Technology StocksTwitter, Inc.

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1122)9/27/2017 11:49:49 AM
From: richardred
   of 1203
I wish I was one of the ones selected to try it. Many of my tweets have to be shortened to make the count.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: richardred who wrote (1123)9/27/2017 5:01:33 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 1203
I have the same problem. Sometimes I would like to include a comment or a short quote from an article I am referencing.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: richardred who wrote (1123)9/30/2017 9:51:32 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 1203
Personally, I think that an acquisition makes more sense, but who know?

Why Amazon should buy Twitter

It’s not a crazy idea.

by Kurt Wagner
Sep 30, 2017, 12:41pm EDT

Photo by David Ryder/Getty Images
Amazon should buy Twitter.

One year ago, when Twitter was out looking for a new home, Amazon wasn’t really mentioned as a possible suitor. But many people — myself included — think Twitter will eventually have to sell. After years of little user growth and no profits, it’s clear the company needs a larger, more stable parent to protect it from the pressures of public company life.

Amazon could be that larger, more stable benefactor.

The current state of play: Twitter may be the most relevant it’s ever been, thanks in part to President Donald Trump, who uses the service daily to make pronouncements that end up destabilizing financial markets as well as world affairs. He’s stoked political tensions, bickered with other politicians, and created drama with other nations. ( Hi, North Korea!)

Trump aside, there are other reasons, though unproven, for why Twitter might look appealing to Amazon. It’s still the best platform for real-time search (which is why a lot of Google searches now show tweets), and while Twitter hasn’t perfected its search product, there is a lot of potential. Twitter hasn’t figured out social commerce yet either, but perhaps Amazon could make it work.

There are a lot of other reasons, which we get to below, but before that, let’s talk money. Amazon could easily make it work. Even at a very high 30 percent premium, Twitter’s takeout price would be around $16 billion. And while Amazon had $15.4 billion in cash at the end of June, it could offer stock plus cash. Or it could just borrow the funds outright as it did when it bought Whole Foods for just under $14 billion in June.

Why should Amazon buy Twitter? Here are five reasons:


Amazon has a growing advertising business, and Twitter is an advertising company. Twitter hasn’t figured out direct response advertising the way Google and Facebook have, but matching Amazon’s purchase and search data with Twitter’s data around people’s interests is a fun idea. It could provide an immediate (though relatively small) boost if Amazon decided it wants to actually compete with Facebook and Google for marketing dollars, and Twitter’s real-time search data could prove valuable. Amazon is competing just fine on its own: eMarketer projects Amazon’s U.S. digital ad revenue will surpass Twitter’s this year, but adding Twitter would give Amazon much more data on mobile users.

Live Video

Twitter wants to be the best online destination for live video, a part of its push to distribute real-time news and information. The problem is that Twitter doesn’t have very good live video content. Many of its deals are for video that probably wouldn’t find a home anywhere else. Amazon, on the other hand, has some amazing content, including original TV shows and NFL football, but a smaller overall reach given it has about 85 million Prime members. Twitter, which had 328 million monthly active users as of June, could offer Amazon additional reach for its content, especially for mobile viewers, and offer a built-in social experience for some of Amazon’s best shows. Plus, putting some Amazon videos on Twitter might help draw people in who aren’t yet Amazon Prime subscribers.

Customer Service

Amazon is online shopping, but it doesn’t provide much in the way of connecting people to businesses the way that, say, Facebook is trying to do with Messenger and WhatsApp. Buying Twitter would immediately give Amazon another messaging option — and one that many people already use to try and get attention from brands and businesses. Imagine if Amazon could sell you a new television, then automatically connect you with the seller via Twitter DM for any troubleshooting, receipts or exchanges. Twitter already offers some business features for customer service purposes, but it’s really underachieved there. Teaming with Amazon could help.

Media impact

If anyone is willing to pay for a media company with social impact, it may be Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. He already owns the The Washington Post, which he bought for $250 million back in 2013. (That was a personal purchase, not an Amazon purchase.) He may believe Twitter’s social and cultural value is worth preserving — plus, Bezos actually tweets. Potential bonus: The Post was not profitable when Bezos bought it, but turned a profit in 2016. Without the pressure that comes from a publicly traded stock, perhaps Bezos could do the same for Twitter.

