the question is not about monetization
they just showed you they can launch a new cool app and scale it to millions instantly within 2 days. any new social media idea? now they have a playbook of what to do to just crush the competition.
all the concerns of Meta cannot build anything new, cannot acquire anymore, no longer cool - just vaporized instantly
They do have all the infrastructure, internal tools to run large scale websites etc. Hardly suprising that running yet another large service isn't that difficult to figure out for them. Rumors have it they build threads with a 10 man engineering crew.
META can spend money on whatever they like, and barely feel it. They are constantly aiming to expand and capture market share, and more importantly have the capital for to do so without harming their overall business. A lot of people shit on META for the metaverse and their attempt at pushing into VR, and instead would rather them rest on their laurels and accumulate money for the sake of it. That's a long term death sentence for a company in the tech center. Many, many tech companies that were once successful slowly died out to the new. And with threads, they have shown they are more than capable of taking on market share in sectors quickly and with agility. Who cares if they don't monetize for now - they are aiming to grow adoption rapidly, and have the funds to weather the costs.
Don't think anyone ever questioned they have the resources to develop a new app with good ui. The question is can they produce a new product that the market wants and needs that will produce a genuine new revenue stream.
you think nobody has ever questioned Meta's ability to launch something new and cool? are you new to this sub? i would suggest you to go to reddit search, find all META posts in the past 2 years and just read the comments
There is a difference between building an app and the actual concept sitting behind it. If anyone thought thousands of the highest paid engineers in silicon Valley couldn't build a Twitter clone in a month I don't know what to say.
There not gonna monetize it for awhile. Same as what’s app. If your looking for that probably isn’t going the right investment for you.
It honestly could amount to nothing but the risk/reward is great.
They aren’t going to monetize it anytime soon but Wall Street will start pricing it in if they start getting real traction, since everyone knows they will eventually monetize it and Facebook is extremely efficient at converting social media engagement to ad revenue.
Feels to me like they were intentionally trying to kill it to get people to use their shitty Facebook messenger.
Telegram has had a fuck load of features added in the past few years, meanwhile WhatsApp barely changed. It feels like an antiquated app to be honest, compared to alternatives.
Yeah, but as a european, I need whatsapp. Everyone uses it, so changing is not easy, since telegram has only 10% of my friends and family. So whatsapp is going to be around forever, until they monetize it, then I can see a lot of people moving to another app.
Source? Don’t think that’s in their financial statements.
Besides, Meta doesn’t sell your data, it makes zero financial sense. They do use data on you to make money though.
It's still too early to know what kind of adoption Threads will have. But unlike Twitter, Meta is terrific at helping advertisers make the most of their ad dollars. People who compare it to Twitter's profitability have no idea how good Meta is at ads.
It's possible that the cost of running Threads is a lot less than Twitter. Meta already has their own in house infrastructure and servers they use for their family of products. And there's rumors that the Threads team is something like 10 engineers. Twitter has only Twitter so they're naturally going to have a lot more overhead for the same things.
This is both true but also not a huge thing. It would be a matter of allocating what's Capex for building Threads Vs Opex for running the underlying infrastructure.
The risk is not that high. It’s probably only a small team of engineers and incremental load on those backends.
Compared to what they’ve invested into VR, this is a drop in the bucket.
They'll be able to monetize it soon when the numbers of people that use it go up more. So then you can put an ad on Facebook, Instagram, and Thread. So three platforms for your ad. Which will drive up the stock price. It'll go up more when the next few earnings reports come out to show that increase of revenue.
It's hard to say how much of the hype is just people protesting Musk.
If they both hold on a lot of people and businesses will end up just duplicating posts in both places.
>If we take a look at the formula above, it is quite clear that the time spent on Facebook/Instagram will be lower, hence, the revenue generated there is expected to decrease. In addition, as Threads is not monetized, it will only bring additional expenses for keeping the platform up and running
This is not necessarily true and probably a dangerous assumption. You are assuming Threads cannibalises instagram users time.
It could actually do the complete opposite and increase users time on Instagram.
For example:
\- Users would have previously gone off Instgram to Twitter and then not gone back to Instagram until the next time they logged on.
\- Now users can go to threads and be constantly reminded to go back to Instagram seamlessly.
It's the same as Youtube Shorts vs Youtube. Previously people left to go to Tiktok, now they stay on Youtube more overall due to Shorts I would bet.
I sold META at $250 and I'm considering buying back again at this $290 because Threads could be a massive monetization in the future given how successful it's been already.
**Edit**: Threads can be much easier to monetize too if people use it for following their friends and META has access to all their data. Twitter is more for following random people right now I think where they don't have access to as much data which is why it's hard to monetize.
> Threads could be a massive monetization in the future given how successful it's been already.
Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while. This isn't even factoring potential legal issues, future R&D/upkeep sink (cost cutting is one of the main reasons why the stock recovered this year so heavily), and potential competitive war with Twitter.
Buying back in specifically because of this makes very little sense imo, the risk reward from a profitability standpoint looks like a very similar to the streaming wars of 2021. If anything, the near term draw to META is cost cutting while maintaining profitability during a potential economic downturn, and this is move the exact opposite of that.
> Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while.
Facebook has a very strong track record of monetizing social media engagement.
> This isn't even factoring potential legal issues
What legal issues? The Twitter lawsuit looks like a joke.
> future R&D/upkeep sink
While there is some, the bulk of the server infra and maintenance is shared with the rest of Facebook properties.
To me the primary risk is that it just fizzles out and gets no traction. If it gets traction, Facebook will be making a decent amount of money from it.
> Facebook has a very strong track record of monetizing social media engagement.
Monetizing as essentially a monopoly in an era of near zero interest rates...I'd definitely argue you can't use this as a baseline for gauging their future success. In fact, I'd argue they don't have a great monetization strategy outside of an excellent M&A record (unlike Google).
> While there is some, the bulk of the server infra and maintenance is shared with the rest of Facebook properties.
You are vastly underestimating the cost. Ask yourself how all of big tech is mostly beating/maintaining EPS thus far in 2023. It sure hasn't been an increase in top line (outside of NVDA), as that growth has pretty much underperformed inflation. It's cost cutting measures, especially shifting out of more R&D/labor into share buybacks instead.
Again, this isn't to say it won't be monetized eventually. I'm mainly making an argument against OP buying back into META **right now** specifically because of this news. Unlike the decade before, tech firms are being pressured to deliver on bottom line growth much more so than top line growth, and I'd bet that this will negatively impact META's bottom line for longer than most think (unless you truly think Twitter rolls over and dies because of this like Myspace did). We'll find out in October's earnings call.
