So "X" - nothing to see here. Elon's in control - Part XXX

skimpydoo

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519415674111672325?s=21&t=u1CXoITL3dfgYRRG_oGQdg

Has this happened?

skimpydoo

Musk is now stating that legacy verified accounts like mine will no longer retain their blue ticks unless they subscribe to Twitter Blue, which is not available in Ireland. The verified blue tick meant you are who you say you are. When I got verified I had to provide certain information that proved I was who I said I was. What's to stop some clown in the future subscribing to Twitter blue and claiming to be somebody else?

This is going to be a disaster.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206741#Comment_120206741

Just be glad you're not a business account. They're going to have to pay $1,000 per month to keep their gold checkmark.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206779#Comment_120206779

Very few are going to pay that.

skimpydoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206779#Comment_120206779

None of my work colleagues will be paying for Twitter Blue if it comes to Ireland.

skimpydoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206804#Comment_120206804

Can't see the benefit in paying.

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206779#Comment_120206779

I don't really see what's wrong with that.

Why should entities such as TV Networks, businesses, state departments etc etc use Twitter for free, when the whole reason they are on it in the first place is to promote themselves. Why should they get that for free. They can well afford it as well.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207035#Comment_120207035

Having the same fee for CNN and the New York Post as the Gorey Observer doesn’t make any sense.

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207045#Comment_120207045

What doesn't make any sense is providing a service and charging according to how 'wealthy' the customer is.

In that case then rich people should pay more for their electricity than the common man.

Anyway I'm sure there is some way around the issue you highlight, like for example, a restriction on the number of tweets allowed per day and how the algorithm promotes an account. Want a better service - pay for it.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206779#Comment_120206779

He is still only chasing shadows.if he gets 100k businesses to pay it Twitter will bring in 100 milion.

He failed to protect his revenue sources. He could now have the situation where businesses (especially media businesses) will stop putting content up again effecting his ability to bring in advertising revenue.

It's hard to know how bad it is because Twitter no longer has to publish accounts you will have to wait for company filings

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120206688#Comment_120206688

I don't know, but

Trust in Twitter has declined among Democrats after Musk took over, but gone up among Republicans. The two sides are now at the same level.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/twitter-users-down-democrats-elon-musk

(notably, trust has risen among independents also)

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207059#Comment_120207059

The problem is that taking it private will crystallise what the actual revenue vs overheads and operational costs are. If Twitter can't wash its own face, there isn't any source of income other than Musk topping it up or loans. Otherwise, it will have to go back on the market again and start selling shares.

He has a lot of money, but this is an incredibly expensive hobby and he's flushing it down the toilet.

I would still see Twitter ultimately having to face rather harsh realities. I'd predict it will probably be sold off for a fraction of what he paid for it probably sometime before Q3 this year.

He'll dress it up as 'bring investors on board' or something but in reality it'll have been sold and he'll have burnt billions.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207055#Comment_120207055

Problem with your analogy: everyone needs electricity, no matter the size or wealth of the customer. In some parts of the world it's literally life or death.

Do any entity need Twitter? Musk needs to make some bank however, but has a product that has already, historically shown itself tricky to monetise. And people are hostile to free things becoming paid; look at our own water marches from years back (to use the Utilities comparison)

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207055#Comment_120207055

An account with a few thousand followers and an account with millions of followers aren’t getting the same service.

He’s also deterring businesses from providing content for his network. There’s an argument that he should be paying them, not charging them.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207160#Comment_120207160

Exactly - He makes his money from the advertisers - who pay to get screen time from the users who come to twitter to read the content from these companies.

It's a circular thing - they all need each other but Musk hasn't exactly been extending many olive branches to the people that bring him customers for his advertising.

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207488#Comment_120207488

It's a circular thing - they all need each other but Musk hasn't exactly been extending many olive branches to the people that bring him customers for his advertising.

In the case of TV networks, say ITV which isn't a state broadcaster like BBC which doesn't have any commercial advertising, ITV are using Twitter to gain revenue off their own advertising themselves.

So it doesn't seem irrational to me that ITV pay Twitter a grand a month. In fact that seems cheap. Another way of doing it is charging per hit rate or Twitter demands a percentage of ITV's advertising revenue.

But you are right, it is a circular thing, but if Twitter is in the red I think they are warranted in charging significant bucks for the service they provide to entities that are in the business of advertising themselves and not only.

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120207155#Comment_120207155

the thing is if you asked me a year ago if I'd pay for twitter i might have said yes. If it got rid of adverts and had a feature or two that was handy it might have been an option.

Not a hope of me paying for it now. last night musk was amplifying fake russian news accounts. Why would i ever want to give that guy my money. And that's besides the fact that twitter blue just isn't worth it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210041#Comment_120210041

But in the case of ITV, if their stuff is driving engagement then it's good for twitter. The way it works on social media platform is that people generate content. Other people visit the site/app to view the content and the social media service makes money from showing adverts to its users.

