Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Twitter Businesses

Maybe It's Time For Jack Dorsey To Pick a Company (theoutline.com) 37

To Jack Dorsey, running two high-profile companies -- Twitter and Square -- at the same time doesn't seem like a problem. In an earlier interview with The New York Times, he said, "I can split my time and be present at both companies every single day." But despite how confidently Dorsey seems about his leadership roles at both the companies, investors and journalists keep asking him this question. And there's a reason why, both the companies are unprofitable (for now, at least), and pretty much every social media app that emerges on the face of the Earth is able to gain more users and figure out a better business plan than the decade-old Twitter. In a column on The Outline, Adrianne Jeffries writes: This question popped up again this week on Twitter's earnings call. Twitter missed its fourth quarter revenue targets. The stock is down and advertising revenue is down. User growth plateaued a year ago. Bloomberg estimated that Twitter has about 140 million daily active users, which was recently surpassed by the much-younger Snapchat. [...] Unlike Twitter, Square has real competitors, including PayPal, Intuit, and Stripe. "Twitter's got a niche where it owns that niche," said Jay Ritter, a professor at the Department of Finance at the University of Florida who specializes in IPOs. "Square, on the other hand, has competition. It is not something where it owns a niche. There are other ways to have easy electronic payments. And consequently, investors are more concerned about, is Square going to be able to get sufficient size that it then becomes profitable? Or is a competitor going to wind up dominating the market?" That's one reason why investors, and probably Dorsey himself, are still seduced by Twitter. While Twitter has seen user growth stall -- a very bad sign for a social network -- it's still able to capture a lot of mindshare, and some investors believe that that means there is still a windfall to be made. Facebook, after all, saw its stock cut in half after its IPO only to rebound and march steadily upward. At this point, it's clear that Facebook has a solid business and terrifying staying power. That's what Twitter investors want: to dominate a market, trap advertisers, and conquer the world. The possibility that maybe Twitter has no competitors because there is no money to be made in microblogging is sidelined. As Ritter said, "Just because it's a winner-take-all market doesn't mean it's a profitable winner-take-all market."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Maybe It's Time For Jack Dorsey To Pick a Company

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It's Twitter has jumped the shark, big time.
    People are fed up with their confusing selective enforcement of banning people and tweaking the feeds.
    The only people left are spammers, Trump and haters. And by haters I mean haters of everything, doesn't matter what.

    Reminds me of that sinking feeling on Digg a while ago, and the current sinking feeling on Reddit and Facebook.
    Slashdot is still somewhat relevant as long as they aren't political and stick to tech, it's great.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    There is no coming back from their stance on free speech. Even if they changed today, a lot of users would remain skeptical. I rarely use twitter anymore unless it's to complain to companies that still think Twitter is the next big thing...

    • I'm not sure that the free speech thing is that much of a big deal.

      The really big deal is that Twitter loses money and has no real plan to ever make any. What the current shareholders need is an idiot to buy them out for too much money.

      This guy would do nicely. [telegraph.co.uk]

  • I know a lot of people like to turn in Russian bots to Twitter for fun, so it's difficult to extrapolate user growth from abuser shrinkage.

    And they have very tiny bot hands, so you know it shrinks bigly.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Thursday February 09, 2017 @04:55PM (#53834849)

    When you're talking about a guy running two different companies, it might make some sense to specifically mention both of them by name in the first sentence or two.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      When you're talking about a guy running two different companies, it might make some sense to specifically mention both of them by name in the first sentence or two.

      First sentence of the summary:

      To Jack Dorsey, running two high-profile companies -- Twitter and Square -- at the same time doesn't seem like a problem.

      • First sentence of the summary:

        To Jack Dorsey, running two high-profile companies -- Twitter and Square -- at the same time doesn't seem like a problem.

        Yeah, that was not the first sentence at the time I posted my comment.

      • When you're talking about a guy running two different companies, it might make some sense to specifically mention both of them by name in the first sentence or two.

        First sentence of the summary:

        To Jack Dorsey, running two high-profile companies -- Twitter and Square -- at the same time doesn't seem like a problem.

        At the time of the post, the summary was different. I read it through twice trying to decipher the situation. It has been edited without a note.

  • Twitter has reached peak tweet.

  • He should concentrate his critical mass on totally fucking one of them up, and only then switch to absolutely wrecking the daylights the other.

  • by bayankaran ( 446245 ) on Thursday February 09, 2017 @06:23PM (#53835381) Homepage

    The stock is down and advertising revenue is down.

    Last year I spent some money on advertisement on online platforms. 80% of spent went to Facebook, 15% to Google properties, and whatever remaining to Twitter.

    The ad platform of Facebook is *the* most sophisticated - the sort of filtering and targeting you can do is detailed, you can build an audience. Twitter is the worst, even the interface is from 1999.

    Facebook is not making significant missteps. And Twitter is not taking any steps...forget about missteps. Whoever who's running Twitter should rework their ad platform, then it may or may not make profits.

    But the core issue of Twitter...why push for profits? If the inventors were not greedy they could have used the model of Craigslist, remain as a useful public service. There will be enough money for your needs, not your wants.

    • its not about ads its about amount of users. if you have a zillion users you make a zillion more moneys.

      more people like to use facebook than twitter. does it mean facebook is better? hell no.
      facebook has near 2 billion users.

      if you spam twitter with ads like facebook does, twitter will just, actually, die. the main reason people still use twitter is that it, in fact, does not sucks too much, does not spam too much, and so on. the main reason people are on facebook is that it made it easy to share pics and

  • Something makes me feel like all these anti Twitter news things are hit pieces. How many times do you hear about other companies almost on a weekly basis that are doing poorly? This has been covered in all angles. They have 140 million users and are a name brand pretty much. What are you trying to accomplish by constantly reporting that they are dying? I don't care either way but its just funny how often this is reported on.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Something makes me feel like all these anti Twitter news things are hit pieces. How many times do you hear about other companies almost on a weekly basis that are doing poorly? This has been covered in all angles. They have 140 million users and are a name brand pretty much. What are you trying to accomplish by constantly reporting that they are dying? I don't care either way but its just funny how often this is reported on.

      Apple is almost always in the news. And it's been bad so far - iPhone 7 sales, Mac s

  • Twitter is out of control and it's obvious that there is no leadership at the helm. They're banning accounts left and right, and typically without any serious reason. Or when they do it's over something mildly offensive. Meanwhile Twitter leadership acts like 12k calls to assassinate the President [breitbart.com] don't constitute unimpeachable grounds to bring down the banhammer.

    So remember kids, you can't say "I hate n----s" on Twitter if your account comes off as white. That's a violation of their community standards, bu

    • committing a federal felony in what you write, that's Twitter's idea of protected speech.

      [[Citation Needed]] Exactly what Federal laws have been violated and ignored by Twitter?
       
      And by citation - I mean from a reputable source (which Breitbart isn't).

  • to stop telling other people what to do.
  • Does he need to turn the knobs of the company every day?

  • Don't half-ass two things. Whole-ass one thing.

Save the whales. Collect the whole set.

Working...