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

Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

endpts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 222 posts

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#71

Post by lawn »

scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

> It kind of reminds me how a while back somebody posted proposed redesign of stackoverflow to make it more nice from UX perspective. However this person wasn't a user of stackoverflow and didn't understand how much value which features provide and suggested changes that would make very valuable features removed or made less easily accessible while bringing to the front features that are not very useful.

To be completely fair, this is my feeling about the web Twitter and especially Reddit UI.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#72

Post by ryandvm »

tablespoon wrote: post #21
scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

> I think it just helps to be a user of the product and have a deep understanding for it before you make any changes. Elon used twitter a lot, but in pretty unusual fashion (because he's world famous billionaire) so he really didn't understand what's most valuable part and took it for granted. And it also doesn't take a genius to make changes a little slower and more conservatively. For instance, in this case they sh…

The biggest difference between Twitter and every one of Musk's successful companies is that his typical ventures absolutely depend on US federal largesse to survive. Unless Twitter can start selling carbon credits or secure some bloated federal contracts, there is no chance in hell that Twitter is going to be in the black any time soon.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#73

Post by SoftTalker »

mirzap wrote: post #9
dragontamer wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patients seem to trust that Eli Lilly's drugs work. The price point may not be trusted, but its efficacy is trusted.

Patients don't have real choice. Options are either you die or spend hundreds* of dollars on a drug that everywhere else on the planet costs few bucks.

The patients also aren't actually paying for it, so mostly don't care. Insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare is paying.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#74

Post by fknorangesite »

legitster wrote: post #14

Is the fake accounts thing overblown? Like, if I create a fake verified Eli Lilly account on Twitter with no followers, how would anyone even see it? It seems like it would only get picked up and shared by people in on the joke.

> It seems like it would only get picked up and shared by people in on the joke.

If I have a significant following on my main/normal account, then I can create the fake one and then retweet it on main, thus showing it to all my regular followers. From there it just needs a little normal organic traction - and yes, that includes many people who immediately understand the joke and are RT'ing it because it's fake.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#75

Post by jjcon »

falcolas wrote: post #8

Aah, yes, the company who lost billions in "value". And yet their stock is already back up 60% of the amount it dropped in a mere 3 days. I have to imagine they're doing this for the continued exposure. There's no such thing as bad press and all that.

> https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

They also lose a lawsuit on the day of that tweet (and the drop was pretty typical for that day on the market) so I'm not really convinced their stock was altered much by a fake tweet.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#76

Post by MBCook »

danudey wrote: post #39
scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

> Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. 1. Create a new Apple account 2. Buy a $10 iTunes gift card 3. Use that to pay for Twitter Blue Would I pay $10 and twenty minutes of my time to knock $20bn off of an insulin profiteer's stock price? Absolutely. Put me down for a recurring subscrip…

Apple doesn’t give away subscriber details to the service. So you don’t even need the gift card.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#77

Post by antisthenes »

jjulius wrote: post #32
legitster wrote: post #14

Is the fake accounts thing overblown? Like, if I create a fake verified Eli Lilly account on Twitter with no followers, how would anyone even see it? It seems like it would only get picked up and shared by people in on the joke.

>Is the fake accounts thing overblown? From the article: >By Friday morning, Lilly stock had dropped by more than 5% from the day before. The Twitter stunt pulled down the stock price of other diabetes drugmakers, including Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Lilly’s stock has yet to recover and, on Monday morning, remained down more than 4% over the past five days. I'm not normally one to defend drug makers, but when you're ta…

Drugmakers pulling advertising and doing less advertising in general is a good thing anyway.

So the negatives are definitely overblown.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#80

Post by mgraczyk »

Seems pretty unlikely that this fake tweet affected the company's stock. It's odd this reporting has survived.

Other similar companies that are not in the Insulin business in any way moved down by about the same amount at the same time. Eli Lilly's stock has mostly gone back up. Also the timing is off, the stock moved after open the following day, after other news was announced and not in line with the timing of the tweet's creation or growth in impressions.

Post reply on HN