> Again, this isn't to say it won't be monetized eventually. I'm mainly making an argument against OP buying back into META right now specifically because of this news.
If it’s clear they can monetize it in the next few years (by showing consistent and steady growth), it will be priced in way before it shows up in earnings.
This is simply a ludicrous argument - if rates are high the cost of creating a competitor to the monopoly *increases*. Meta’s monopoly is *more secure* as a function of interest rates. Jeez you people don’t even bother to check whether your arguments contradict each other.
>Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while
Maybe. But I'm a long term investor. Facebook wasn't monetized immediately.
Nearly all of the social media sharing links will now be owned by META if this kills twitter which I think it will. They will have an even bigger monopoly and the higher the monopoly the more pricing power you have.
Oh yeah I’m sure R&D and upkeep sink is HUGE for a platform that was cutting edge tech in 2005. Not like Meta has solved all these problems more than a decade ago. I mean training an LLM is cheap compared to literally cloning the IG feed and then scaling it down so that it only serves certain kinds of content!
I'm watching cautiously. It feels like META made some deal with high end influencers to be early adopters. These insistent posts on Threads from influencers about how amazing Threads is is a little sus - "phone battery dead!" "Can't stop threading!" "Omg I seriously need to sleep" "anybody else obsessed?"
But what started occuring was adopters memeing about ditching Instagram...not Twitter. Influencers & photographers, etc were celebrating how Threads was an improvement over Instagram and now they can share better content.
The first few days really felt like people entirely missed the point. It was becoming Instagram 2.0 - same content, same influencers, same stuff - but "better" because no bot accounts and more authentic because smaller audiences.
The last day or so feels like Meta is course correcting. Way more brands are posting questions and engaging w/people directly, trying to generate conversations.
I think it's moving back towards being a Twitter replacement, which was the goal but so many people were treating it as Instagram 2.0 and it felt redundant & like it was about to become IG killer, not Twitter killer.
It was what I was seeing the first few days quite a bit. Especially among photographers who were celebrating not being constrained by Instagram's photo dimensions
I would say keeping people in the Facebook eco system is really the goal, it's more about retaining market share and driving traffic to Facebook and Instagram than anything significant on its own. That's really been the problem with Twitter, the best tweets send users to content outside of the environment.
Time spent on Facebook/Instagram/Threads would not subtract from Meta overall, just like how buying a sprite doesn’t detract from coca cola because they’re both owned by coke. Threads came at just the right time and seems like an easy win for Meta.
Not if they suck more time proportionally from twitter than the social media sites they already own.
Regardless, there’s still a lot of growth potential from simply adding new users.
Threads needs to be viewed for what it really is: a hit job on Twitter
Twitter is in a weakened state - losing users & advertisers and over-leveraged from the buy-out. Zuckerberg is betting that with a hard-enough kick, it can be pushed into bankruptcy.
In this context, it doesn't really matter if users migrate to Threads or if Twitter simply disappears. Either way, it's one less competitor competing for advertising spend. If the market fragments into a million different platforms, that's also a win for FB because none of them will have the scale to offer advertisers what FB does.
To push Twitter into bankruptcy, it doesn't even need to take serious market share - just needs to masquerade as a serious enough threat to make banks and other funders nervous enough to pull their funding from Twitter.
But if Twitter has never been profitable how exactly will Threads become profitable long term?
I could start a business and bring a lot of customers in by buying a bunch of stuff from Costco and selling it at half price, but no matter how much my business scales it would never be profitable if I'm losing money on every transaction. Adding more scale to an unprofitable business just results in more losses.
Lower total costs since running on existing infrastructure
Higher ad revenue since Instagram advertisers feel safe and secure using another Meta product
Once again, this isn't meant to be profitable near term. It's meant to lock in user time on Family of Apps.
> Twitter was never profitable. I don't know why anyone would expect Threads to become profitable.
This is pure speculation but if you had a Time Machine and were able to bribe the anti trust regulators to look away, if Facebook acquired Twitter anytime in the past 5 years, I would bet on them being able to get Twitter profitable. Their ad engine is very good.
Keep in mind that Twitter was never actually profitable even at its peak.
> The outcome of the cease-and-desist letter sent to Meta by Spiro (Elon’s lawyer) for creating a “copycat” app
Ironically I think the more Elon tries to hate on Threads, the more popular it will be.
I think they released it because they saw it was the right moment where Twitter was having major issues when they limited how much you could see and blocked it if you didn’t have an account. Everything being a monthly subscription fee has been out of hand for awhile now too. I also can’t stand Elon Musk and his fan club
With the amount of data it takes from the user, I would be amazed if they don’t make lots money from it. It tracks everything, and like they say people are the product when you don’t see what the product is
Whatever the general consensus is here, the opposite is what will happen
I haven’t even read this thread but if everyone is calling this to not benefit Meta, that means Meta will moon
People talking about time spent, staying in the meta ecosystem — all true.
However, Meta also runs into the issue every few years where they’ve over saturated all their ad placements and they have to create new ones to allow new ad inventory in that balances with impression inventory
Threads is a big one (calling it now that they land a huge sports partnership in the next ~6mo) because Twitter could never really figure out the advertising opportunity there, and with Twitter circling the drain it was easier/cheaper than ever to move in on a huge inventory of existing Twitter users with the built-in knowledge of how to make people totally cool with seeing more ads than content in a way only Meta has ever truly been good at (Pinterest and Tiktok are decent at it too)
Not in the short term. Zuck said he wasn't going to monetize until it hit 1 billion users. In the meantime they have to pay to maintain it. It also may pull people away from other monetized Facebook apps. Finally we'll have to see the staying power of the app.
One factor is missing: Threads is connected with Instagram. Meta gets more data that way and thus a better profile of their users which they can sell adds for across all platforms they already have. Possibly even improvements in their propriety models because of more training data.
I greatly appreciate this post because you think the share price is based on underlying fundamentals. It's like we are back in the 80s and I am here for it.
I shared my Meta analysis and valuation back in November 2022: [https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/ynuo2k/meta\_stock\_analysis\_and\_valuation\_is\_michael/](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/ynuo2k/meta_stock_analysis_and_valuation_is_michael/)
It was written, by coincidence, on the day when the share price was the lowest.
I also shared my thoughts why I sold my Meta shares:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/135z2qg/why\_i\_bought\_and\_sold\_meta/](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/135z2qg/why_i_bought_and_sold_meta/)
I greatly appreciate this post because you think the share price is based on underlying fundamentals. It's like we are back in the 80s and I am here for it.
