SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Twitter is reportedly in conversation with a number of tech companies for a potential sale. According to CNBC, the social company is in talks with the likes of Google and cloud computing company...
The suiters [sic] courting Twitter are said to be interested in the data the company generates from its 313 million active users. However, sources say that, while conversations are ongoing and picking up steam, there's no assurance that a deal will be inked. As a result, Twitter's stocks have soared as high as 23 percent based on the news. Meanwhile, TechCrunch reports that the company has just lost two key staffers, including head of TV Andrew Adashek.
Source: http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13028616/twitter-sale-talks-google-salesforce
(Score: 4, Insightful) by edIII on Saturday September 24 2016, @01:46AM
The funny thing is, that Twitter is doing just fine for a company. There are no real alternatives for what Twitter is, people and businesses have embraced it for PR purposes, but it no longer has "growth".
That's the actual problem in the avaricious shortsighted c-suite world; A company without strong growth is weak, and stable is a weakness.
Unless a company is constantly growing, and c-suite salaries constantly being raised, it is seen to be failing. I abhor Twitter and Facebook, but I would find it hard to say that Twitter is a failing company when its use in the media is quite ubiquitous. Many articles I read directly reference Tweets as if a Tweet itself can serve as a quote from somebody.
You're correct nonetheless, not because of Twitter's state, but because these are signals that the c-suites in Twitter are hungry and greedy, and some pigs need to get fed. Usually, that does not bode well for the company because that's the point in which it starts to fail because c-suites are no longer convinced the unsustainable gravy train will continue and deliberately killing a corporation can be quite profitable.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday September 24 2016, @01:54AM
Actually, no, they're currently being sued for refactoring how they counted users and not disclosing it so they wouldn't have to show a loss to shareholders.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday September 24 2016, @05:17AM
I hadn't heard that :)
Thanks for telling me.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Saturday September 24 2016, @03:17PM
I don't have the impression that Twitter is "doing fine". They have a lot of users, but they haven't figured out how to make money. Despite attempts to diguise their finances, it seems pretty clear that they are losing money hand-over-fist.
Add to that the overuse of the ban-hammer. You don't have to follow someone you don't like, so why do they care if Instapundit or Milo post comments that offend some people? As a result, lots of people on the conservative and alt-right side of things are moving to other services, such as Gab [gab.ai].
In case anyone missed it, Instapundit was banned for the tweet "run them over" in response to rioters blocking the highway. He was blunt, and entirely right: if your vehicle is surrounded by rioters, you do not stop, or the rioters will break your windows and drag you out of the vehicle [infowars.com].
Twitter banning an account for telling an unpalatable truth? The platform has lost its credibility. It's losing money. The shareholders probably want someone, anyone to bail them out before Twitter burns through whatever remains of its capital.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday September 24 2016, @10:06PM
You're both terribly wrong. I'm not going to Breitbart to read any of that bullshit. It's title says it all. Where you're both disconnected from reality, and your bias to violence shows, is in the statement "run them over".
If you're in that situation there is an incredible difference between "don't stop moving forward" and "run them over". It's intent. One is intending to escape, and the causing of injuries being secondary towards your right to survive and defend yourself. One is the intention to end lives. Running people over rarely results in them being alive to argue with you later, but horrible maiming and death.
Placed in that situation you don't need to instantly resort to killing. What about backwards?
I'm just as iffy as you about the ban hammer, even in this case, but that isn't a rational justification for running people over.
Are you that convinced they would pull you out to kill you? If they're protesting, and you were afraid, the easiest way out is to stop the car. You then get out and yell, "is the the protest?!!". Then say you have that lane blocked off, and you're walking back to organize friends that are coming. Get the fuck out there.
These aren't terribly bad people. They're protestors. I don't think you need to default to killing them, but that might require quite a bit of yielding to their temporary insistence to occupy that exact piece of land. You need to get through so bad you would kill them? You let things cool down a bit and perhaps nobody needs to die.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1) by harmless on Saturday September 24 2016, @07:53PM
Well, your definition of "doing fine" seems to significantly differ from mine:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/twtr/financials [marketwatch.com]
They lost over half a million dollar each year for three years now. They never made money; only burned through it.
The problem with Twitter is, there is no obvious method to make enough money from it. If you inject too many ads, the service gets worthless and people leave. If you start charging for the service (which IMHO would be a reasonable approach) people will leave and use another VC-backed service instead.
I don't think there is a solution to this problem until VCs stopp throwing money at ventures whose only opportunity for revenue lies in ads.
And I can't see that happening any time soon.