I've never mentioned your magical 90% number, which is clearly rubbish, I only mentioned your assertion that Twitter was 'cearly bloated', and it was easily shown that you have absolutely no idea if that is true or not. You're guessing.Yes the entire industry. Your response was specific to Twitter with the example of 2FA. I didn’t say Twitter was 90% bloated but it was bloated.
I've never mentioned your magical 90% number, which is clearly rubbish, I only mentioned your assertion that Twitter was 'cearly bloated', and it was easily shown that you have absolutely no idea if that is true or not. You're guessing.
You keep telling people to "Read", but you're asserting people are saying things they aren't. I would just stop whilst you're behind if I were you.
Elon is eventually selling personal data in the darkweb for millions already!Thinking more in line of them open to cyber attacks. With that much personal data on their server, there is no way any hackers wont be interested to try.
It will hurt him more badly when GDPR comes in than him losing advertiser money.Elon is eventually selling personal data in the darkweb for millions already!
I completely buy the idea that Twitter has been poorly run and could have been a much better (and more profitable) product, but I have zero belief in the idea that whatever Elon is doing now is going to make it any better, or that Elon is capable of doing it in the first place. I wasn't a Twitter shareholder, or someone whose business relied on Twitter, so I was perfectly content with it just sort of stumbling along as it did. This just looks like it's going to spectacularly crash, which will be entertaining for a little bit and then in the end we don't have Twitter anymore.I don’t buy for a single minute this Twitter is gonna be better in two years. And if that really happens, and Elon will be able to make a better product with 80% or so less employees, then it means that the entire industry does not know what is doing and has over hired. Which means that all of us in the industry are in trouble. feck that so hopefully Twitter burns!
Yes, 2FA did stop working. I pointed out that as soon as cuts started being made shit started to go wrong.Its also worth noting 2FA stopped working in that time.
This is what you said.
Twitter being bloated does not mean that Musk getting rid of 90% of staff makes sense.
Twitter being bloated in terms of staff is clear if you look at the numbers and growth in numbers vs revenues. Its not a guess and thats why the industry is having a correction.
Absolutely. It would take a miracle for it not to happen.The example of old bugs reappearing has already happened days after they fired half the people. I think larger-scale issues are inevitable and on the way soon.
Hah. Documentation. Hah. In my 10+ years of experience, I have yet to see good, up to date and accurate documentation. The reason is, writing detailed documentations is boring and developers hate to do it. They even hate more updating that documentation after a bug fix or new feature, because they have more bugs and features in pipeline that have to be delivered yesterday, because sprint is over in 2 days. We'll update documentations when there's less crunch (IE most likely never, but even if it happens, soon it's outdated again). If you have some people hired just to write documentation (I've seen that too), they most like don't understand sh*t and that kind of documentation is useless.How much time do you reckon before shit starts breaking?
Also cant Twitter remain stable by hiring aggressively? No knowledge transfer but I'm sure Twitter has decent documentation.
No one said it grows linearly, but I guess readYes, 2FA did stop working. I pointed out that as soon as cuts started being made shit started to go wrong.
Just because you say its clear doesn't make it so. Revenue vs employee numbers never grow linearly, not sure why you think they would.
I think everybody understands this already; if you work people to the bone, you produce more(in theory, discounting employee wellbeing/churn etc.). One of the core notions of the tech industry is that it doesn't do this though, at least in the way long standing industries like finance do. It's supposed to be run, for the most part, by people that don't subscribe to this burnout inducing mentality, so I'm not sure that it's going to cause some sort of revolution.Personally, I think we are witnessing history. In the unlikely case that Musk pulls this off, it could have transformative effects on the tech industry (showing that you can achieve results with significantly lesser people).
Then state something more than total and complete vagueries. Everything you've said is "its clear, trust me bro". You make a statement about revenue vs employee growth but don't state what you think it should be like. Its almost like you don't know what you're talking about so you're putting headlines out there without anything behind them.No one said it grows linearly, but I guess read
Snide is what I was met with based on a statement which went against the majority view in the thread. I’ll leave it there though.Then state something more than total and complete vagueries. Everything you've said is "its clear, trust me bro". You make a statement about revenue vs employee growth but don't state what you think it should be like. Its almost like you don't know what you're talking about so you're putting headlines out there without anything behind them.
The snide tone lends absolutely nothing to your position or argument, quite the opposite.
I don’t buy for a single minute this Twitter is gonna be better in two years. And if that really happens, and Elon will be able to make a better product with 80% or so less employees, then it means that the entire industry does not know what is doing and has over hired. Which means that all of us in the industry are in trouble. feck that so hopefully Twitter burns!