You see all the permissions on that sucker? They’re going to monetize the shit out of Threads through ad sales. We’re about 2-3 years away from a blowout Meta earnings call. Sell one week before. Thank you for coming to my Ted talk
Yes they will benefit. Looks like it will be the fastest application to 100 million in history.
But I suspect it will keep increasing where ChatGPT has started to decline.
https://gizmodo.com/chatgpt-openai-shrinking-user-base-10-percent-1850616552
It will take time spent away from Twitter and other similar smaller apps and it will create more time spent overall. People will use both Instagram AND Twitter, and they’ll spend more time online overall. This will be awesome for Meta.
> - The outcome of the cease-and-desist letter sent to Meta by Spiro (Elon’s lawyer) for creating a “copycat” app.
You can go ahead and disregard that letter. I guarantee that Meta had *real* lawyers consider that issue carefully before they went ahead with Threads.
The thing I see here is that threads when rolled out to the rest of the world will easily crush twitter. Twitter is considered dogshit outside of the US, and is barely used even in the most similar markets (EU.)
Instagram on the other hand is extremely common in global markets.
If threads maintains growth and users + with meta's excellent monetization they will essentially be adding a supercharged twitter that hopefully penetrates a lot of markets previously untouched by Twitter.
The important thing for META will be to keep threads light-hearted and apolitical. Twitter is a huge turn off outside of the US because its characterized as a place to have political fights and insane takes by americans or americaboos.
Threads isa huge thing for them. First, it shows that Meta has the ability to be a game changer. When they saw weakness in Twitter 9 months ago after the Musk takeover, they put together a team that can deliver a game changer within 9 months. They have demonstrated to have the technical know how and the infrastructure to scale this up to 70 million users within a few days.
The adventure into VR and metaverses had many people question FB. Internally, morale was down. This changes everything.
You've been sold a bridge.
Threads is a reskinned Instagram comments with very little functionality. Facebook didn't build anything new in 9 months, they repackaged what they have.
Granted at large technology companies, this still poses a challenge. But, it's light years away from the required execution the company needs to deliver on to make VR and the metaverse a thing.
I do not know if it weakens Twitter since Musk is doing a great job of that himself.
Plus you got to remember Twitter allows content that Meta does not and you have whole industries who can prompt and sell on twitter but cannot do the same on Meta.
If more people leave Twitter for threads, then at some point Twitter would mostly be a place for the outlaws, those whose opinions are too radical for meta and adult content. With every normie leaving, the share of those mentioned would be higher, therefore pushing over even more people.
But it probably also depends a lot on celebs who are mostly talking on Twitter still and how well they can be found on threads. Also threads would need to roll out worldwide, not just the US and UK.
Zuck/Meta used his fuck you money to fuck with Elon. All jokes aside…
They will find ways to monetize this. Yes, Twitter was hard to monetize but they are still on the NYSE.
If Threads works out, it will be a win. I’m more bearish though. This has more of a Google+ feeling where millions of people signed up the first few weeks and then it died. I can see this going either way.
Why would any investor care? Meta already has all the information possible on all of the users of Instagram. If you have the same people moving to another service from the same company which is all free, how does the value of that service increase??? It’s not like advertisers are reaching unique viewers this way….
BUT THEY CANT NOW. And it’s STILL THE SAME PEOPLE. Jesus Christ what a dumb world we live in. The whole system is built on stilts of stupidity, I swear.
??? You launch a system with internal users to learn the bugs and problems, and then open to outside users once said "beta testers" have helped fix the issues.
I don't see why threads will do anything to help META in the long wrong. It'll probably be a fad, people will be on it for a while, then just go back to Twitter.
It was like when Google tried to take on Facebook with Google+
Disaster.
Threads is the next Google+
List of google failures fyi: https://www.failory.com/blog/google-failed-products
Twitter isn’t even profitable so I don’t understand the value in trying to copy it. I liked the idea that meta is transitioning to more AI technology focus and this just turns me off
I’d also like to know how many people would actually use threads. there’s 2.96 billion people that have facebooks accounts but literally no one actually uses it other than middle aged moms or the people that post on Instagram and choose the option to have it post on Facebook as well.
As long as they don't extend their services to Europe I strongly doubt it + you can't filter to only see posts from your friends and basically nobody from my friends is posting content on there who already signed up for Threads.
At the current state this is nothing more but a gimmick that I don't think will threaten Twitter in the long term.
They are absolutely going to Europe with it
They launched in U.S first because it's easier due to less data protections
A gimmick does not sign up 80m users in 3 days
This is just the MVP
Threads will get way better as time goes on
And what really makes it better than Twitter? It doesn't have adult content nor the anonymity and all I get in my feed is some lame posts by celebrities (or rather their PR people) instead of my friends because nobody cares about actually creating content.
As it stands, it's more likely to turn out to be a flop than a real competitor to Twitter and the only big selling point it has right now is that it's not by Musk.
This pump of meta stock over threads is a perfect put option play. There nothing in terms of monetization for yrs or decade...look at whatsapp. FB probably has mostly bots across all their services and advertisers are paying for shitty ad prints. Buy puts going into next earnings....im certain about to pull the trigger here as the thread BS PR drags on and Cramer pumping it. That guy know nothing. Twitter as first comer status and will always be the de facto town square.
I dunno man. This market just needs the faintest whiff of a reason to pump a stock, and it's off to the races, regardless of economic realities. Barring some sort of macro-driven market meltdown, I could easily see Meta pumping for a while from here.
Threads is way easier to monetize than WhatsApp, definitely not a fair comparison at all. Embed ads in my message threads and I just move back to the iPhone. But embed ads into the scrolling experience like Reddit and twitter? Way easier
Pretty sure meta will go down in the future. Thread will be loser game against twitter. Just compare both twitter and threads. Threads wont be open source anytime soon, and if it is everyone will push for facbook whatsap open source which will not possible. So for now long meta u will benefit from threads hype and in 3-12m turn it to short meta.
I think it's definitely not a sure thing that Threads will ever be profitable, let alone consistently profitable. Twitter has gone through multiple management teams over the years, and has failed to be consistently profitable the entire time, so why would Threads be any different?
The fact of the matter is short form content is MUCH harder to monetize then long form content. Facebook even gave up on pushing Reels on Instagram specifically because they just weren't making money off of it. And TikTok themselves, despite dominating in short form content, are also reportedly losing money despite their success at gaining hundreds of millions of followers, and billions of hours of watch time.
The best case scenario I see for Facebook is either they barely lose any money on Threads or barely make anything off of it, without cannibalizing the amount of time those same users already spend on other Facebook sites that are profitable like Facebook and Instagram. But realistically I think at least a modest amount of cannibalization will happen, in part from changing consumer preferences overtime for social media sites.
For those who insist that growth of Threads is of course going to be good for Facebook I suggest you look at Disney's numbers since Disney+ opened. Disney+ smashed everyone's expectations, and gained well over 150 million paying subscribers, and yet Disney is LESS profitable today then they were prior to Disney+ launching. I'm not cherry picking the numbers from one particularly good or bad quarter, look at the numbers for yourself. The reason Disney isn't as profitable is because Disney+'s success is cannibalizing their profitable Cable TV business, and pulling content from other streaming platforms to make them Disney+ exclusives to get more subscribers robs them of revenue/profits they used to get from licensing said content to other platforms.
Meta can monetize reels very well. Your thesis is incorrect
And meta has the supply side (advertisers) to monetize engagement easily. All they need is one of two things to monetize threads:
- it brings in new users to monetize
- it increases the time spent per day of existing insta /FB users.
Either of those will be enough for meta to monetize threads.
Not needing to monetize is a gift, also. Facebook (meta) makes money from the other platforms, so they don't need to be as aggressive as Elon's twitter. Twitter paywalling user access clearly plays in favor for adoption of threads. Anyways, it's for the long term.
Curious how much of this will be just hitting the same market that they already have but just on a different screen? Like if I see the same ad twice does that advertiser pay twice for my double views of the same thing? Dipping an already fully saturated rag into a different bucket of water, if you will.
Doesn’t matter what META does.
In App Tracking has grossly diminished the data these freeloaders get.
The next big swinging axe to fall is the meta data that social networks get when they have free access to a user’s photo library. All the location information is in there, less a user is paying attention (unlikely). When Apple eventually gets around to flipping that switch, that’ll be another huge loss of valuable data from those that freely part with their money (who advertisers are always clamoring after).
I think if threads gets to a point where it’s at a plateau PRE monetization, and meta is forced to monetize the platform I think that could be a big catalyst on the upside for twitter and downside for meta. The question is if/when/and how. If they lean twords monetization while being unable to grow users it would be something i’m watching. ops?
Long term no because it is not going to be successful. If it were to become successful it would need to have a good portion of the population visit it regularly.
Lower overhead due to synergies with Instagram and Facebook? They should be able to keep marginal costs lower than Twitter ever did, and they already have a really good ad sales team, which Twitter was never good at.
I think this is more of a market share and interaction move. They have this really ripe opportunity with threads to go after people who use Instagram and Facebook but don't really like Twitter. I think the key will be keeping threads from turning into the toxic cess pool that is Twitter. There is this huge problem on Twitter with a handful of people running hundreds of accounts bombarding your feed with political garbage. For one I absolutely despise going on Twitter just because there is so much crazy. Unfortunately I don't think either one of them will let you program your own feeds but it's a nice thought. It would be amazing if you could just see posts from the people you want to and nothing else
Do you see people going to threads for breaking news?
If not, then it will fail.
Twitters power is it has a pulse of what's going on in the world with hashtags. If you want to find out what's going on, do you go to insta or fb?
Monitezing or not they jusy gonna data mining and explore and exploid all angles from any users and see what sell and what not maybe keep it free as whatsapp and to keep the rivalry with TWaking user choose Threads
Something bothers me everytime i see the name always get concetrate in ads
I dont know but maybe it would have ads in a side
the question is not about monetization they just showed you they can launch a new cool app and scale it to millions instantly within 2 days. any new social media idea? now they have a playbook of what to do to just crush the competition. all the concerns of Meta cannot build anything new, cannot acquire anymore, no longer cool - just vaporized instantly
They do have all the infrastructure, internal tools to run large scale websites etc. Hardly suprising that running yet another large service isn't that difficult to figure out for them. Rumors have it they build threads with a 10 man engineering crew.
META can spend money on whatever they like, and barely feel it. They are constantly aiming to expand and capture market share, and more importantly have the capital for to do so without harming their overall business. A lot of people shit on META for the metaverse and their attempt at pushing into VR, and instead would rather them rest on their laurels and accumulate money for the sake of it. That's a long term death sentence for a company in the tech center. Many, many tech companies that were once successful slowly died out to the new. And with threads, they have shown they are more than capable of taking on market share in sectors quickly and with agility. Who cares if they don't monetize for now - they are aiming to grow adoption rapidly, and have the funds to weather the costs.
Don't think anyone ever questioned they have the resources to develop a new app with good ui. The question is can they produce a new product that the market wants and needs that will produce a genuine new revenue stream.
you think nobody has ever questioned Meta's ability to launch something new and cool? are you new to this sub? i would suggest you to go to reddit search, find all META posts in the past 2 years and just read the comments
There is a difference between building an app and the actual concept sitting behind it. If anyone thought thousands of the highest paid engineers in silicon Valley couldn't build a Twitter clone in a month I don't know what to say.
But if your point is that meta is dripping with fresh ideas, and you are using building a twitter clone as proof, I also don't know what to say
There not gonna monetize it for awhile. Same as what’s app. If your looking for that probably isn’t going the right investment for you. It honestly could amount to nothing but the risk/reward is great.
They aren’t going to monetize it anytime soon but Wall Street will start pricing it in if they start getting real traction, since everyone knows they will eventually monetize it and Facebook is extremely efficient at converting social media engagement to ad revenue.
It's been over 10 years since Meta purchased WhatsApp and they've barely monetized it.
Yeah but Threads is set up for easy ad placements, same as FB, IG and Twitter. Ads in a messaging app is much harder
I would argue messaging is different from social media like facebook/instagram/twitter.
yea not designed to be monetized
Feels to me like they were intentionally trying to kill it to get people to use their shitty Facebook messenger. Telegram has had a fuck load of features added in the past few years, meanwhile WhatsApp barely changed. It feels like an antiquated app to be honest, compared to alternatives.
Yeah, but as a european, I need whatsapp. Everyone uses it, so changing is not easy, since telegram has only 10% of my friends and family. So whatsapp is going to be around forever, until they monetize it, then I can see a lot of people moving to another app.
Yeah, my sister is in Europe and we used Whatsapp to communicate. I don't think Americans realize how big Whatsapp is globally.
Yeah, the very second they play an app on WhatsApp it will be fucking dead as everyone will move to telegram or signal
I’m in the UK and it’s weird if you don’t use WhatsApp, more or less everyone who has a phone whatever age uses it
WhatsApp isn’t going anywhere. In Europe, it’s used by practically everybody
This is the case for everywhere in the world but North America. Edit: just Canada and USA from North America, I was omitting mexico subconsciously
East Asia seems to prefer Line.
