
Apple Is Said to Discuss an Investment in Twitter - iProject
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/28/technology/apple-is-said-to-discuss-an-investment-in-twitter.html?_r=1&ref=technology
======
Steko
A lot of people are probably going to blow this out of proportion as Apple
looking to buy Twitter and lock everyone out but here's what I think:

Tim Cook knows a lot of his users use FB and Twitter as their primary
e-communication channels and that that's where they spend a lot of their time
and is the primary use of the mobile devices he sells them.

Deals like this then have a single aim: to ensure the optimal consumer
experience. Tim wants the Twitter app on iOS to be the best in breed. Not just
today but in 5 years. When Twitter introduces a new feature, Tim wants that
thing to be working smoothly on iOS on day 1. When Tim launches his search
engine with iOS 7 or 8 he wants to have Twitter search built in.

That costs money and as it turns out Apple has a metric crapton of it.

~~~
taligent
I think Apple just doesn't want Twitter screwing it over like Google did and
Facebook will.

The fact that Google wouldn't provide turn by turn navigation, 3D and other
features to iOS was a hard and expensive lesson for Apple. And with Facebook
also getting into apps and phones it needs a third party.

~~~
cma
Google didn't provide turn by turn but we don't know why. Apple gets a cut of
Google's search revenues on iPhone; android vendors don't get as large of a
cut (or any cut in some cases).

------
JoeCortopassi
"Apple, which has stumbled in its efforts to get into social media, has talked
with Twitter in recent months about making a strategic investment in it,
_according to people briefed on the matter_."

Every bit of substance that this article has, is stated in this first
sentence. Anonymous sources like this, with no real corroborating facts, are
usually indicative of PR people testing the waters for things that _might_
happen. We already know that Twitter and Apple have a relationship, what _new_
facts does this article have that indicate that anything worthy of discussion
is happening? I doubt anything of substance will come of this.

~~~
gry
Also, Apple has a track record of paving their own path the last 10 years. If
this were true, Apple doesn't feel like Apple anymore. It would feel like the
future is in someone else rather than theirs.

This would be the end of Apple as a culture, though they would still succeed
as a company.

I'm not ready to subscribe to this. I don't think Apple will either. Too soon.

~~~
jshen
Apple, i.e. Steve Jobs, stated multiple times that they don't have to build
everything themselves, that they aren't good at everything, and that strategic
partnerships with outside companies is important. If my memory is correct,
Jobs even said that one of his biggest mistakes in his early career was not
realizing this.

~~~
gry
This is true; and within Apple's success. I guess I see them having an
incredible ability to meld things into their own.

A strategic and public investment, like Twitter, feels unlike them. Twitter
seems to be the news, not Apple.

The AuthenTec acquisition, however, feels very Apple. They have a vision, they
found a partner (and for some reason, acquired them). If it weren't for the
purchase, AuthenTec would still be unknown to me.

The biometric integration will be, bar none, an Apple event.

------
AznHisoka
Oh no... flash forward a year or 2, and Apple will buy all of Twitter! It's
their knight in a white horse coming to bail them out! Now I'll never get to
see how Twitter will make serious revenue to sustain itself.

~~~
hollerith
Apparently, the owners of Twitter will make most of their revenue selling
computers and other consumer electronics :)

------
stevenj
As someone who has a significant stake in Apple (as a part of my personal
investments), this concerns me.

Steve used to say that it's what you don't do that matters most.

He has also said that Apple's mission is to simply make great products. That's
its identity. Make great products.

I don't see how investing/partnering with Twitter fits that.

As a customer and shareholder I want Apple to stay true to its identity and
mission. An identity that cost a significant amount of pain and time to
discover.

Maybe Tim wants to change Apple's core identity. I'm not sure.

I fear he may make strategic decisions mainly because he wants to distinguish
himself from Steve.

Steve even told him not to play the "what would Steve do?" game.

But I think Steve always asked, in the end, what's best for Apple and its
customer.

And I hope Tim does the same.

I hope he focuses on product. Make great products.

I recently signed up for iTunes Match and I've just had problems with it. It
hasn't "just worked".

I hope that's not a sign of what's to come.

