5 ms·

I agree with this statement. Twitter as a platform and product works better today than it did a year ago. Less bots makes a huge difference. It's also not har

I agree with this statement. Twitter as a platform and product works better today than it did a year ago. Less bots makes a huge difference. It's also not hard to imagine why they lost 50% of their advertisers. 50% kind of lines up with the percentage of "woke" (horrible label, but whatever) companies out there who basically "had to" pull their ad dollars to not piss off the camp they put themselves in. Prognostication is fun, but to be honest, we don't really have any idea whether or not this rebranding and redirection will work. Time will tell. I, however, applaud people willing to take moonshots.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> companies out there who basically "had to" pull their ad dollars to not piss off the camp they put themselves in Musk used to be political Teflon. He threw away that bipartisan edge for no gain. That was one of the beginnings of his Howard Hughes analogy.
edmundsauto 3y ago
Scaling down engineering and product, reducing revenue by significant amounts in order to reach "profitability" is not directionally in line with a moonshot. SpaceX, sure - but what he's doing to Twitter is straight from a private equity / corporate raider textbook.