15 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 42.6 ms ] thread
1) Are there any legal issues with Elon lying about the health of his private company to the public? No.

2) All that activity increase AND none of them are bots?

One would expect a drop in active users since Elon was so dead set on dismantling the supposed bot network that fuels Twitter.

Oh funny, the peanut gallery doesn't have much to say about this one.
I think that might be jumping the gun a bit. The article talks about a jump in "monetizable daily active users" during Elon's first week as owner. Couldn't that just as easily be explained by dormant accounts opening Twitter to see what's going on?
I am very curious to see what Twitter settle down to in a few months. Excited for the ability to have longer posts, replacing self-reply threads since those are a nightmare (1/?)
Are you describing Elon Musk?
> Twitter’s monetizable daily user (mDAU) growth has accelerated to more than 20 percent... according to an internal FAQ obtained by The Verge that was shared with Twitter’s sales team on Monday to use in conversations with advertisers.

It seems like this is a different metric to user growth. Does anyone have any insight into how something like this is calculated? I'm curious to know if the number of users can remain the same, or decrease, while "monetizable daily users" increases.

More monetizable users doesn't matter if no advertisers are willing to monetized them for you.
They'll inevitably come back. Right now you can advertise to more people, more engaged people, and at a discount given these conditions. Why would an advertiser not immediately return as soon as the vitriol dies down?
Who cares if its just people signing up to see how far they can push things?
If this despicable new wave of Twitter users is more immune to advertising than the prior users, I guess that would be a problem
Got a reference for that? I was under the impression advertisers are pulling out because of the content they'd be placed near?
That is what most advertisers are saying.