\- - -

I want to add that I think it's still very early in the game when it comes to
social.

I think it's entirely possible that Twitter is the RIMM of social.

It might not be, but I think it's possible.

Apple, please stay away from social networks; especially right now.

~~~
jad
> Maybe Tim wants to change Apple's core identity.

The Wall Street Journal has its own article on this[1], and it reports that
"Apple Inc. held discussions with Twitter Inc. more than a year ago about
taking a strategic investment in the short-messaging service." Steve was still
alive more than a year ago.

1:
[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087239639044334370457755...](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443343704577553953443264394.html)

------
monvural
Apple missed on e-mail by making Mobile Me a paid service. This may be their
way of making up for that, and having a solid foot hold in a consumer social
network without that needing to be baked into their DNA.

Makes me wonder why Microsoft didn't turn its 2% of Facebook into a larger
integration which both companies could have touted as value-added on both
platforms.

------
LinaLauneBaer
I disagree with the statement that Twitter has problems finding a monetization
model. What do you think about the following idea:

Many people use Twitter to link to apps they like (Apple App Store, Android
Store etc) or to products (links to Amazon) etc. Twitter already detects that.
If you post a link to an app Twitter automatically shows the icon and
screenshots - at least in the web version. All Twitter has to do now is to add
their own "affiliate token" to the URL and then they would profit: 2-3% for
each and every thing you buy on the App Store and up to 10% for things on
Amazon. People do click links on Twitter all the time so their cookie would
always be "refreshed".

I have an application in the App Store ( <http://store-news-app.com/> ) that
is free and links to the best deals in the Mac/iOS app store. I can tell you:
With just a couple of thousands requests / day I make good money from it.
Imagine what Twitter could do just by adding a few bytes to every Amazon/App
Store URL posted on Twitter...

------
avolcano
Ugh, I'm really opposed, as an OSX and iOS user, to Apple having this direct
of a tie to any social networking company. It would be awful if they avoided
adding more sharing options and OS integration for 3rd-party applications like
Facebook because they could be a competitor to Twitter or any other
investment. I'd rather they stay as relatively neutral as they can.

~~~
bronxbomber92
I'm opposed too, but for a different reason. I'm opposed to any sort of social
network integration into my OS.

~~~
jiggy2011
Does it matter, if you are not forced to use it?

~~~
colkassad
I'm not forced to use the Facebook app on my smartphone but it sure pisses me
off that I can't remove it without rooting it.

~~~
alecperkins
Vote with your money.

------
briandear
“Down the road, social engagement may dictate how consumers spend,” Mr. Hilwa
said.

I doubt it. Social is pretty overrated. While sharing is still important to
many people, it seems that great software and the ability to access quality
content is far more important than what my casual aquaintences are up to.
Anecdotally, my 'friends' seem to be less social online and less willing to
share every little life detail despite the increases ease of doing so.

The analysts are wrong. It's like saying the Mac needs to be more social to be
successful in the future. Besides, how much more social Cana smartphone get?
It's a phone and a pocket computer already. Besides, Apple is primarily a
hardware company and secondarily a content agency. Their revenues don't depend
on advertising, which is really the only business model social currently has.
The last thing Apple wants to do is be an advertising company.

Still, I am happy with Apple getting friendly with Twitter. I find Twitter to
be much less obnoxious than Facebook. API and infrastructure debacles aside,
Twitter seems a lot less arrogant and threatening than Zuck and Co. Twitter,
for example doesn't suddenly make your direct messages public or change
privacy settings in onerous and unexpected ways.

~~~
stfu
I have to admit that my perception towards Twitter is very similar to yours.
In comparison to Facebook or Google they have been very transparent about
Government activities - for example by fighting government subpoenas of the
Occupy protesters or by not shutting down most accounts of Anonymous. In so
far it seems to me that Twitter has been one of the good guys who still care
about free speech and refrain from the overanxious self-censoring so eagerly
practiced by Facebook and alikes.

~~~
spudlyo
"Respect the user's voice."

As far as I can tell, it's not an empty platitude, Twitter puts their money
where their mouth is. I admire them for it.

Disclosure: I work there. I see those words on laptop cases and screen savers
every day at the Twitplex.