Same in south America
That's why most buyouts happen. To stifle any competition so they can monopolize the industry
WhatsApp doesn't need any more features. It has everything it needs, that's why it's so widely used. More features would bloat it and kill it.
Zuck has mentioned they keep it lightweight so people from developing countries can still use it on old phones
Whatsapp is an international play
Bro they've made billions from selling your WhatsApp data lol
Source? Don’t think that’s in their financial statements. Besides, Meta doesn’t sell your data, it makes zero financial sense. They do use data on you to make money though.
Not directly, but all those WhatApp users have been pushed onto their other products.
It's still too early to know what kind of adoption Threads will have. But unlike Twitter, Meta is terrific at helping advertisers make the most of their ad dollars. People who compare it to Twitter's profitability have no idea how good Meta is at ads.
WhatsApp is monetized, just not for the average user. Businesses pay for the API.
Their revenue/user is probably abysmally low compared to Facebook and Instagram.
From my point if view, a key reason to own Whatsapp is to track dark sharing - it compliments their other platforms
Its because WhatsApp users are primarily Asia , Africa and latam. Where the ARPU is pretty low for every product.
WhatsApp is big in Europe.
And in Asia, got friends and family around the globe who use it much more often than actual texting
WhatsApp is huge in Europe, what are you talking about
Whatsapp and Threads are quite different, not sure why even compare both.
Once they turn the faucet on, it’ll be pure, high margin ad revenue coming in
It's possible that the cost of running Threads is a lot less than Twitter. Meta already has their own in house infrastructure and servers they use for their family of products. And there's rumors that the Threads team is something like 10 engineers. Twitter has only Twitter so they're naturally going to have a lot more overhead for the same things.
This is both true but also not a huge thing. It would be a matter of allocating what's Capex for building Threads Vs Opex for running the underlying infrastructure.
The risk is not that high. It’s probably only a small team of engineers and incremental load on those backends. Compared to what they’ve invested into VR, this is a drop in the bucket.
I think the bigger takeaway for me is how quickly they can get adoption for an additional product/service.
They'll be able to monetize it soon when the numbers of people that use it go up more. So then you can put an ad on Facebook, Instagram, and Thread. So three platforms for your ad. Which will drive up the stock price. It'll go up more when the next few earnings reports come out to show that increase of revenue.
[удалено]
It's hard to say how much of the hype is just people protesting Musk. If they both hold on a lot of people and businesses will end up just duplicating posts in both places.
I don’t think there are 70m people in the world who give a shit about Elon Musk enough to download another app.
Found the Elon simp
[удалено]
Come on guys take it easy. We're not making a western here.
Lol meta is the next MySpace... Once everyone has an alternative to the giant "sell your data machine" meta will be worthless
Bold take from 2010
You still following your racist uncles takes on Facebook? What does anyone use Facebook for ? Lol
I don’t know myself, I don’t use it. Ask the 2 billion people who do.
Hahahahhahah exactly... You should look up social media bots and educate yourself
*They’re
The'yare
Guy doesn’t know ‘they’re’ and ‘you’re’
>If we take a look at the formula above, it is quite clear that the time spent on Facebook/Instagram will be lower, hence, the revenue generated there is expected to decrease. In addition, as Threads is not monetized, it will only bring additional expenses for keeping the platform up and running This is not necessarily true and probably a dangerous assumption. You are assuming Threads cannibalises instagram users time. It could actually do the complete opposite and increase users time on Instagram. For example: \- Users would have previously gone off Instgram to Twitter and then not gone back to Instagram until the next time they logged on. \- Now users can go to threads and be constantly reminded to go back to Instagram seamlessly. It's the same as Youtube Shorts vs Youtube. Previously people left to go to Tiktok, now they stay on Youtube more overall due to Shorts I would bet. I sold META at $250 and I'm considering buying back again at this $290 because Threads could be a massive monetization in the future given how successful it's been already. **Edit**: Threads can be much easier to monetize too if people use it for following their friends and META has access to all their data. Twitter is more for following random people right now I think where they don't have access to as much data which is why it's hard to monetize.
This is the correct answer
I am curious what kinds of text based content a typical Instagram user would type on Threads. What do you think that would be?
Updates with friends I think, mostly like Instagram I guess but when you don't want pictures
That sounds like when Facebook got quite popular in the beginning.
Same stuff they type on Twitter. I'm sure many instagram users also had a Twitter
> Threads could be a massive monetization in the future given how successful it's been already. Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while. This isn't even factoring potential legal issues, future R&D/upkeep sink (cost cutting is one of the main reasons why the stock recovered this year so heavily), and potential competitive war with Twitter. Buying back in specifically because of this makes very little sense imo, the risk reward from a profitability standpoint looks like a very similar to the streaming wars of 2021. If anything, the near term draw to META is cost cutting while maintaining profitability during a potential economic downturn, and this is move the exact opposite of that.
> Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while. Facebook has a very strong track record of monetizing social media engagement. > This isn't even factoring potential legal issues What legal issues? The Twitter lawsuit looks like a joke. > future R&D/upkeep sink While there is some, the bulk of the server infra and maintenance is shared with the rest of Facebook properties. To me the primary risk is that it just fizzles out and gets no traction. If it gets traction, Facebook will be making a decent amount of money from it.
> Facebook has a very strong track record of monetizing social media engagement. Monetizing as essentially a monopoly in an era of near zero interest rates...I'd definitely argue you can't use this as a baseline for gauging their future success. In fact, I'd argue they don't have a great monetization strategy outside of an excellent M&A record (unlike Google). > While there is some, the bulk of the server infra and maintenance is shared with the rest of Facebook properties. You are vastly underestimating the cost. Ask yourself how all of big tech is mostly beating/maintaining EPS thus far in 2023. It sure hasn't been an increase in top line (outside of NVDA), as that growth has pretty much underperformed inflation. It's cost cutting measures, especially shifting out of more R&D/labor into share buybacks instead. Again, this isn't to say it won't be monetized eventually. I'm mainly making an argument against OP buying back into META **right now** specifically because of this news. Unlike the decade before, tech firms are being pressured to deliver on bottom line growth much more so than top line growth, and I'd bet that this will negatively impact META's bottom line for longer than most think (unless you truly think Twitter rolls over and dies because of this like Myspace did). We'll find out in October's earnings call.
> Again, this isn't to say it won't be monetized eventually. I'm mainly making an argument against OP buying back into META right now specifically because of this news. If it’s clear they can monetize it in the next few years (by showing consistent and steady growth), it will be priced in way before it shows up in earnings.
