Meta Threads engagement has dropped off since red-hot debut, tracking firms say
cnbc.com
cnbc.com
It basically just text version of Instagram. I want to see more of the post from people I follow, not random celebrities and companies.
Seems like the leadership doesn't understand what made Twitter popular, it's the 5th most visited website in the world despite having less than a third of active users as the 4th place Instagram.
this is the biggest mistake imho. I am not going to download an app, create an account, just to view something.
I will not even go test it out if it's not convenient.
Reddit is in the same category. If they shut off the public website, they’ll be dead to me as well.
I can open and read links on my mobile browser without the app?
Oh... I thought it was just me missing the login box somewhere in the floating galaxy and abstract art in the middle of their page. </snark>
Network effects are a hell of a thing, not that Threads was even a good product. The algorithm SUCKS, the feed is just random garbage instead of relevant content that interests you, or current world events.
SELECT * FROM posts ORDER BY RAND() doesn't make for a good social media experience.
The interface is clean and light and honestly I like it. But I'd like it even more if I could have a feed showing only the users I follow.
I used to open Facebook every day, scroll down to see all my friends' new posts, and then close it once it said "all caught up!"
Of course, Facebook decided that the possibility of actually being "done" browsing Facebook for the day is a no-go, they want me engaged for 25 hours a day, so they will endlessly throw irrelevant crap at you.
In the case of Threads for me that's a class of influencer that posts nothing but unsolicited love advice or things like "if your friends hurt you they were never really your friends" that are supposed to be 'relatable' but just make it sound like they have BPD.
The premiere of any social media app is going to signal a Gold Rush in terms of account creation. You're going to attract the claim-stakers, their foil the name-squatters, the botters, the sleeper-creators, the early-adopters, the refugees of St. Elsewhere, the megalomaniacs, the API-experimenters, the app-writers. And then all those accounts are going to go dark and bide their time, because account creation was the goal, not engagement or participation.
The other thing is that threads is basically Instagram but without all the features ig has right now. Facebook is being careful since they don't want to cannibalize ig with threads since ig doesn't have any competitors rn. If you add photos, videos, etc... to threads, then you will have q repost issue. Are ig users going to repost their content on threads just because or viceversa? Why should I follow you if that's the case?
The third part (controversial) is that you have to "thread" carefully because of content moderation guidelines. I'm left or right but let's call a spade a spade: social media, in its entirety, is left leaning. If you take that into consideration, then you'll loose at least 40% of your user base.
Threads is aiming get most brands, celebrities, and influencers to be on the platform, having a "Twitter" like experience they can control (with fb's help) and monetize it asap. They know hot takes (politics, news, sports to a certain extent...) are difficult to control; That's why zuck said they weren't trying to "compete with Twitter" because those things divide people really fast, but takes regarding celebrities, food, etc... Are what brands want.
Twitter will still be "that" place. Threads (if it doesn't cannibalize ig) will be the alternative only if you want to engage with the same content you see in ig, but text version (dull and false, most of the time).
> We’re still negative cash flow, due to ~50% drop in advertising revenue plus heavy debt load. Need to reach positive cash flow before we have the luxury of anything else.
Elon is asset-rich but cash-poor, and I don't know how long he can fund his current hobby.