in terms of DAU in few weeks after the launch. And if there’s one thing Meta knows how to do is to copy successful idea and slowly grind the growth till it dominates market.

Absolutely this is failure. Twitter/threads is (or should be) a highly viral application. New users should find themselves compelled to use the product and compelled to encourage others to use it. With a 100 million user head start, if they were succeeding this shoukd have immediately resulted in the viral loop being triggered into explosive growth. It’s a huge failure. Not necessarily unrecoverable, but absolutely a…

Building products and slowly grinding away at improving DAU is Meta's bread and butter. This has been the case with IG Stories vs Snap, now IG Reels vs Tiktok (IG Reels rev set to exceed tiktok as early as 2024 https://www.mbi-deepdives.com/meta2q23/). Meta is setting up the exact same playbook for Threads, and given their track record, I wouldn't bet against them.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#277
post #32

Threads will be alright in the end. They launched it at a very opportune time when Twitter was having massive technical issues. That was enough to get millions of people to kick the tires and more importantly, create awareness. The next time Twitter goes down, and it will any day now, people will again flock to Threads and notice that it got a little better. Twitter will get fixed again, and a lower percentage of Thr…

That's exactly how Telegram growth. WhatsApp always had outages and some problems. With every problem, people used Telegram - and Telegram was better.

That's how Telegram have 700 million active users.

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#278
post #228

It’s super funny to see people framing that as Threads failing. They totally may fail. But even after that initial drop (which is expected, for something that managed to get so much hype) they’re likely still the biggest app in the history in terms of DAU in few weeks after the launch. And if there’s one thing Meta knows how to do is to copy successful idea and slowly grind the growth till it dominates market.

There seems to be a desire to watch Meta fail, and that's reflected in the media coverage around Threads. This is broadly true of many large tech companies, but particularly Meta/Facebook.

[dead]

Re: Threads users down by more than a half

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did regarding the timelines, then they pivoted to including HN threads in the comparison when my original statement was about articles. I don't know what you're talking about regarding Google Video, I did not mention it.

To lift the kimono: It's often easier to search within a specific timeframe on Hacker News itself given Algolia search's excellent date-range functions, and the fact that HN itself is strongly time-oriented. There are doubtless other stories elsewhere, but it would be more tedious to track those down and verify that they actually came from the period under consideration. It's also possible to search via comments, wit…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN