Is Sequoia going to need to rebrand itself after this? Sure does raise some questions about their judgement and professionalism. Hey Investors, we're raising a round of almost half a billion dollars and the theme is...
If they did then their record is looking pretty poor right now.
What am I missing? Or are you making a prediction that is the opposite of available evidence?
It is likely at peak MAU because a lot of people want to be “in” during what they _think_ is the crash (think of crypto a year ago when it was a peak, but now it’s way down). Current MAU may or may not be reflective of MAU in a month or two since the reason is so weird.
The old financial statements are probably meaningless at this point given how much has changed and how many advertisers have reportedly pulled out.
Not saying that I think Twitter will “fail” or even that it won’t be profitable. Just saying your metric is likely meaningless and is just a snapshot of a weird time.
If salary expenses are halved, the company is cash flow positive next year.
I guess what I'm saying is, I'd rather trust financial statements than CNN articles about how Twitter is supposedly burning to the ground (CNN is a direct competitor and has a conflict of interest).
1. That’s basically nothing compared to the big names. 2. This tweet is intentionally using _rates_ but I don’t see absolute values. If I spend $2 vs $1, I’ve doubled my spending, but I also haven’t really spent anything. Last week my coffee spend was about 700% higher than usual! Because I bought a single coffee from a coffee shop instead of making it at home. 3. This sample seems to be just of a very small number of small companies (which are this tryramp’s customers). Again, this is pretty useless on its own. Especially when we have statements that large companies are pausing spending. 4. If big names are pulling out, the ad space may be cheaper (due to less demand) at which point they are giving more to Twitter but Twitter is still taking in less.
We don’t know either way, but that tweet gives no real information on its own.
The fact that a massive number of high-profile advertisers have announced they've stopped buying ads?
> > Audi of America, United Airlines, General Mills, General Motors, Volkswagen, Modelez International (which makes popular products like Oreos), and Omnicon (which manages advertising for brands like McDonalds and Apple)
So two of the world's largest automakers, the world's richest computer company, one of the largest food companies in the US, the largest fast food chain in the world....yeah, I'm sure they'll keep right on with that "upward trajectory" with revenue falling like a lead balloon.
...and not just because of a risk of hate speech and other not-brand-safe stuff happening, but because they rightly feel that the company losing half its staff (the half too stupid to leave) has serious implications for almost every aspect of Twitter's operations, including minor little things like cybersecurity. Who's going to be doing pentesting? Who's going to be patching exploits in the mobile clients and website? Who's monitoring for things like bot networks registering fake accounts (remember when Elon was concerned about that?) and pushing tweets full of political, economic, or social misinformation? Dollars to donuts twitter starts having problems with shit like tiktok's endlessly destructive "challenges."
Hell, advertisers are probably wondering whether they'll even get a bill or know where to send a check.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/11/twitter-mayhem-s...
That it's not "personnel changes" but thousands of their best employees leaving? (It's not the worst people that leave.)
That it took barely 48 hours for Musk to cause a major outage, accidentally killing the services that handled 2FA because he thought "bah, all these silly microservices"
That Tesla stock was at ~$380 this year and is now at half that? In less than a month it's gone from $230 to $180.2
It's the second largest advertising holding company in the world.
That's the biggest deal of all the names quoted by a LARGE degree.
They have 5,000 different clients.
If you pick a random 50% of people from ANY company, only 10-20% of that group are actually high performers. As Musk pointed out, there were several developers laid off who wrote zero lines of code in three months. Sorry, but that's unacceptable and is not indicative of high performance.
Top performers may write 1,000 lines of quality code per quarter, but it's never zero. If you're writing docs all day, you're useless.
Also consider the leaked Project Veritas videos of a Twitter senior engineer admitting he worked only 4 hours a week.
The "top performers" laid off you defend literally work less than 1 day a week.
I mean how did dozens of big investment firms put money into this thing without even seeing the balance sheet? Which would have immediately exposed them as fraudulent