My personal opinion from 10+ years in the industry is that there is overhiring. I've repeatedly had teammates on various projects who were barely positive contributors. They would deliver features, but they would be bugged as hell or the code would be designed so badly any future work on it would take twice as long.I think everybody understands this already; if you work people to the bone, you produce more(in theory, discounting employee wellbeing/churn etc.). One of the core notions of the tech industry is that it doesn't do this though, at least in the way long standing industries like finance do. It's supposed to be run, for the most part, by people that don't subscribe to this burnout inducing mentality, so I'm not sure that it's going to cause some sort of revolution.
If this were a twitter, I would retweet this. I think it's a really good take of what's happening.The perfect / entirely sustainable / barely tolerable head count at Twitter is not a trivial matter because their product per se was a technical mess already, in need of constant micro-management… and without ever generating sufficient money to be profitable, they already relied upon “subsidies” (venture capital, the most) that are not going to suffice now that ads’ income is disappearing.
Here enters Muskonomics?? Older businesses in the engineering sector, not necessarily brick and mortar ones, had a golden rule for profitability going like this: every employee generates 3x his gross salary for the firm.
I do not have Twitter’s numbers before and after Musk, yet I suspect he was underestimating again how heavy and messy Twitter is as a platform, so messy that there is no way to make it sustainable without ads… if not downscaling it massively, making it a closed circle without freeloaders (which is a business model as well, think of substack for example?).
I completely buy the idea that Twitter has been poorly run and could have been a much better (and more profitable) product, but I have zero belief in the idea that whatever Elon is doing now is going to make it any better, or that Elon is capable of doing it in the first place. I wasn't a Twitter shareholder, or someone whose business relied on Twitter, so I was perfectly content with it just sort of stumbling along as it did. This just looks like it's going to spectacularly crash, which will be entertaining for a little bit and then in the end we don't have Twitter anymore.
I agree that Twitter could have been run better, and I also agree that there might be some overhiring here and there. However, what is happening in Twitter is extreme. He randomly fired half of their workforce, which made many others leave. And now, if the rumours are true that 75% of the remaining are leaving, we are talking for less than 1000 people remaining in a company that had over 7000 workers. I do not think that 700 or so remaining employees, however hard core they are, can do the job that 7000 did in the past.My personal opinion from 10+ years in the industry is that there is overhiring. I've repeatedly had teammates on various projects who were barely positive contributors. They would deliver features, but they would be bugged as hell or the code would be designed so badly any future work on it would take twice as long.
However most businesses want features out as soon as possible. It's ridiculous how many times do businesses really have an approach "if it takes 9 months to deliver a baby, we should have 9 mothers to deliver it in one". The problem is it works, kinda (you'll get it in 4 months), but then the next baby takes twice as long. But at least you are getting features out and making money on them. Which is important.
Working people to the bone, never works. They stop caring, start delivering sh*t and then leave.
So my opinion is, can Twitter be streamlined? Sure, but how much? I don't know, but I do know you need to do it slowly, carefully and make sure not to overwork the rest of the teams as then it's getting counterproductive.
What Musk doesn't look very smart to me, but I'm giving him a small chance of success, maybe he lucks out. I do think it's more likely Twitter and his other businesses will collapse due to this.
Here's a tweet:I've just skimmed two pages since midday and there are no more tweets in here. Has Twitter already gone down or is everyone just too busy babbling?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think you have it spot on. I haven't seen how many employers are quitting (source on that would be good), and how many he will be left with. I guess we will know the real numbers in a few month. The fact some people were fired and then re-hired in the next few days, just even more demonstrates the clusterfeck.I agree that Twitter could have been run better, and I also agree that there might be some overhiring here and there. However, what is happening in Twitter is extreme. He randomly fired half of their workforce, which made many others leave. And now, if the rumours are true that 75% of the remaining are leaving, we are talking for less than 1000 people remaining in a company that had over 7000 workers. I do not think that 700 or so remaining employees, however hard core they are, can do the job that 7000 did in the past.
Now of course, Twitter will start hiring, and luckily for them, Meta just fired 11K people (although most of them in not-tech), Argo AI closed (so 2000 good workers there), and there are other layoffs in other top tech companies. At the same time, he basically fired every recruiter, and even at the best of times, recruiting takes time (checking your CV, talking with HR, talking with hiring manager and/or 1-2 screening interviews, followed by 5 rounds of technical interviews and 1 behavioural interview, with a committee reading the assessments and deciding to hire or not, often followed by a VP checking the decision with veto power). Essentially, it is very hard to do this in less than a month, and quite often it goes 2-3 months. To make things even worse, there are entire teams who have been fired, so who is gonna do the inteviewing for those roles. With entire teams fired, it means that there are entire parts of the codebase/database/infrastructure that no one doesn't even know what to do with, entire features that people are not aware, let alone know the codebase. If Twitter starts hiring fast, it means that the current engineers need to spend a significant amount of time interviewing, rather than writing code.