Twitter has flipped this by trying to charge the content creators for simply using the site. They could have some sort of paid boost which increases engagement but they're not doing that, they're just charging a flat fee for access. Smaller content creators won't do that.

The thing is that if Musk is trying to make a quick buck to get twitter out of the red he'll lost the loyalty of creators and advertisers. He wants people to use the place more, not less.

Penn

Companies driving engagement on Twitter is absolutely key. Outside of advertising or promotion of tweets/accounts, the very fact they're on Twitter means people can tweet at them, ask questions, customer support, info etc. Those accounts can still do that with an unverified account. The only thing that happens with them not having a checkmark beside their name is that people may set up fake accounts, and people may get tricked by them and give personal info to what they thought was an official account. People aren't always going to check things like follower numbers, date account joined etc. Some people are possibly going to get scammed.

Whereas Musk wants companies to pay $12k a year (+$600 for each affiliated account)? Some companies will pay it because it's a drop in the bucket, but many won't because all of a sudden they have $12k+ added to their social media bill for the year.

It's extremely shortsighted, just like most of Musk's decisions, many of which he's had to walk back. I wonder if Executive Senior Advisor catturd2 will talk him out of it.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210197#Comment_120210197

It would be a nice accidental side-effect of Twitter going into that weird subscription funnel, if companies pivoted back to phone centres and Customer Support less driven by social media: it's a rare case where you actually have a phone number & genuine human being to talk to - and by god, sometimes you gotta hunt for it - so if Twitter suddenly became a less attractive proposition for companies, being less reliable or trustworthy? Great!

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210215#Comment_120210215

If anything, I've found I get more/quicker response from companies on social media than by trying to call them or use webchat, because social media is public and they want to be seen helping people as quickly and efficiently as possible to get positive public feedback. Though oftentimes, they just tell you to contact their call centre or whatever.

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210197#Comment_120210197

I wonder what the going rate was for the Talk-to forums on Boards, or the verified representative accounts

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210041#Comment_120210041

Hilariously not one of ITVs twitter accounts that I could find are verified anymore meaning they already arent bothered paying just the 8 dollars so what makes you think they would be willing to pay a grand?

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210255#Comment_120210255

According to reports , there are only about 180k accounts paying the $8/month charge so far in the US , which based on the current global spread of accounts would suggest only about 290/300k accounts worldwide.

That's about 0.2% of active users generating about $2.4M/month or ~$28M/year which is insignificant in the extreme.

Especially when set against his stated goal of 50% of the targeted $3B annual revenue coming from subscriptions.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210432#Comment_120210432

Realistically how long does he have to turn the ship around before his investors start coming for him?

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210467#Comment_120210467

That's the big question.

Musk claimed the other day that Twitter are "on track to break even" this year , but I'd take that with a grain of salt.

All of the available data suggests they are bleeding money at a rate of knots.

We don't know the terms of the deals he has with the various investors , but the crunch will come when the 1st investor looks to cash out which could be around the 1 year mark , so a bit to go yet.

They also might have performance targets baked in which if not achieved allows them to pull their funds out.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210563#Comment_120210563

I'd also add in that there are probably a lot of bills ready to come due in the next 12 months from legal payouts for staff who weren't let go in accordance with relevant local laws and rent payments missed on various offices, and probably more similar payouts from sheer mis-management of the company, regardless of how well or badly the company is performing.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210584#Comment_120210584

Indeed - There are potentially a few big ones there given that he fired all the execs "for cause" according to him, to avoid having to pay them their agreed severance packages.

Quite a few million tied up in those court cases if they go against Musk.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120211098#Comment_120211098

Some of the top exec's also had a golden parachute clause with regards to a take over which he is refusing to pay. These are estimated to be 120 million.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/29/twitter-executives-payouts-musk/

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210255#Comment_120210255

Because it's hugely convenient and Twitter has reach. I'd imagine the reason they use Twitter at all is because they want to be on it, not because they feel behoved to be on it. They have to employ people but not many surely to upload the content.

There is no other Twitter, if anything it's Mastodon that is going to disappear some day.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120213616#Comment_120213616

Companies can still operate on Twitter without the gold mark. Many will opt for that. He would need 100k to take it up to reach 1.2 billion in revenue. That a bill of 12 k dollars to a company. Dose a major oil company it maybe they will fork it out but smaller one may not.

The Nasdaq and NYSE has 6k traded companies would they all register. For to hit 100K you would need 30k+ to register. Will government departments pay out that sum.

I say many will stay unregistered and work away

AllForIt

Companies can still operate on Twitter without the gold mark.

They can at the moment sure, but that may not last.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120213759#Comment_120213759

But then that reduces content which leads to less users.

We already see it with the blue tick a couple of 100k are paying for it which is bringing in about 25 million. Will 10 k companies feel the need to pay this charge 120 million. In revenue.

He needs media outlets as much as they need him how dose he remove access to certain outlets.

