Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter may soon go through

[Silvanus]

Reviving this thread to show just how great everything is going: having to obfuscate if somebody is using your subscription service because people hate it so much

Wait hang on, I thought they'd introduced another tier altogether for verified accounts. I even remember a press post about it.

Don't tell me they've walked that back. Which would make this the.... what, the fourth time they've changed how Twitter blue checks work, in about 5 months?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Wait hang on, I thought they'd introduced another tier altogether for verified accounts. I even remember a press post about it.

Don't tell me they've walked that back. Which would make this the.... what, the fourth time they've changed how Twitter blue checks work, in about 5 months?

Well, how else are you going to shield your weirdo followers from getting called out for paying for twitter?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Wait hang on, I thought they'd introduced another tier altogether for verified accounts. I even remember a press post about it.

Don't tell me they've walked that back. Which would make this the.... what, the fourth time they've changed how Twitter blue checks work, in about 5 months?

Well, government agencies get grey and gold is for businesses. He *said* that legacy Actually Verified people would lose their checkmarks but apparently hasn't convinced very many of them to give him $8 $11 $7 to prevent that form happening and he seems very reluctant to pull that trigger

Also, the plan to only let blue checks participate in polls

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Absolutely hilarious how he thought celebrities would jump at the chance to give him $7 a month. Like, I get it: they have a lot of money. But they also don't need twitter nearly as much as Twitter needs them

Meanwhile, Tumblr just added polls. They're pretty fun

I can't believe this meme is doing critical damage to twitter

 

[ralfy]

The company had $3 billion in losses, was valued at half of what it was worth, and advertisers were fleeing because their promoted tweets were being shown alongside child porn advocacy:

Focus: Here's what Twitter lost in advertising revenue in final months of 2022

Top advertisers on Twitter slashed their spending after Elon Musk's takeover, according to estimates compiled for Reuters by research firm Pathmatics, in the latest shock to the company's dominant revenue source.

www.reuters.com

That's why many previous owners were quick to unload the company, and at twice its actual worth.

To cover the losses, Musk had to sell off assets and fire employees, cutting down losses by over 90 pct. With probably 5 pct of the platform filled with 'bots (or probably even more), he had to come up with a subscription model. Other platforms are doing the same:

A new paid subscription service is coming to Facebook and Instagram

Meta Verified for Facebook and Instagram will require users to submit a government ID to get a blue verification badge.

www.euronews.com

The implication is that companies are reluctant to advertise in platforms containing things like advocacy of child porn, and at the same time are driven by ESG scores. The public wants a public square but at the same time room for "safe spaces," but are not keen on paying for them. The company that operates the platform obviously needs to cover costs while their investors want to maximize profits.

Given that, if you're a businessman, what would you do to deal with such matters?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I mean, other than not let my childish pride get a hold of me and make me buy an overpriced Twitter to begin with, mostly on credit with decent interest rates that have to be adsorbed by a company that's barely profitable?

I probably wouldn't unban a lot of toxic culture warriors/literal fascists as recommended by the like of conservative celebrity catturd2 while also personally banning left leaning accounts. That kinda behavior makes you anathema to controversy averse advertisers. Smaller websites can get away with it, and Twitter is swiftly turning into one of those, but it will cost Musk quite a bit of money

Elon Musk personally ordered the Twitter suspension of activist, report claims

Twitter CEO has overseen effort to punish his critics while cozying up to far-right accounts

www.independent.co.uk

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I mean, other than not let my childish pride get a hold of me and make me buy an overpriced Twitter to begin with, mostly on credit with decent interest rates that have to be adsorbed by a company that's barely profitable?

I probably wouldn't unban a lot of toxic culture warriors/literal fascists as recommended by the like of conservative celebrity catturd2 while also personally banning left leaning accounts. That kinda behavior makes you anathema to controversy averse advertisers. Smaller websites can get away with it, and Twitter is swiftly turning into one of those, but it will cost Musk quite a bit of money

Elon Musk personally ordered the Twitter suspension of activist, report claims

Twitter CEO has overseen effort to punish his critics while cozying up to far-right accounts

www.independent.co.uk

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Elon Musk's definition of "free speech" is that everyone gets to express his opinions.

 

[meiam]

While Musk clearly hasn't helped Twitter situation, it's important to mention that it was already losing money before Musk took over and there really wasn't any sign that they were going to get any large scale growth anytime soon. So Musk solution of firing a lot of people was probably the only viable path forward and if he didn't also try to impose his "free speech" approach it might have actually improved things for twitter. But the best move forward would have been to cut down on the human moderator and replace them by automatic moderation, which would have to be done in crude fashion, by just auto blocking any mention of specific word, which seems to go against what Musk... "believe" in.

 

[Silvanus]

While Musk clearly hasn't helped Twitter situation, it's important to mention that it was already losing money before Musk took over and there really wasn't any sign that they were going to get any large scale growth anytime soon. So Musk solution of firing a lot of people was probably the only viable path forward and if he didn't also try to impose his "free speech" approach it might have actually improved things for twitter. But the best move forward would have been to cut down on the human moderator and replace them by automatic moderation, which would have to be done in crude fashion, by just auto blocking any mention of specific word, which seems to go against what Musk... "believe" in.

Not sure that less sensitivity and oversight is what that pit of despair needs.

 

[meiam]

Not sure that less sensitivity and oversight is what that pit of despair needs.

Without massive growth, what it need is less expense. Tech company are asset light so they can't really shed that and most of their expense comes from employee. I'm assuming the moderation side is a big chunk of the total workforce so that's where a lot of the cut would have to come from.

