Twitter 3.0

[Herman Cain]

New management charging for service .

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/elon-musk-twitter-blue-checkmark-stephen-king-1235252656/

[MU82]

IBTL

[wadesworld]

Maybe this one will work!

[The Sultan]

Yeah I guess I don't get this.  I follow a bunch of people with blue check marks, but I also follow a bunch that don't - some of which have huge followings.  If a blue checked person said "screw this" and lost their checkmark...what is Elon going to do about that?  I mean, I guess he could say "people without the checkmark are limited to XX number of followers," but seems like you are charging the people who are creating the most followed content.

OTOH, if he said "you can only follow blue check marks if you pay a subscription fee of $5 per month," I would grumble but likely pay it.  I guess my point is that he should be charging the consumers of content - not the creators.  He could even share that fee by sending money TO those who generate content and have the most followers.

[Pakuni]

He's already floating an $8/month fee instead.

[MU82]

I hope lots of people sign up. Musk has mouth to feed.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

*blue check marks if you pay a subscription fee of $5 per month," I would grumble but likely pay it.  I guess my point is that he should be charging the consumers of content - not the creators. 

OTOH, the people with huge followings are the ones that can monetize those huge followings. Wouldn't they be the ones that would be willing to pay based on how many followers they have since they are the ones that can benefit financially?

TWTR already makes money off you (though they are admittedly bad at it) by monetizing your interaction with the platform.

[The Sultan]

For instance, I am a YouTube Premium subscriber - mostly so I don't see the advertisements. That's $12 a month that is charged to my card a month.  I subscribe to a handful of channels, and if those channels are part of the Youtube Partner Program, they get a slice of that fee.  Furthermore, there is all sorts of way for people who generate the content to be compensated for that content.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/72857

What Elon is doing seems completely backwards. They are CHARGING people create the content that drive people to the platform.

[jficke13]

and charging  *EVERYONE* w/ a blue check this miniscule sub fee would create so very little revenue relative to how much revenue TWTR gets from ad sales it's a nonsensical plan.

This is all separate and apart from the fact that Musk seems intent treating the public facing "users" of Twitter like they are his customers rather than the fact that they are obviously the product that he sells to his real customers, the advertisers.

Its funny as hell that he needs to more than double Twitter's profit just to service the debt he took on to buy out the dang thing. No notes.



wint
@dril
Food $200
Data $150
Rent $800
Candles $3,600
Utility $150
someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. my family is dying

[brewcity77]

What Elon is doing seems completely backwards. They are CHARGING people create the content that drive people to the platform.

For a guy who's purports to be so smart, Musk sure seems to be an idiot regarding this. No understanding of what public square or free speech is, no recognition that monetizing the platform isn't best done by charging the people that give it value, and trying to negotiate this in public while responding to a Stephen King tweet is just idiotic.

I remember someone once describing Musk as "a stupid person's idea of a smart person" and it has never felt more apt than the past couple weeks.

[lawdog77]

For a guy who's purports to be so smart, Musk sure seems to be an idiot regarding this. No understanding of what public square or free speech is, no recognition that monetizing the platform isn't best done by charging the people that give it value, and trying to negotiate this in public while responding to a Stephen King tweet is just idiotic.

I remember someone once describing Musk as "a stupid person's idea of a smart person" and it has never felt more apt than the past couple weeks.

He's playing chess while you are playing checkers, my friend

[YaBlueIt]

He's playing chess while you are playing checkers, my friend

Actually, Musk seems to think he's too smart for chess.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1584537377837490177?s=20&t=F0EbsklnbbOHIr5fKNBCiA

[Uncle Rico]

For a guy who's purports to be so smart, Musk sure seems to be an idiot regarding this. No understanding of what public square or free speech is, no recognition that monetizing the platform isn't best done by charging the people that give it value, and trying to negotiate this in public while responding to a Stephen King tweet is just idiotic.

I remember someone once describing Musk as "a stupid person's idea of a smart person" and it has never felt more apt than the past couple weeks.

He is pretty smart about a lot of things.  Being smart about one thing doesn't make you smart about another.  I ain't going to call my landscaper to check out a toothache

[dgies9156]

I really don't get why everyone is upset.

Twitter is like a newspaper. You don't like the content? You don't like what they charge?

Then don't subscribe to it.

[MU82]

Twitter is not the "town square." It is the Octagon of the interwebs.

[The Sultan]

I really don't get why everyone is upset.

Twitter is like a newspaper. You don't like the content? You don't like what they charge?