It's just a brain fart not properly taught out.

He has already dropped advertising revenue by 2 billion and it is not rushing back. Best case scenario is he gets half that back. Revenue generation by charging users will not replace what he has lost.

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120213788#Comment_120213788

But then that reduces content which leads to less users.

Hmm I dunno, I personally use Twitter primarily to read peoples points of view, like here. Wouldn't bother me if GMB posts didn't pop up on my feed. But yes they are there and I do click on them from time to time if there's an interest, like Piers Morgan storming off set :)

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120213886#Comment_120213886

Viral moments like that will still make it to Twitter without ITV having accounts.

Look it's impossible to say if they would pay or not as we don't know their conversion metrics to say if it's worth it or not however my point I think stands somewhat that they don't currently pay just 8 dollars so can't see them willingingly agreeing to pay 1000.

Also they don't even use it as a customer support tool like many other companies, those who do are the ones who have the highest potential for being willing to pay any money but again it will all depend on a cost benefit analysis they perform but it honestly may just not be worth it for many.

I used to work in customer support doing social media specifically, thankfully I don't any longer but am now in a higher position where in can confidently say many companies would see it as a relief to be given a reason to dump Twitter as a support platform.

AndrewJRenko

If only he had kept some experienced people on staff who would have known this all along?

What a super genius idea, to restrict people from posting content that is the lifeblood of the service?

pixelburp

It's really weird to watch an Engineering approach more similar to that of a start-up than a giant corporation. Even in start-ups it's not sustainable to just keep pivoting but hey ho, at least everyone left has the right hair colour, or something?

I'd wonder how many people's LinkedIn inboxes were pinged by Twitter HR, diplomatically asking if they might consider returning to the fold (translation: please please come back, we didn't realise you were the only one who knew how that Black Box worked)

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120218289#Comment_120218289

He is snatching at straws at this stage.

Is that a sort of micro/ mid sized business offer for 100/ month with a free trial period with 1500 tweets per month or 50/ day more or less

VinLieger

The massive levels of incompetence are just amazing

https://twitter.com/revhowardarson/status/1623449352504066050

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120218933#Comment_120218933

I will say: I'd wonder about their engineering department WRT architectural documentation, or sensible fallbacks and escalation policies. Had they any? Though I've worked in corporations where many aspects of the overall technology was "siloed" as they call it - everybody working on their own core features without realising how interconnected they were - not 'til someone changed something innocuous and broke have the company. It's not unique to Twitter, though is rarely this public, or caused by self-sabotage.

Plus, if you have a helicopter boss dictating risky engineering decisions - presumably bypassing your CTO - coupled with a noted brain drain of senior figures who could say "if we do X, Y will happen", then all the documentation and fallbacks in the world won't help.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120218952#Comment_120218952

Ohh im not calling the employees incompetant this is solely Elons doing by being as you say a helicopter boss who fired all the oldest most experienced people with legacy knowledge from the vital teams and then has pranced around demand things happen with little to know knowledge personally of how it all works. This was bound to happen and honestly its shocking it didnt sooner. Im still waiting for the lack of a real SRE team to be THE problem because thats not going to be fixable with a simple code push or policy change.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120218952#Comment_120218952

Does twitter still have a CTO?

AndrewJRenko

He truly is disappearing up his own ass in a temper tantrum.

https://www.platformer.news/p/elon-musk-fires-a-top-twitter-engineer

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120222279#Comment_120222279

“You’re fired, you’re fired,” Musk told the engineer. (Platformer is withholding the engineer’s name in light of the harassment Musk has directed at former Twitter employees.)

You'll forgive me for being a bit sceptical about the veracity of this one.

Twitter was never a social media site that gained enormous traction outside the sort of people who enjoy getting angry and arguing on the internet. It added nothing to public discourse. It actively took away from it, and salted the type of nasty populist opinions that actively hurt a democracy.

Musk is yet another example of a moron from a privileged background who got so bored with his money that he decided to buy a website that was going to die anyway.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120222320#Comment_120222320

Fits perfectly with the petulant outraged image that he's portrayed himself over recent months.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120222320#Comment_120222320

i'm not sure where your scepticism comes from you. it is very on-brand from what we know of Musk.

pixelburp

It's also boilerplate stuff for any outlet wanting to protect the identities of people in the firing line. Many workplace tell-alls, or whistleblower stories in general, tend to come from sources who remain anonymous - for obvious reasons. And makes sense.

AndrewJRenko

How to win friends and influence people, by Elon Musk, Age 14

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/09/zelenskiy-aide-takes-aim-at-curbs-on-ukraine-use-of-starlink-to-pilot-drones-elon-musk

BoxcarWilliam99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120060585#Comment_120060585

It's only up 780% in the last 5 years

Up 82% year to date

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120225816#Comment_120225816

Also down 105% in the last 12 months, also at the time of the post you replied to it was at its lowest point in 3 years