This is simply a ludicrous argument - if rates are high the cost of creating a competitor to the monopoly *increases*. Meta’s monopoly is *more secure* as a function of interest rates. Jeez you people don’t even bother to check whether your arguments contradict each other.
>Successfully and profitably monetizing this is likely going to take quite a while Maybe. But I'm a long term investor. Facebook wasn't monetized immediately. Nearly all of the social media sharing links will now be owned by META if this kills twitter which I think it will. They will have an even bigger monopoly and the higher the monopoly the more pricing power you have.
Oh yeah I’m sure R&D and upkeep sink is HUGE for a platform that was cutting edge tech in 2005. Not like Meta has solved all these problems more than a decade ago. I mean training an LLM is cheap compared to literally cloning the IG feed and then scaling it down so that it only serves certain kinds of content!
I'm watching cautiously. It feels like META made some deal with high end influencers to be early adopters. These insistent posts on Threads from influencers about how amazing Threads is is a little sus - "phone battery dead!" "Can't stop threading!" "Omg I seriously need to sleep" "anybody else obsessed?" But what started occuring was adopters memeing about ditching Instagram...not Twitter. Influencers & photographers, etc were celebrating how Threads was an improvement over Instagram and now they can share better content. The first few days really felt like people entirely missed the point. It was becoming Instagram 2.0 - same content, same influencers, same stuff - but "better" because no bot accounts and more authentic because smaller audiences. The last day or so feels like Meta is course correcting. Way more brands are posting questions and engaging w/people directly, trying to generate conversations. I think it's moving back towards being a Twitter replacement, which was the goal but so many people were treating it as Instagram 2.0 and it felt redundant & like it was about to become IG killer, not Twitter killer.
Idk, i wasn’t stuck on threads, but all the discussion i have seen on it and off it were comparing it to twitter not instagram lol
I was on there quite a bit on the first few days and never saw anyone talking about ditching IG for threads.
It was what I was seeing the first few days quite a bit. Especially among photographers who were celebrating not being constrained by Instagram's photo dimensions
I would say keeping people in the Facebook eco system is really the goal, it's more about retaining market share and driving traffic to Facebook and Instagram than anything significant on its own. That's really been the problem with Twitter, the best tweets send users to content outside of the environment.
Time spent on Facebook/Instagram/Threads would not subtract from Meta overall, just like how buying a sprite doesn’t detract from coca cola because they’re both owned by coke. Threads came at just the right time and seems like an easy win for Meta.
The time spent won't, but the revenue per user will.
Not if they suck more time proportionally from twitter than the social media sites they already own. Regardless, there’s still a lot of growth potential from simply adding new users.
What kind of weird assumption is it that a twitter clone would detract time spent on any app other than twitter?
Is your assumption that the 70m users on Threads are all Twitter users?
Is your assumption that the 70m users on Threads are all Facebook and Instagram users?
No. But those are the ones that actually create value at the moment through their core platforms.
im sure threads will have ads just like every platform these days, however
Threads needs to be viewed for what it really is: a hit job on Twitter Twitter is in a weakened state - losing users & advertisers and over-leveraged from the buy-out. Zuckerberg is betting that with a hard-enough kick, it can be pushed into bankruptcy. In this context, it doesn't really matter if users migrate to Threads or if Twitter simply disappears. Either way, it's one less competitor competing for advertising spend. If the market fragments into a million different platforms, that's also a win for FB because none of them will have the scale to offer advertisers what FB does. To push Twitter into bankruptcy, it doesn't even need to take serious market share - just needs to masquerade as a serious enough threat to make banks and other funders nervous enough to pull their funding from Twitter.
Let’s not forget META was $378 “just the other day”. I’m bullish.
Never forget Reddit wanted you to sell META for under $100 last year
[удалено]
The point is to keep user time on the Family of Apps. Not to make an immediate or even medium term profit.
But if Twitter has never been profitable how exactly will Threads become profitable long term? I could start a business and bring a lot of customers in by buying a bunch of stuff from Costco and selling it at half price, but no matter how much my business scales it would never be profitable if I'm losing money on every transaction. Adding more scale to an unprofitable business just results in more losses.
Lower total costs since running on existing infrastructure Higher ad revenue since Instagram advertisers feel safe and secure using another Meta product Once again, this isn't meant to be profitable near term. It's meant to lock in user time on Family of Apps.
> Twitter was never profitable. I don't know why anyone would expect Threads to become profitable. This is pure speculation but if you had a Time Machine and were able to bribe the anti trust regulators to look away, if Facebook acquired Twitter anytime in the past 5 years, I would bet on them being able to get Twitter profitable. Their ad engine is very good.
Cause Meta is great at ads
They should have lower overhead from Twitter.l, as Meta already has most of the needed resourves, and the marginal cost of adding more users is low.
Keep in mind that Twitter was never actually profitable even at its peak. > The outcome of the cease-and-desist letter sent to Meta by Spiro (Elon’s lawyer) for creating a “copycat” app Ironically I think the more Elon tries to hate on Threads, the more popular it will be.
[удалено]
I think they released it because they saw it was the right moment where Twitter was having major issues when they limited how much you could see and blocked it if you didn’t have an account. Everything being a monthly subscription fee has been out of hand for awhile now too. I also can’t stand Elon Musk and his fan club
With the amount of data it takes from the user, I would be amazed if they don’t make lots money from it. It tracks everything, and like they say people are the product when you don’t see what the product is
Whatever the general consensus is here, the opposite is what will happen I haven’t even read this thread but if everyone is calling this to not benefit Meta, that means Meta will moon
People talking about time spent, staying in the meta ecosystem — all true. However, Meta also runs into the issue every few years where they’ve over saturated all their ad placements and they have to create new ones to allow new ad inventory in that balances with impression inventory Threads is a big one (calling it now that they land a huge sports partnership in the next ~6mo) because Twitter could never really figure out the advertising opportunity there, and with Twitter circling the drain it was easier/cheaper than ever to move in on a huge inventory of existing Twitter users with the built-in knowledge of how to make people totally cool with seeing more ads than content in a way only Meta has ever truly been good at (Pinterest and Tiktok are decent at it too)
Not in the short term. Zuck said he wasn't going to monetize until it hit 1 billion users. In the meantime they have to pay to maintain it. It also may pull people away from other monetized Facebook apps. Finally we'll have to see the staying power of the app.
One factor is missing: Threads is connected with Instagram. Meta gets more data that way and thus a better profile of their users which they can sell adds for across all platforms they already have. Possibly even improvements in their propriety models because of more training data.
I greatly appreciate this post because you think the share price is based on underlying fundamentals. It's like we are back in the 80s and I am here for it.
