Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Stock Plunges 21 Percent After Earnings Show Effects of Fake-Account Purge (marketwatch.com)

Twitter shares fell 21% on Friday as the company reported that user growth had turned negative, even as its quarterly results beat Wall Street expectations. The decline was even greater than Facebook's almost 19 percent plunge in shares after the social media giant reported disappointing results. MarketWatch reports: Twitter posted a profit for the third consecutive quarter, with its $134 million in net income equating to 13 cents a share. Adjusted per-share earnings came to 17 cents. The FactSet consensus estimate had been 16 cents. Twitter's revenue climbed 24% to $710.5 million to beat the FactSet consensus estimate by about $2 million. Even as executives talked about Twitter's bright future on the earnings calls, investors appeared to react to Twitter's slowing user growth, as its monthly user count went south, falling by 1 million to 355 million, as compared with the year's first quarter. The decline was expected after recent reports had the company purging about a million fake accounts a day.

5 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Just to be clear by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I honestly think one of the main reasons Trump won was the media's refusal to call him out on obvious lies and his shady business record. And that refusal was fueled by a desire to see a horse race and to suck up all those ad buys. Trump should never have been a serious candidate. He refused to release his tax returns, has a string of failed businesses and a court case where he admitted under oath his net worth isn't near what he claims and a long history of extra-marital affairs of the sort that don't go down well with the base he was trying to appeal to. That baggage should have wrecked him. But the media continually went easy on him even as they piled on Hillary.
    Of course if they'd buried Trump in his own bad press early on folks would have stopped paying attention and the guys bank rolling his campaign would stop; meaning no more free eyeballs and no more free ad money. Trump got something like a billion in free coverage most of it positive. But then again if the media was doing it's job we'd be calling Bernie Mr President.

    Okay, just so I'm clear here.

    You think the media *wasn't* incessantly harsh on Trump in the run-up to the election.

    You think most of the media coverage was positive.

    I am at a loss as to how, exactly, the media could have been more harsh...

  2. It's about time by timholman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Using Twitter is like playing Russian Roulette. Every time you tweet, you pull the trigger. Most of the time, nothing happens, but sooner or later you'll get unlucky and the Internet mob will destroy you for what you tweeted (latest case in point: James Gunn).

    Maybe, just maybe, people are finally beginning to realize just how toxic Twitter really is. It only took a few thousand ruined lives and careers to get the point across.

  3. Fantasy cage match: Network Effects v Market Cap by shanen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's interesting me about this news, also extended to Facebook, is the interplay between the corporate value that's actually based on network effects versus the delusional stock prices that drive the market cap. To review, the idea of network effects is that more users of the network increase the value of the network, often more than linearly. However, what happens when lots of the users become fake identities that are not actually contributing any real value? The tiny bit of the stock price that is related to actual value (rather than gambling machines battling to the death) is going to have to adjust when the network appears to shrink.

    From a fundamental level (as if anyone cared anymore relative to technical speculation), I don't see any value in Twitter from the git go.

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  4. Re:The election brought in a ton of money by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not disagreeing with you at all.

    Trump would have won.

    People wanted change.

    Hillary self-identified as Obama 2.0.

    The Democratic party rigged their whole primary process. Bernie was not supposed to be there to dilute the vote.

    Clinton had too much baggage and Sanders was too radical to the left.

    Trump promised whatever it was that his immediate rally-goers needed to survive.

    Back to your point:

    Businesses don't care about anything except money.

    America is not a Republic or a democracy.

    It's a Capitalistic society.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  5. Re:With the exception of the LA Times by ravenshrike · · Score: 3, Interesting

    During the primaries all the left wing msm went easy on him and treated him with kid gloves. The moment he won the primaries the MSM barring Fox news completely flipped the script.