Amazon can be patient

Some believe that, more than anything, Twitter would benefit from some air cover while it gets things figured out. Imagine if Twitter didn’t need to report earnings every three months, and the service was instead measured by its ability to influence the real world and disseminate information? Putting the company under Amazon’s umbrella would give Bezos time to figure out the best way to value Twitter without watching its business get ripped by the media and Wall Street every three months.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: hollyhunter10/2/2017 7:20:19 PM
   of 1203
Looks like good entry point here.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: FUBHO10/12/2017 7:14:49 PM
   of 1203
Tech Giants Transform From 'Saviors' to 'Threats'...

FACEBOOK Sandberg Slams TWITTER Over Censorship...

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: FUBHO who wrote (1127)10/13/2017 6:54:09 AM
From: scion
   of 1203
Twitter deleted data potentially crucial to Russia probes

Social-media platform’s strict privacy policy led to deletions of Russian information of interest to investigators.

By JOSH MEYER 10/13/2017 05:07 AM EDT

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: scion who wrote (1128)10/14/2017 4:03:19 AM
   of 1203
It would be quite ironic for Russia to give America the greatest president ever. LOL MAGA bitches!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: Glenn Petersen10/24/2017 10:15:56 PM
   of 1203
Twitter will now label political ads, including who bought them and how much they are spending

  • Twitter will clearly label political ads and require campaigns and organizations to disclose who bought the ad and how much they spent.
  • A new "transparency center" will have a database of all ads currently running on the platform, with more disclosures for political ads.
  • The new rules come as Twitter and other social platforms are under scrutiny from lawmakers for allowing Russian interference through online political ads during the 2016 election.
Michelle Castillo | @mishcastillo
October 24, 2017

Twitter announced new ad transparency measures 5 Hours Ago | 01:30

As political pressure mounts on social media companies to say where ads are coming from, Twitter will reveal more information about political advertising on its platform.

Twitter said in a blog post on Tuesday it would clearly label political electioneering ads, which the Federal Election Commission (FEC) defines as an ad used to promote a specific candidate for elected office or affiliated party posted within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election. Electioneering ads can also include any ad clearly promoting a political candidate at any time.

The ads will have some sort of visual marker, likely a purple dot next to the user handle, and a purple box with the text "Promoted by" and the name of the sponsor.

Courtesy of Twitter

Twitter will label political electioneering ads meant to promote a candidate or a candidate's party for elected office.

In addition, the company will limit which criteria can be used to target people and will introduce a "stronger" penalty on those who do not abide by the new rules. The company did not say what the tougher standards or penalties will be.

Twitter, along with Facebook and Google, are sending their lawyers to Congress to testify as lawmakers investigate Russian involvement in the 2016 election through online political ad buying. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have introduced the " Honest Ads Act" as a way to get platforms to disclose more about paid online political ads. The legislation would require platforms with 50 million or more monthly unique visitors to have a public database of political ads and records for anyone who bought more than $500 worth of political ads in the previous 12 months.

Twitter's move to provide more information on political ads lines up with most of what Congress is asking for.

The company will also launch a "transparency center," which will show all ads — political or not — currently running on Twitter, and how long the ads have been running. The database will show users which ads have been targeted toward them and the personal criteria used to target them.

Political ads specifically will have additional information in the center, including all associated campaign ads currently running or that have run on the platform. It will show who funded the campaign, how much they spent on this specific campaign, and how much they spent on the platform in total. There will be information on the criteria used to place the ad, such as age, gender and geography.

The new ad policies will first be enforced in the U.S. but will expand globally eventually.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1130)10/24/2017 10:18:08 PM
From: Sam
   of 1203
"disclose who bought the ad"

But how will they know where the money actually came from? It is pretty easy to hide real ownership.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Sam who wrote (1131)10/24/2017 10:44:13 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
2 Recommendations   of 1203
You have the same problem with contributions made directly to candidates.

The vast majority of ad buys will probably come from PACs, party organizations and the candidates themselves. These buys are easy to vet. Enterprising reporters and Internet trolls can vet the unfamiliar names. I suspect that they will do a better job of vetting the ad buys than the party organizations do vetting the direct contributions.

Transparency is a step in the right direction.

I suspect when the dollar amounts are finally accumulated that we will find that the Russians spent a relatively small amount on the ads, particularly when you consider how much the candidates spent. Unfortunately, the Russians are masters of misinformation and manipulation and got more of a bang for their buck.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.