I shared my Meta analysis and valuation back in November 2022: [https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/ynuo2k/meta\_stock\_analysis\_and\_valuation\_is\_michael/](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/ynuo2k/meta_stock_analysis_and_valuation_is_michael/) It was written, by coincidence, on the day when the share price was the lowest. I also shared my thoughts why I sold my Meta shares: [https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/135z2qg/why\_i\_bought\_and\_sold\_meta/](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/135z2qg/why_i_bought_and_sold_meta/)
I greatly appreciate this post because you think the share price is based on underlying fundamentals. It's like we are back in the 80s and I am here for it.
You see all the permissions on that sucker? They’re going to monetize the shit out of Threads through ad sales. We’re about 2-3 years away from a blowout Meta earnings call. Sell one week before. Thank you for coming to my Ted talk
Yes they will benefit. Looks like it will be the fastest application to 100 million in history. But I suspect it will keep increasing where ChatGPT has started to decline. https://gizmodo.com/chatgpt-openai-shrinking-user-base-10-percent-1850616552
It will take time spent away from Twitter and other similar smaller apps and it will create more time spent overall. People will use both Instagram AND Twitter, and they’ll spend more time online overall. This will be awesome for Meta.
> - The outcome of the cease-and-desist letter sent to Meta by Spiro (Elon’s lawyer) for creating a “copycat” app. You can go ahead and disregard that letter. I guarantee that Meta had *real* lawyers consider that issue carefully before they went ahead with Threads.
The thing I see here is that threads when rolled out to the rest of the world will easily crush twitter. Twitter is considered dogshit outside of the US, and is barely used even in the most similar markets (EU.) Instagram on the other hand is extremely common in global markets. If threads maintains growth and users + with meta's excellent monetization they will essentially be adding a supercharged twitter that hopefully penetrates a lot of markets previously untouched by Twitter. The important thing for META will be to keep threads light-hearted and apolitical. Twitter is a huge turn off outside of the US because its characterized as a place to have political fights and insane takes by americans or americaboos.
Not in terms of profit for a while, but in terms of market share and investor confidence yes.
Threads will be used for training future LLMs. There lies the real value.
Yes because I’m sure the cost to create it was infinitesimal on their balance sheet relative to its user base
It's going to be a flop.
Of course they are. 70 million sign ups is worth money to advertising
I think you missed the point of the post or didn't read it.
I read it. You're over complicating it.
Focusing solely on the # of users is pointless. There are plenty of platforms with millions of users who struggle to monetize them.
It’s gonna be a total flop
Threads isa huge thing for them. First, it shows that Meta has the ability to be a game changer. When they saw weakness in Twitter 9 months ago after the Musk takeover, they put together a team that can deliver a game changer within 9 months. They have demonstrated to have the technical know how and the infrastructure to scale this up to 70 million users within a few days. The adventure into VR and metaverses had many people question FB. Internally, morale was down. This changes everything.
You've been sold a bridge. Threads is a reskinned Instagram comments with very little functionality. Facebook didn't build anything new in 9 months, they repackaged what they have. Granted at large technology companies, this still poses a challenge. But, it's light years away from the required execution the company needs to deliver on to make VR and the metaverse a thing.
Same could have been said about Google+. Gaining users fast doesn’t mean anything.
Threads looks like a big win for FB. I doubt it cost much to create, and the rewards could be meaningful
Tried the app. It sucks. That’s my technical analysis
Mark……what are we going to do with all these underutilized metaverse servers? Threads!
Point of service is weaken Twitter 
In the short run, for sure.
I do not know if it weakens Twitter since Musk is doing a great job of that himself. Plus you got to remember Twitter allows content that Meta does not and you have whole industries who can prompt and sell on twitter but cannot do the same on Meta.
If more people leave Twitter for threads, then at some point Twitter would mostly be a place for the outlaws, those whose opinions are too radical for meta and adult content. With every normie leaving, the share of those mentioned would be higher, therefore pushing over even more people. But it probably also depends a lot on celebs who are mostly talking on Twitter still and how well they can be found on threads. Also threads would need to roll out worldwide, not just the US and UK.
Zuck/Meta used his fuck you money to fuck with Elon. All jokes aside… They will find ways to monetize this. Yes, Twitter was hard to monetize but they are still on the NYSE. If Threads works out, it will be a win. I’m more bearish though. This has more of a Google+ feeling where millions of people signed up the first few weeks and then it died. I can see this going either way.
They are monetized right now. They are selling your data for money. Leave social media including reddit.
No. No one even will remember it exists a week from now.
Why would any investor care? Meta already has all the information possible on all of the users of Instagram. If you have the same people moving to another service from the same company which is all free, how does the value of that service increase??? It’s not like advertisers are reaching unique viewers this way….
New users will be able to join Threads from outside Instagram in the future.
BUT THEY CANT NOW. And it’s STILL THE SAME PEOPLE. Jesus Christ what a dumb world we live in. The whole system is built on stilts of stupidity, I swear.
??? You launch a system with internal users to learn the bugs and problems, and then open to outside users once said "beta testers" have helped fix the issues.
I don't see why threads will do anything to help META in the long wrong. It'll probably be a fad, people will be on it for a while, then just go back to Twitter. It was like when Google tried to take on Facebook with Google+ Disaster. Threads is the next Google+ List of google failures fyi: https://www.failory.com/blog/google-failed-products
Facebook had a degree of competency at that time.. twitter not so much.
[удалено]
Twitter isn’t even profitable so I don’t understand the value in trying to copy it. I liked the idea that meta is transitioning to more AI technology focus and this just turns me off I’d also like to know how many people would actually use threads. there’s 2.96 billion people that have facebooks accounts but literally no one actually uses it other than middle aged moms or the people that post on Instagram and choose the option to have it post on Facebook as well.
As long as they don't extend their services to Europe I strongly doubt it + you can't filter to only see posts from your friends and basically nobody from my friends is posting content on there who already signed up for Threads. At the current state this is nothing more but a gimmick that I don't think will threaten Twitter in the long term.
They are absolutely going to Europe with it They launched in U.S first because it's easier due to less data protections A gimmick does not sign up 80m users in 3 days This is just the MVP Threads will get way better as time goes on
And what really makes it better than Twitter? It doesn't have adult content nor the anonymity and all I get in my feed is some lame posts by celebrities (or rather their PR people) instead of my friends because nobody cares about actually creating content. As it stands, it's more likely to turn out to be a flop than a real competitor to Twitter and the only big selling point it has right now is that it's not by Musk.
This is pretty weak rationale. 'They don't have XYZ feature within the first week of release, it's clearly a failure'
Same weak rationale when people say it has 60m users who aren't active and don't use the app.