Although I suppose they could have tried pushing more adds to the user.

 

[Silvanus]

Without massive growth, what it need is less expense. Tech company are asset light so they can't really shed that and most of their expense comes from employee. I'm assuming the moderation side is a big chunk of the total workforce so that's where a lot of the cut would have to come from.

Although I suppose they could have tried pushing more adds to the user.

And yet, the lower quality of moderation and technical stability-- both directly stemming from layoffs-- were both reasons for the loss of revenue.

 

[Trunkage]

Without massive growth, what it need is less expense. Tech company are asset light so they can't really shed that and most of their expense comes from employee. I'm assuming the moderation side is a big chunk of the total workforce so that's where a lot of the cut would have to come from.

Although I suppose they could have tried pushing more adds to the user.

This is like the government. There are some services and employees you can cut and it's fine. Other you can cut and your economy will implode. Musk has less the 25% of the employees when he took over. Much of what he is cutting is just cutting income. Dramatically

 

[meiam]

This is like the government. There are some services and employees you can cut and it's fine. Other you can cut and your economy will implode. Musk has less the 25% of the employees when he took over. Much of what he is cutting is just cutting income. Dramatically

Possibly, but then then it might just mean that twitter is fundamentally a failed business that'll never make money no matter what, and in that case the best thing that could happen would be for it to fail quickly and in a way that'll only wipe out money for ultra rich who can afford to lose it.

 

[Ag3ma]

Possibly, but then then it might just mean that twitter is fundamentally a failed business that'll never make money no matter what, and in that case the best thing that could happen would be for it to fail quickly and in a way that'll only wipe out money for ultra rich who can afford to lose it.

In a sense it's likely right that everyone wants a public square but doesn't want to pay for it. But if stops being a public sqare, are people going to use it? As more and more becomes subscription, the less there is binding everyone into the same shared experience, and the risk is that the userbase drops off and goes elsewhere, and the ad revenue declines, and that just accelerates failure.

Twitter was losing money already. But in 2021 it lost only ~$221 million. Not good, but not that serious either for a company worth well over 100 times that, which investors seemed content with and was supreme in its particular niche. It seems very plausible that Twitter could have been brought into profitability with some modest measures. Let's bear in mind YouTube was making an annual loss for its parent Alphabet about 5 years ago. Now it makes a very, very healthy profit.

Thus Musk's claim that Twitter was a mess and he's had to save it is almost certainly self-aggrandising bullshit. Twitter might not have been fantastically run, but it was apparently stable, reasonably healthy and surely had growth opportunities before Musk started swinging a wrecking ball at it.

 

[Baffle]

Thus Musk's claim that Twitter was a mess and he's had to save it is almost certainly self-aggrandising bullshit. Twitter might not have been fantastically run, but it was apparently stable, reasonably healthy and surely had growth opportunities before Musk started swinging a wrecking ball at it.

It is 100% Father Ted knocking out a ding in a car.

 

[meiam]

In a sense it's likely right that everyone wants a public square but doesn't want to pay for it. But if stops being a public sqare, are people going to use it? As more and more becomes subscription, the less there is binding everyone into the same shared experience, and the risk is that the userbase drops off and goes elsewhere, and the ad revenue declines, and that just accelerates failure.

Twitter was losing money already. But in 2021 it lost only ~$221 million. Not good, but not that serious either for a company worth well over 100 times that, which investors seemed content with and was supreme in its particular niche. It seems very plausible that Twitter could have been brought into profitability with some modest measures. Let's bear in mind YouTube was making an annual loss for its parent Alphabet about 5 years ago. Now it makes a very, very healthy profit.

Thus Musk's claim that Twitter was a mess and he's had to save it is almost certainly self-aggrandising bullshit. Twitter might not have been fantastically run, but it was apparently stable, reasonably healthy and surely had growth opportunities before Musk started swinging a wrecking ball at it.

Youtube was making a loss, but it was growing quite healthily during that time (and is still growing very nicely today). Not twitter, its been stagnating for awhile now iirc, and its business model clash with tiktok (short burst of content consumed in small bits) and the newer stuff. Twitter was also seeing a lot of churn at the top from people coming in, trying to make it profitable, and not being able to. I suppose its possible it could have been made profitable, but it was outside the realm of modest measure and serious change were needed. Musk tried to do some and I think it would have functioned if he didn't try to push for "free speech" at the same time, leading to most big advertiser to decamp. While advertiser dislike being next to abhorrent content, in almost every case those are up for a very short time, seen by almost no one and user quickly banned even by simple automatic mod. So they're not really an issue, unless a big giant spotlight is flashed on them (ironically this usually give the content far more visibility than it would ever get by itself), forcing advertiser to react to this. If Musk had come in quietly, cut most of the staff and replace most moderation by auto mod, with less manual oversight and chance for questionable user to come back, nobody would have really noticed it but Twitter might have been able to start turning a profit.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I hate it when sacking everyone who knows how to use the extinguisher doesn't put my binfire out.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

replace most moderation by auto mod

Yes, the answer is always more pearl-clutching algorithms.

Automodding is what got me permabanned from Twitter and I have mixed feelings on that.

 

[Majestic_Manatee]

If Musk had come in quietly, cut most of the staff and replace most moderation by auto mod, with less manual oversight and chance for questionable user to come back, nobody would have really noticed it but Twitter might have been able to start turning a profit.

There is no universe where nobody would have noticed any of that.

 

[Thaluikhain]

There is no universe where nobody would have noticed any of that.

Yeah, thought I think he could have avoided a hilarious disaster and just ended up with a cautionary tale of bad decisions.