~~~
briandear
Can you disclose me some Twitter stickers? This user's voice is saying,
"stickers please!" In all seriousness, respecting the user is paramount.
Facebook tends to respect themselves often at the expense of the user which is
counterproductive: an engaged and trusting user base will lead to higher
revenues.

------
cletus
Many times (here and elsewhere) I've stated my opinion that I believe Twitter
to be ultimately doomed. It is being relegated to infrastructure (and thus
will be commoditized in time) and (IMHO) it is floundering in finding a
monetization model.

Don't get me wrong: they have an exceptionally long runway so this won't
happen anytime soon but I think it will end up being acquired by the likes of
Facebook, Google (disclaimer: I work for Google) or Apple.

I don't see a compelling reason for Facebook to buy Twitter other than to deny
it to the other two (which could be compelling but given the direction of
their stock price this seems like a hard sell to Twitter's investors and
board).

Apple could marry its mobile ecosystem, particularly the messaging
infrastructure, to Twitter and be a dominant player.

Google could do the same thing but I think Apple has the most to gain from
picking up social assets (note: these opinions are strictly personal views).

Given that it makes sense for Apple to buy a stake in Twitter. Large(r)
companies often do this. It's a poison pill. Take a large enough stake and you
can make it more difficult for others to acquire that company and be int he
box seat to be the acquirer if it should come to that.

I believe that if Twitter gives Apple, say a 10% or bigger stake, they are
insuring an exit strategy if they can't continue to exist independently.

~~~
dm8
I beg to differ. Twitter is my primary source of real time information. In
fact I go to find relevant information from people I follow from time to time.
By the way, Twitter is very popular amongst younger generation.

Relegated to infrastructure? They have users and they have eye-balls. That's
what matters. By the way, don't forget promoted tweets are really working for
them.

~~~
Happer
Fully agree. I don't 'Google', I 'Twitter'. Primarily through my feed of
course but I use also Twitter search for all the topics I'm interested in but
that are not covered by the accounts I follow. Exaggerated, but Google Search
is slow compared to Twitter.

What if Twitter also indexes the web pages that are/were referred to by the
links in the tweets and builds a Google like search page for that index. For
example, the number of re-tweets and clicks can be used as input for the sort
relevance. The result is a search engine that is crowed sourced combined with
a robotic one and in real time. Combine "AdSense" and there you have it.

~~~
hu_me
as soon as twitter starts using tweets for ranking link relevance, there will
come the army of people trying to seo the ranking and leaving relevance in
dust.

I think twitter is better with focusing on their core competency of providing
real time information rather then being side tracked into something very
different.

Apple's stake makes good sense because offers both backups and decreases
reliance on others. For Twitter it gurantees a medium/eyeballs and for Apple
content.

~~~
Happer
Good point, but Google also has to counter bad seo practices.

Twitter already has good anti spam algorithms and for this case they should be
able to determine the quality of accounts and the quality of the tweets as
well: age of an account, diversity of the tweets, hash tags, verified
accounts, account linking to 3rd parties, re-tweets by other 'good' accounts,
etc.