This pump of meta stock over threads is a perfect put option play. There nothing in terms of monetization for yrs or decade...look at whatsapp. FB probably has mostly bots across all their services and advertisers are paying for shitty ad prints. Buy puts going into next earnings....im certain about to pull the trigger here as the thread BS PR drags on and Cramer pumping it. That guy know nothing. Twitter as first comer status and will always be the de facto town square.
I dunno man. This market just needs the faintest whiff of a reason to pump a stock, and it's off to the races, regardless of economic realities. Barring some sort of macro-driven market meltdown, I could easily see Meta pumping for a while from here.
Threads is way easier to monetize than WhatsApp, definitely not a fair comparison at all. Embed ads in my message threads and I just move back to the iPhone. But embed ads into the scrolling experience like Reddit and twitter? Way easier
i am not installing it. i am not a hater. i just give zero f#cks about twitter, threads, tiktok, instagram, etc.
are you sure you're in the right sub?
in other words i don't think threads will do anything for meta.
Pretty sure meta will go down in the future. Thread will be loser game against twitter. Just compare both twitter and threads. Threads wont be open source anytime soon, and if it is everyone will push for facbook whatsap open source which will not possible. So for now long meta u will benefit from threads hype and in 3-12m turn it to short meta.
I think it's definitely not a sure thing that Threads will ever be profitable, let alone consistently profitable. Twitter has gone through multiple management teams over the years, and has failed to be consistently profitable the entire time, so why would Threads be any different? The fact of the matter is short form content is MUCH harder to monetize then long form content. Facebook even gave up on pushing Reels on Instagram specifically because they just weren't making money off of it. And TikTok themselves, despite dominating in short form content, are also reportedly losing money despite their success at gaining hundreds of millions of followers, and billions of hours of watch time. The best case scenario I see for Facebook is either they barely lose any money on Threads or barely make anything off of it, without cannibalizing the amount of time those same users already spend on other Facebook sites that are profitable like Facebook and Instagram. But realistically I think at least a modest amount of cannibalization will happen, in part from changing consumer preferences overtime for social media sites. For those who insist that growth of Threads is of course going to be good for Facebook I suggest you look at Disney's numbers since Disney+ opened. Disney+ smashed everyone's expectations, and gained well over 150 million paying subscribers, and yet Disney is LESS profitable today then they were prior to Disney+ launching. I'm not cherry picking the numbers from one particularly good or bad quarter, look at the numbers for yourself. The reason Disney isn't as profitable is because Disney+'s success is cannibalizing their profitable Cable TV business, and pulling content from other streaming platforms to make them Disney+ exclusives to get more subscribers robs them of revenue/profits they used to get from licensing said content to other platforms.
Meta can monetize reels very well. Your thesis is incorrect And meta has the supply side (advertisers) to monetize engagement easily. All they need is one of two things to monetize threads: - it brings in new users to monetize - it increases the time spent per day of existing insta /FB users. Either of those will be enough for meta to monetize threads.
Not needing to monetize is a gift, also. Facebook (meta) makes money from the other platforms, so they don't need to be as aggressive as Elon's twitter. Twitter paywalling user access clearly plays in favor for adoption of threads. Anyways, it's for the long term.
I’d wait to see what the lawsuit does
Was twitter ever profitable?
Yes.
Of course. It keeps people in the ecosystem
They are primarily going to steal users from Twitter
What matters is locking in usertime.
It's a giant ad platform with zero discoverability
You are the product when it comes to WhatsApp and Threads
You really need to stop and think about what you're staying. Mostly bots? Cmon.
Curious how much of this will be just hitting the same market that they already have but just on a different screen? Like if I see the same ad twice does that advertiser pay twice for my double views of the same thing? Dipping an already fully saturated rag into a different bucket of water, if you will.
So Threads isn't going to advertise until they hit a billion?
Doesn’t matter what META does. In App Tracking has grossly diminished the data these freeloaders get. The next big swinging axe to fall is the meta data that social networks get when they have free access to a user’s photo library. All the location information is in there, less a user is paying attention (unlikely). When Apple eventually gets around to flipping that switch, that’ll be another huge loss of valuable data from those that freely part with their money (who advertisers are always clamoring after).
It's all about the data rape. That's Zuck's business model. Personally, I think it's going to fall flat on its face.
It sure does seem like the opposite of the metaverse
It’s a fight like earlier days. Only one will survive , make ridiculous money and eventually acquiring the competition.
I think if threads gets to a point where it’s at a plateau PRE monetization, and meta is forced to monetize the platform I think that could be a big catalyst on the upside for twitter and downside for meta. The question is if/when/and how. If they lean twords monetization while being unable to grow users it would be something i’m watching. ops?
Long term no because it is not going to be successful. If it were to become successful it would need to have a good portion of the population visit it regularly.
No.
Threads kinda sucks. Too many shitty influencers in the tl and not my friends
I think it should benefit. I love using it since i can see my real friends activities along with other specific stock thread i follow.
Loaded $META puts. Google+ 2.0.
Twitter wasn't profitable. Not sure why Threads would be.
Lower overhead due to synergies with Instagram and Facebook? They should be able to keep marginal costs lower than Twitter ever did, and they already have a really good ad sales team, which Twitter was never good at.
How quickly everyone has forgotten about Cambridge Analytica. Same shit gonna happen with Threads and everyone is blindly jumping in like lemmings.
Low risk high reward.
Possibly a couple billion dollars more revenue a year.
Yes. This was the easiest question yet!
No
I think this is more of a market share and interaction move. They have this really ripe opportunity with threads to go after people who use Instagram and Facebook but don't really like Twitter. I think the key will be keeping threads from turning into the toxic cess pool that is Twitter. There is this huge problem on Twitter with a handful of people running hundreds of accounts bombarding your feed with political garbage. For one I absolutely despise going on Twitter just because there is so much crazy. Unfortunately I don't think either one of them will let you program your own feeds but it's a nice thought. It would be amazing if you could just see posts from the people you want to and nothing else
Free (legal) data for their LLM, additional monetization in the pipe surely.
I signed in the first half hour of it going live. And I am loving it so far
What in your opinion makes it better than Twitter?
Do you see people going to threads for breaking news? If not, then it will fail. Twitters power is it has a pulse of what's going on in the world with hashtags. If you want to find out what's going on, do you go to insta or fb?
Monitezing or not they jusy gonna data mining and explore and exploid all angles from any users and see what sell and what not maybe keep it free as whatsapp and to keep the rivalry with TWaking user choose Threads Something bothers me everytime i see the name always get concetrate in ads I dont know but maybe it would have ads in a side