ADOTAS – Where’s the beef, Twitter? And by beef, I mean revenue — according to eMarketer, you’re going to bring in $250 million this year, which doesn’t really justify the billions of dollars ($7 billion? Really?) private market speculators think you’re worth.
How are you going to get to a quarter billion in revenue? Yes, geotargeting for Promoted Tweets is nice, but I don’t see brands chomping at the bit. And branded pages are a cool idea, but are you going to charge for them? Possibly follow the Facebook Page advertising model?
And now you’re testing a new revenue product — third-party text ads that appear below the trending topics column. Well, that’s a smart use of dead space, but we’re talking incremental revenue at best.
There’s another problem, buddy — sure Vice President of International Strategy Katie Stanton just boasted about 200 million accounts, but that doesn’t equal 200 million users. The microblogger’s zombie problem is right out of “Night of the Living Dead.”
Last month, Cornell University and Yahoo! Research suggested 0.05% of its users are responsible for half of the tweets — a little math figures that to 10,000 highly active members. Combine that with a recent Pew study suggesting only 8% of American Internet users are tweeters and Twitter sounds like kind of a small community to be dropping major ad dollars into.
However, Twitter’s data is quite valuable for social monitoring purposes, hence why the company charges fees for data streams through Gnip. As more brands look for social monitoring services, requiring the purchase of more streams, could this become enough of a revenue driver to offset lackluster ad revenue?
Or should Twitter reconsider that rumored $10 billion acquisition offer from Google? Now those guys know how to soak up the ad revenue.