In other words, it looks like a total clusterfeck.
witter annual net profit / loss 2012 to 2021 ($mm)He obviously knows he bought a non-profitable company
| Year | Net profit / loss ($mm) |
|---|---|
| 2012 | -79 |
| 2013 | -645 |
| 2014 | -577 |
| 2015 | -521 |
| 2016 | -456 |
| 2017 | -108 |
| 2018 | 1206 |
| 2019 | 1466 |
| 2020 | -1136 |
| 2021 | -221 |
| Year | Revenue ($bn) |
|---|---|
| 2012 | 0.3 |
| 2013 | 0.6 |
| 2014 | 1.4 |
| 2015 | 2.2 |
| 2016 | 2.5 |
| 2017 | 2.4 |
| 2018 | 3 |
| 2019 | 3.4 |
| 2020 | 3.7 |
| 2021 | 5 |
The 7K number is a bit crazy by itself. I'd love to see how these were distributed by teams.I agree that Twitter could have been run better, and I also agree that there might be some overhiring here and there. However, what is happening in Twitter is extreme. He randomly fired half of their workforce, which made many others leave. And now, if the rumours are true that 75% of the remaining are leaving, we are talking for less than 1000 people remaining in a company that had over 7000 workers. I do not think that 700 or so remaining employees, however hard core they are, can do the job that 7000 did in the past.
Now of course, Twitter will start hiring, and luckily for them, Meta just fired 11K people (although most of them in not-tech), Argo AI closed (so 2000 good workers there), and there are other layoffs in other top tech companies. At the same time, he basically fired every recruiter, and even at the best of times, recruiting takes time (checking your CV, talking with HR, talking with hiring manager and/or 1-2 screening interviews, followed by 5 rounds of technical interviews and 1 behavioural interview, with a committee reading the assessments and deciding to hire or not, often followed by a VP checking the decision with veto power). Essentially, it is very hard to do this in less than a month, and quite often it goes 2-3 months. To make things even worse, there are entire teams who have been fired, so who is gonna do the inteviewing for those roles. With entire teams fired, it means that there are entire parts of the codebase/database/infrastructure that no one doesn't even know what to do with, entire features that people are not aware, let alone know the codebase. If Twitter starts hiring fast, it means that the current engineers need to spend a significant amount of time interviewing, rather than writing code.
In other words, it looks like a total clusterfeck.
So it's been leaking money except in 2018 and 2019? What happened? Revenue jump in those years doesn't correspond with profits, so they somehow cut expenses, how? Also why did they lose so much money in 2020, but they've had revenue growth, what were the extra costs?witter annual net profit / loss 2012 to 2021 ($mm)
Year Net profit / loss ($mm) 2012 -79 2013 -645 2014 -577 2015 -521 2016 -456 2017 -108 2018 1206 2019 1466 2020 -1136 2021 -221
so over a 5 year period it made 1.2bn profit
witter annual revenue 2012 to 2021 ($bn)
Year Revenue ($bn) 2012 0.3 2013 0.6 2014 1.4 2015 2.2 2016 2.5 2017 2.4 2018 3 2019 3.4 2020 3.7 2021 5
turnover of 17.5bn in the same period
which is about a 7% return which isnt bad in a company growing revenues in the way it was ... certainly it wasnt dying anytime soon before he started poking it with a stick
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Id guess in 20 their advertising revenues were less than forecast because of covid? but their overheads would not have been able to have been reduced as quickly?So it's been leaking money except in 2018 and 2019? What happened? Revenue jump in those years doesn't correspond with profits, so they somehow cut expenses, how? Also why did they lose so much money in 2020, but they've had revenue growth, what were the extra costs?
These numbers (2017 to 2021) are so strange to me, such huge shifts in profits, while revenue consistently rising. It makes me wonder what's going on. On the other hand I know nothing about finances of big corporations.
