91–100 of 146 posts
I never understood Twitter management. Just accepting small and medium sized companies to consume their firehose and charge for that will be enough to significantly increase their earnings. This was the Google AdWords breakthrough.
You can do that through gnip.com, which they own. It isn't close to their advertising revenue.
I never understood Twitter management. Just accepting small and medium sized companies to consume their firehose and charge for that will be enough to significantly increase their earnings. This was the Google AdWords breakthrough.
I really find it hard to believe that firehose revenue would be anywhere close to ad revenue.
BTW: Lot of downvotes instead of replies.
Meh, I don't get it. They're making money, they grew to 18% more active users (that sounds like a lot), what seems to be the problem?
The way stock prices work is that the price of a company's stock (or more relevantly, the price*num_shares) incorporates their current earnings as well as their potential future profits (which is driven by the company's forecasted growth). Updates on how the company is actually performing (e.g. earnings releases) are a chance to get concrete information that allows everyone to update their expectations of future grow…
isn't it possible that some number can be purposefully influenced so that the stock will go up upon announcement?
Biggest disadvantages for Twitter:
1) People are flocking to other social messaging apps, especially the mobile variants (Snapchat, Instagram, etc). I suspect because its coolness factor is waring off, because of rampant trolling, and poor discovery.
2) Most of Twitter advertising is useless, in large part due to poor data collection. I have yet to see any performance campaigns really kill it on the platform. Brands only advertise because they are easily misled by agencies.
Can anyone offer realistic suggestions to help improve the company's outlook? Here are some random thoughts:
1) Trying to take a piece of the mobile ecosystem seems like a smart move, as they show genuine expertise. I liked their acquisition of MoPub and every developer seems to use Crashlytics. People seem to use Periscope and Vine often, as well. This could lead to a lucrative formula: Making apps easier to build with their tools, nudge developers to monetize through MoPub, and then take the plethora of learnings from the latest mobile craze and build an awesome new app.
2) They need to better monetize news, not just social interaction. How much content is written today because "Person said X offensive statement on twitter"? Twitter gets $0, despite the fact most news comes from them. Maybe try to attempt to be the Bloomberg Terminal for all news going forward? How about trying to beat Nielsen (16bn market cap) in actually monitoring sentiment? This obviously would take some ingenuity, but could be very rewarding. They seem to be trying this strategy, with some of their recent acquisitions.
3) Find out what other countries want. There is still a huge untapped marked in the 3rd world. Twitter could expand there by offering new services.
4) Somehow disincentivize blowhards from going on Twitter too often.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but from my understanding - you get to buy and sell stocks. So when twitter says that instead of earning say 300 million, they a bit less like 280, why is this a big problem? Did they expect the stock to be valued higher and because it has not lived up to that, they're selling it and buying a different stock that will do that?
It's both what they just did and what they are trending towards in the future. twitter is currently valued at say $35 billion then long term to justify that valuation per what the stock market demands long term they need to consistently generate around 2 billion a year in profit. If they do really well and have say a 25% margin they'd need $8 billion a year in revenue to operate at that level. Current revenue project…
Ya'll need to chill out and look at a price chart of TWTR over time. This is very common run-of-the-mill volatility. Source: http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=TWTR&p=W&b=5&g=0&id=p870792...
Another way to look at it is that Twitter's first trade on the NYSE in November 2013 was at $45.10, and today, almost a year and a half later, it closed at around $42. That is not a whole lot of return for what is supposed to be a growth stock. It's also not a particularly great story to tell prospective employees if you're trying to attract them with stock-based compensation.
Random question: How do I stop videos from auto starting on Bloomberg? I'm running Safari with no Flash, and have Ad-block on. Video doesn't start, but audio does. Super Annoying.
https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/QZ1vdpwB...
These will catch most of them:
0.0.0.0 www.autofixinfo.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 c.brightcove.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 player.theplatform.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 link.theplatform.com # Autoplay video
0.0.0.0 ci-2862d2c8d6-68f418d2.http.atlas.cdn.yimg.com # Autoplay video
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be great if paywall stories weren't allowed.
But, but, but... ads and adblockers and how eveil ads are and let's block them! Let's pay for content and all that jazz.
https://cabalamat.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/a-broadband-tax-f...
Advertising is a net negative on far too many fronts.
I can understand why investment type people like y-axes that don't start at zero - they're usually interested in tiny changes a long way from zero. But for the general public to watch? If you didn't already have an up to date feeling for the price of Twitter shares, then this whole report is meaningless without finding the -$9 and doing the calculation yourself. She even points out that it's now $40 but not what it w…
A 20% move is huge for any stock (most don't move that much in a year!), and it's certainly far outside the norm for TWTR[1].
[1] http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=TWTR&p=D&b=5&g=0&id=p298069...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another way to look at it is that Twitter's first trade on the NYSE in November 2013 was at $45.10, and today, almost a year and a half later, it closed at around $42. That is not a whole lot of return for what is supposed to be a growth stock. It's also not a particularly great story to tell prospective employees if you're trying to attract them with stock-based compensation.
Public companies give RSUs to employees. Which don't need a grown story.