>> Twitter needs to make money. For some ridiculous decision, they’ve decided that selling eyeballs to advertisers is the way forward.
>> Twitter decided that they needed to make money. There’s no shame in that. What is shameful is how boring they have been.
At first glance, this attitude strikes me as being naive - however I acknowledge I do not have all the facts.
I do not use Twitter, nor have a I followed their evolution particularly closely. However, I remember reading about them pursuing several different monetization strategies. Can someone comment on why they were abandoned? Were they insufficient or unsustainable?
They do have other ways to make money. Brands can be shown as "recommended followers" to users for a price. Brands can also upgrade their accounts to show a banner of somesort (https://twitter.com/nylabone) and support "sticky tweets". Access to their API in large quantities is a source of revenue (I think). Promoted tweets in a user's stream is another source of revenue.
There may be others, but these are the only ones I'm aware of.
>> Twitter decided that they needed to make money. There’s no shame in that. What is shameful is how boring they have been.
At first glance, this attitude strikes me as being naive - however I acknowledge I do not have all the facts.
I do not use Twitter, nor have a I followed their evolution particularly closely. However, I remember reading about them pursuing several different monetization strategies. Can someone comment on why they were abandoned? Were they insufficient or unsustainable?