Then don't subscribe to it.

Uh...they don't charge for it.  Do you not understand Twitter?

What Elon wants to do is charge the people who create the newspaper.

[dgies9156]

Uh...they don't charge for it.  Do you not understand Twitter?

What Elon wants to do is charge the people who create the newspaper.

Ok, if you don't like it, don't use it. If it is worth the cost, people will flock to it.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Uh...they don't charge for it.  Do you not understand Twitter?

What Elon wants to do is charge the people who create the newspaper.

Google has free search and paid search. It's not all free. Charging a fee to post your content to reach millions is a commercial bargain, will remove many fake accounts (and multiple accounts...trolls will need an identifiable form of payment), and will improve content and targeting.

Stephen King cannot afford $8 per month to pump his books and movies? Oh, the woe and injustice.

[The Sultan]

Ok, if you don't like it, don't use it. If it is worth the cost, people will flock to it.

No sh*t. That is the entire point I am making. Try to keep up OK?

[MU82]

Here's what NYT's DealBook said today:

Days into the Elon Musk era at Twitter, the makings of a new business model for the long-embattled social network are taking shape. The company's new owner is pressing ahead with a subscription offering, which Musk has repeatedly emphasized is a necessary new source of revenue.

But its importance has also seemingly grown as more advertisers have said they are at least temporarily stepping back amid worries about widening chaos on the platform.

A key Musk focus is an $8-a-month Twitter Blue service. As currently envisioned, subscribers would receive the "verified" check-mark badge, see fewer ads, be ranked higher in replies to others' tweets, be able to share longer videos and bypass paywalls at news publishers that partner with Twitter. (The $8 monthly fee was lowered from the original $20 figure ... after Musk seemed to negotiate publicly with the author Stephen King.)

Will users pay for Twitter Blue? Supporters of the move point to other social networks, like LinkedIn and Snap, that charge users for additional features. And some organizations, like the newsletter publisher Puck, said they would fork over the fees to keep their employees verified.

But others point out that verification is meant at least in part to, well, verify that the Twitter user is authentic, and paying to get a check mark defeats that purpose. Check marks will also effectively turn subscribers' prioritized tweets into paid advertisements for Twitter Blue, which could turn off actual advertisers that want their ads to appear next to organically popular content, Slate argues.

We'd also ask: How much money would subscriptions bring in? "It won't be the majority of people, but there's a small base of people that will" subscribe, the analyst Rich Greenfield told The Wall Street Journal. But given that Twitter's own internal research from before the Musk deal closed purportedly showed a drop in activity among power users, it's unclear how much Twitter Blue would add to a top line that hit $5 billion last year.

Speaking of advertisers ... Twitter's ad leadership is in disarray, after Leslie Berland, its chief marketing officer, and Sarah Personette, its sales chief, left the company.

And though Musk flew to New York this week to allay advertising executives' fears over content moderation, the ad giant IPG has joined the firms advising clients to temporarily suspend campaigns on the platform over just that.

[The Sultan]

Google has free search and paid search. It's not all free. Charging a fee to post your content to reach millions is a commercial bargain, will remove many fake accounts (and multiple accounts...trolls will need an identifiable form of payment), and will improve content and targeting.

Stephen King cannot afford $8 per month to pump his books and movies? Oh, the woe and injustice.

Again, what if Stephen King says "screw it....I don't need to checkmark anyway." He has his following built up already. Also, there are MANY accounts out there with huge followings that don't have the checkmark. Why would they now decide to get it now?

This just seems like an idea from a guy who uses Twitter as someone famous, but doesn't understand how Twitter is used by the vast majority of its users.

[mu_hilltopper]

Question about twitter:  Do content creators get paid by Twitter, like on other platforms?

(I know twitter people can get endorsements, get paid by 3rd parties.)

[The Sultan]

Question about twitter:  Do content creators get paid by Twitter, like on other platforms?

No, and that is what I said above.  If Musk wants to make the checkmark profitable, charge the CONSUMERS a fee that can be shared with verified content creators.  His idea is going to prevent people from getting verified.

[#UnleashSean]

No, and that is what I said above.  If Musk wants to make the checkmark profitable, charge the CONSUMERS a fee that can be shared with verified content creators.  His idea is going to prevent people from getting verified.

I honestly don't see to many people paying a premium to follow people.

[The Sultan]

I honestly don't see to many people paying a premium to follow people.

But would you pay a premium (say $10 a month) to be able to follow any verified accounts?  That would include not just people, but news organizations, etc.