Fail fast and iterate happens at all start ups. Nothing ground breaking about it. If Musk has some innovative idea that can monetise Twitter's user base then jolly good. But Twitter's existing infra to support daily DAU will require more head count than a start up just getting off the ground. Also the only ideas Musk has thrown out so far are to try to monetise videos on Twitter ala Youtube or append Twitter with a payments platform. Facebook has a much higher DAU than twitter, already possess long form video hosting and would be much better equipped to challenge Youtube. They launched their own video streaming service to host original TV shows and sporting events like La Liga. Yet they have have not succeeded in this space so don't think cracking the video space is going to be easy for Musk either. P2P Payments in US market, I am not well versed it so can't say if that will take off.The work force was bloated clearly (not just Twitter the entire industry). They will make mistakes and iterate quickly rather than suffer from paralysis and ship nothing (what has Twitter shipped in the last few years)
I wouldn’t judge this based soley on the first month, especially when a lot is based on dislike for Musk anyway.
Fail fast and iterate with a smaller more engaged team. I think what comes out at the end of that will be interesting.
Do not be suprised to see long form video coming to Twitter within that 2 years along with improvements in spaces.
I think the industry is going to get a shake up top once PE sees what happens at Twitter.
I doubt it, Musk is running it like a headless chicken currently & it's only going to get worse due to the amount of resignations. That's not going to motivate advertisers to come back.I reckon Twitter will turn out to be better and profitable within 24 months.
Good post. And on P2P, there's already incumbents Venmo/Paypal and Cash App.Fail fast and iterate happens at all start ups. Nothing ground breaking about it. If Musk has some innovative idea that can monetise Twitter's user base then jolly good. But Twitter's existing infra top support daily DAU will require more head count than a start up just getting off the ground would. Also the only ideas Musk has thrown out so far is to try to monetise videos on Twitter ala Youtube and append Twitter with a payments platform. Facebook has a much higher DAU than twitter, already possess long form video hosting and would be much better equipped to challenge Youtube. They launched their own video streaming service to host original TV shows and sporting events like La Liga. Yet they have have not succeeded in this space so don't think cracking the video space is going to be easy for Musk either. P2P Payments in US market, I am not well versed it so can't say if that will take off.
I agree on infra support,I don’t believe it cannot be replaced though especially in the current market placeFail fast and iterate happens at all start ups. Nothing ground breaking about it. If Musk has some innovative idea that can monetise Twitter's user base then jolly good. But Twitter's existing infra to support daily DAU will require more head count than a start up just getting off the ground. Also the only ideas Musk has thrown out so far are to try to monetise videos on Twitter ala Youtube or append Twitter with a payments platform. Facebook has a much higher DAU than twitter, already possess long form video hosting and would be much better equipped to challenge Youtube. They launched their own video streaming service to host original TV shows and sporting events like La Liga. Yet they have have not succeeded in this space so don't think cracking the video space is going to be easy for Musk either. P2P Payments in US market, I am not well versed it so can't say if that will take off.
I guess time will tell. I certainly wouldn’t rule it out after 1 monthI doubt it, Musk is running it like a headless chicken currently & it's only going to get worse due to the amount of resignations. That's not going to motivate advertisers to come back.
Then you need to factor in that Musk openly airs that he's a w"nkstain. Don't like any Billionaires really but how often do you hear about Bezos,Gates,Dorsey..
I don't even know any of their political leanings but I know Musk is a proud Republican at a time when they've gone full nutjob.
Not hard to see that bias will be a major thing going forward, it'll be the right wings version of free speech. Hate over facts.
Microsoft practically had a monopoly, Tesla has a small share of the market.To older guys here: Does this whole discussion here remind you of the Bill Gates saga in the 1990s? Is Bill Gates smart? Can Bill Gates program? He is not a programmer, he doesn't even have a degree. He stole everything from Apple. Bill Gates is stupid, he missed the internet. Linux on the desktop had 100% increase last year (1998), Microsoft will soon be history.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He didn't miss the internet. On the contrary, their early integration of it into Windows (Internet explorer, outlook) was a big factor in its near monopoly of the desktop sphere.To older guys here: Does this whole discussion here remind you of the Bill Gates saga in the 1990s? Is Bill Gates smart? Can Bill Gates program? He is not a programmer, he doesn't even have a degree. He stole everything from Apple. Bill Gates is stupid, he missed the internet. Linux on the desktop had 100% increase last year (1998), Microsoft will soon be history.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There is cycle for everything. Ya he was kinda of irrelevant in the late nineties and Microsoft might soon be history but that doesn't take anything away from what he achieved. He was also smart enough eventually to step aside.To older guys here: Does this whole discussion here remind you of the Bill Gates saga in the 1990s? Is Bill Gates smart? Can Bill Gates program? He is not a programmer, he doesn't even have a degree. He stole everything from Apple. Bill Gates is stupid, he missed the internet. Linux on the desktop had 100% increase last year (1998), Microsoft will soon be history.
