Twitter just lost 12% of its value. Here is what they should do | Hacker News Reader

Twitter just lost 12% of its value. Here is what they should do

5 pointsquelsolaar10 comments

Twitter needs to hire me to fix their business model. Have you ever read a tweet like "I just got my new DX3250, and its amazing!", and the obvious question is: What the hell is a DX3250!? Its the inherent problem of twitter that it doesn't provide very much in terms of context. So what do you do? Well, you go to google and google DX3250. This has got to be a major loss to twitter. Google gets ad money from people selling the DX3250, while the place that made you interested in it gets nothing. Why cant who ever sells what ever a DX3250 is just buy the word so that every instance of the word that appears in a tweet it becomes a link to what ever the advertiser wants the link to be. All sponsored links can have a different color and a pop up announcing who sponsors the link. Let companies bid for words and let anyone bid for any word. If Coke buys the link to the word "Pepsi", Pepsi co will have to out bid them. What will Coffee be worth to Starbucks? Who will buy "New car"? Twitter needs to be twitter and stop trying to be something else, and turn its weakness in to a strength.

This focuses on the wrong thing. Ads/monetization is the best performing part of Twitter (and widely acknowledged to have the best leadership). Twitter doesn't have monetization problems - if they stopped spending on R&D and M&A they'd be very profitable.

Twitter has new user acquisition/retention problems and this doesn't address that at all (and the only appealing thing about it appeals only to power users).

People invest in Twitter because it's supposed to be a fast-growth tech company. If user growth slows, that narrative is shredded, and so is the stock price.

So every time I post about drinking coffee I would be advertising Starbucks?!? No, thanks. I think that would piss off a lot of users.

But what if you get a percentage anytime somebody clicks on the ad from your tweet? Acceptable?

I still wouldn't like it as I wouldn't have any control over the content I post. Let's say a company you hate buys a relatively common word. You can't use it without advertising the company you hate. They have effectively stolen that word from you :)

Opt-out via monthly fee?

Opt-out via using a different platform?

I've found that Twitter's business model has and is straying from what originally drew a lot of users in. I started using Twitter because it was a great source for real-time updates from people I admire. I think it lost its mojo when it became more of a social network where people stupidly try to have conversations in 140 characters. That drew in the trolls.

One thing I've always found odd is that the companies who provide me with a valuable service, like Twitter, refuse to charge me money even though I would definitely pay. I pay for magazine, newspaper, Netflix, Google Play, and Amazon Prime subscriptions. I would more than gladly pay for a Twitter subscription. Instead of trying to appeal to everyone, appeal to people who are willing to fork over some cash for what you have to offer.

Twitter is all in the users. If they start charging for an account then they lose their users, and therefore a large chunk of their appeal.

With that being said, I don't know why they don't charge for verification. Hell, open up additional verification for businesses and start charging them to use Twitter. There's a surprising number of verified users from all around the world ans as far as I know they're all using Twitter for free, like the rest of us.

Sites that turn words into link adverts are so annoying. And the ones that turn every company name into a stock quote. Equally so!

Reminds me of Skimlinks

http://skimlinks.com/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com