Hacker News Reader

> There is NO viable competition that exists for Twitter in same format.

This doesn't necessarily matter. From the blog post:

> I keep wondering about “what is going to replace Twitter”, but I am increasingly of the belief that this is the wrong question, that no single thing is going to replace Twitter. That is, Twitter as an idea — a single social platform catering to all demographics and uses — will become like the evening nightly news or the morning newspaper: a relic from a bygone era.

Twitter is a way to spend time. People can leave Twitter and spend their time in other ways, without joining a service like Twitter. The world existed before Twitter existed, and the world will continue to exist after Twitter doesn't.

> Even though it might look reckless, it is clear that much of these staff wasn’t on critical path for running day to day operations. So, Twitter will keep running smoothly on infrastructure side

Is it clear though? There is a lot more to running Twitter than just keeping the servers online. If the site turns into a cesspool and becomes unpleasant to be on, users will flee in droves.

> If the site turns into a cesspool and becomes unpleasant to be on,

That's already the case.

Twitter has lot of algorithmic control already and it has worked pretty good for more than decade. This is not to say more staffing wouldn’t be useful and improve experience but I don’t think Twitter is in sudden risk of turning into cesspool any more than it was 5 years ago. People will always point to XYZ examples but you need to look at big picture.

Also it's been only a few days since the layoffs. If you laid off half the doctors/residents in a busy hospital, patients may not start dropping like flies right away. That doesn't mean the hospital is able to function effectively. It takes time for technical issues to develop and trigger problems in the rest of the system.

> "Currently, Twitter is mainly a website for top 1% to disseminate their message and it will slowly transform into top 5% decimate their message."

I realise that your use of decimate is likely an autocorrect typo, but as it stands, it's actually a rather witty description of what occurs on social media right now. The top 5% decimates what the 1% disseminates.

> Letting go half of the staff exactly enabled $1B in debt servicing

$1.3 Billion debt service (assuming 10% CCC Bonds locked into April 2022 on $13 Billion in debt)

Assuming 3500 staff were let go, do you really think each staff member was costing the company $370,000 / year ? I don't think so. I'd estimate the costs-per-head to be under $200,000 for the typical staff member (sure, maybe some set of senior programmers are paid $250,000 with + $100,000 in benefits, but there's not _THAT_ many senior level staff. And the seniors are exactly the people you don't want to be firing)

Even then, that's just the debt issue. Rumor is that Twitter lost $700-million/year or so in ad revenue at its latest advertising conference.

My current estimate to Twitter's yearly losses is _STILL_ on the order of $1100+ Million or so, even with all the staff reductions. (Originally $2+ Billion or so losses/year, but maybe 900-million/year saved from this firing spree)

> Rumor is that Twitter lost $700-million/year or so in ad revenue at its latest advertising conference.

And having lost its CRO, who walked out on Thursday, Musk tried to repair the damage himself on a conference call with major advertisers, who started adjusting their spending down while on the call. Twitter's ad revenue for 2023 will be a smoking crater.

> it is clear that much of these staff wasn’t on critical path for running day to day operations

Clear based on what evidence?

> So, Twitter will keep running smoothly on infrastructure side.

Time can only prove this.

> There was a joke that it might be easier to make peace in Middle East than significantly grow Twitter profits.

After the Abraham Accords, seems like less a joke than a real possibility.

What? By having countries that were already friendly finally make it public?

Let's see someone tackle the actual hard problems and not just do PR stunts with a glowing orb.

Do you mean disseminate? you wrote "decimate their message"