I think that such an offering would only extend and enhance their current
competency since I'm already using Twitter like I used to Google to search for
real time info. But I like Twitter to become better, more advanced and more
relevant in search. I want to find the information referred to in tweets
(blogs, news articles, videos, charts, etc) not only sorted by time, but
sorted by quality as option. Hundreds of 'opinion' tweets with no links are
less valuable. I don't want to wade through them.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons why Twitter decided to end the availability
of their feed through Google Search?

~~~
hu_me
Certainly its achievable but it would be a massive undertaking, before that
they need to focus on retrieving some of those aged tweets and stopping the
whales from taking over.

I do agree with your point about generally in having a more realtime and
relevant serach engine. But I think instead of twitter some one working across
networks would be in a better position.

bit.ly is going in this direction with its redesign and rt.ly and social
sharing widgets like Addthis and Sharethis would also have a very good view of
realtime data. That they could use.

The only advantage I could see with twitter is if they do sentiment analysis
of the tweet text and then understand relevance. The context they have
available could be akin to how google bot uses link title and anchor text but
with 140characters more focused.

Twitter ending availability I think had more to do with google clearing space
to forthcoming integration of g+

------
AlexMuir
Almost a exactly a year ago I wrote this[1] - I've added contemporary notes in
italics:

Apple should (and I think will) buy Twitter.

Here’s why:

Apple needs a social layer. Facebook could provide it but Apple hate them.
Apple could roll out a new version of iTunes in a couple of days, replacing
the Ping sidebar with Twitter. Deeper integration into iTunes would follow.
_More than a couple of days needed, but still holds true_

Various free messaging apps are doing quite well on the iPhone. Bringing
Twitter in as a native app on iOS devices would both expand Twitter, and
provide another differentiator for Apple products. Other platforms would
continue to be supported, but Twitter could be plumbed into iOS at the OS
level. Networks would bitch about their SMS revenue dropping, but Apple
doesn’t give a shit about that. _Apple launched iMessage and wiped out the
network operators SMS revenue_

Twitter and Apple share a love of simplicity, both of concept and of design.
Their users are from similar demographics. Twitter is heavily used by
celebrities and musicians, their feeds could be linked in to their products on
iTunes. Buying an album could offer you the chance to follow the artist on
Twitter. If Jony Ive was designing a social network, it would look like
Twitter. _This is definitely true and remains so. The only thing that Apple
wouldn't like is ugly usernames like Sasha85_x_

Simple really. Apple could provide the missing revenue that Twitter needs. It
might not make Twitter profitable, but it could bring it up to a level of
lossmaking that was justifiable for the top-tier messaging service among
handset manufacturers.

Twitter’s most recent valuation was reportedly $8billion. Apple could probably
buy them for $12billion (a $4bn profit over a matter of months). That’s not
much out of Apple’s $76billion stockpile. _That stockpile is now $110bn_

6\. Twitter people would be happy to go to Apple. They’re cool, Apple is cool
– it works. _They_ think* they're cool*

7\. I can actually visualize Steve Jobs walking onto stage and announcing it.
Talk of changing the world etc. etc. etc. _Sad._

You shouldn’t follow me on Twitter because I don’t use it. In fact it really
pisses me off, but I can see that it works for millions of people. _I use it a
bit more now, but it still riles me up._

[1] <http://www.alexmuir.com/2011/08/why-apple-will-buy-twitter/>

------
psychotik
Maybe they should start with an official Apple account of some sort on
Twitter. ;)

------
jcampbell1
Apple is currently in a bit of a pickle. Twitter is deeply integrated in the
OS (both Mac and iOS). It makes sense that they invest a few days worth of
profit to secure a more formal partnership.

~~~
glhaynes
I'm not sure why, at least at this point — it seems like it'd be really weird
for Twitter to turn off the ability to post statuses/photos/etc and have an
OS-wide account sign-in feature, which is basically all Apple's OS integration
does. Like, so weird that you'd think Twitter would probably be making
themselves irrelevant, so you wouldn't really care anyway.

------
therealarmen
Ping is rolling over in its' grave. I guess if you can't build it, buy it.

~~~
aydoubleyou
I had completely forgotten about Ping until just now.

------
buddylw
Hold your horses everyone, we still have time. Apple won't take over a
technology until it can find a way to make it worthless without an iTunes
account...

------
michaelpinto
Microsoft made a small strategic investment in facebook, I think if it keeps
an open ecosystem an Apple investment in Twitter isn't a bad idea.

~~~
briandear
I wish Apple would have bought Skype instead of Microsoft, then Mac users
wouldn't have to still contend with Skype's shit UI.

~~~
cageface
Use Facetime.

The rest of us use Skype because we can use it to talk to people that just
happened to buy a computer from a different company than we did.

~~~
kalleboo
FaceTime still doesn't do Audio-only though. Or group conversations. Hardly a
replacement.

------
InclinedPlane
Apparently this news is from about a year ago, and currently there's no such
talk of an investment:
[http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINL2E8IS2GO20120728?i...](http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINL2E8IS2GO20120728?irpc=932)

