
Twitter China head Kathy Chen leaves company - T-A
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-chen-idUSKBN14M17P
======
duskwuff
Seeing as Twitter is inaccessible in China, has generally been inaccessible
for the last 5+ years, and that a widely used local substitute existed (Sina
Weibo) -- it surprises me very much that Twitter even had a "China head" to
begin with. The idea just seems like a non-starter.

~~~
20161112
Kathy Chen has connections which could potentially legalize Twitter in China?

[http://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-china-heads-past-ties-
to...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-china-heads-past-ties-to-military-
spark-concern-1461146188)

~~~
duskwuff
Ah. (Can't read the article but I'll assume that's what it says.) Still... if
she had those connections, they must not have been very good connections; the
site still isn't available.

~~~
citruspi
Eh. It's more about using her connections to sell Twitter's services to
companies in China than it is about using her connections to make Twitter
available to users in China.

Relevant portions:

> Twitter said its strategy in China hasn’t changed and that Ms. Chen’s main
> job is to sell services like advertising, data analytics and developer
> platforms to companies in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

> Underlying the messages were concerns that Twitter, which casts itself as a
> champion of free speech, was motivated to hire Ms. Chen as part of a
> strategy of compromise aimed at getting Chinese authorities to lift the
> block.

> A Twitter spokesman said on Tuesday that wasn’t the case and that Ms. Chen
> had been hired to take advantage of increased interest among Chinese
> companies in advertising on the platform to reach a global audience. “We
> have no plans to change anything about our service in order to enter the
> market,” the spokesman said.

> Twitter has consistently said it won’t compromise its service in order to
> operate in China. It described former CEO Dick Costolo’s first visit to
> China in 2014 as the executive’s attempt to learn more about the local
> culture and technology industry. His successor, Mr. Dorsey, who co-founded
> Twitter, has emphasized a dedication to the company’s values and mission,
> including freedom of speech.

This is supported by the Reuter's article which mentions her work on courting
"potential Chinese advertisers for the social media platform" and growing "its
Greater China advertiser base nearly 400 percent over the past two years."

I'm not sure what 20161112 was talking about.

------
brilliantcode
This is my biggest fear starting in China besides the pollution and cultural
mismatch: A dozen local Chinese startups bootstrapping by copying you with the
government and market heavily favoring domestic solution vs Western solution.

It puzzles me why so many people in the West are trying to chase after the
elusive dream of making it big in China. I can't name any white person that
made it in Chinese startup scene in the way immigrants have IPO'd in the US. I
use race as an important metric to compare the two cultures. One, where anyone
regardless of race can make it and have made it (even if it's extra harder for
a non-white person depending on the industry) and the other, where only
Chinese speakers and ethnic Chinese have a far higher advantage and restrict
outsiders.

In addition, I don't know a single American using Weibo instead of Twitter.

Made in China just isn't good for branding and China isn't "cool' yet. Hell,
even Chinese buyers will pay premium for western names and avoid locally
produced good, if they have the money to spend.

~~~
inlandrookie
I agree that Chinese startups start copying the product if it is a good
product, but it also happens anywhere. In US, Europe, Southeast Asia... name
any place. People has been copying each other for the entire civilization.

China is an unique example. The truth is China is in a totally different world
with totally different culture(maybe not as different as before) and purchase
habits, so localization is hell important in China! That's probably why
software tends to be compete less well than hardware like Apple and General
Moto, since it needs more localization to gain popularity.

Immigrants... Every citizen in USA was an immigrant 300 years ago... if you
are talking about new immigrants, most of them had higher education in USA
before they built a startup, which definitely makes it easier to have success
since they know they country more. Also English is a more well-accepted
language, that's probably the biggest reason why not so many Americans willing
to study in China.

I am a Chinese so my opinion is likely to be biased.

------
epynonymous
i know who will replace her.

------
JumpCrisscross
I'm conflicted on falling standards for IPOs. On one hand, it's unfair for the
exponential gains of pre IPO stocks to be restricted to "accredited
investors". On the other hand, retail investors are entirely unfit to judge--
and prone to be exploited regarding--the nuances of unprofitable companies. My
hope is Twitter's resolution will be clean, so as to avoid polluting the 2017
pipeline.

~~~
elastic_church
I'm conflicted on what IPOs have to do with Twitter news. Are you aware
they've been a public company for like 3 years?

~~~
vonklaus
While I concur with above, I think investors should have the option. I suspect
that the parent was referring to Twitter having a string of issues since IPO.
Over the 3 years they have faced significant problems like leadership change,
product, revenue, m&a and this brain drain.

Twitter is an example of a company that has had poor performance and may have
been to immature to go public.

~~~
elastic_church
> Twitter is an example of a company that has had poor performance and may
> have been to immature to go public.

What exactly do you expect of companies that go public? What you wrote, and
seemingly reflective of a common sentiment, is an extremely loaded statement
of what anyone should expect of "glorious publicly traded unicorns".

Unless Twitter committed fraud by not disclosing something, then there should
no really no other expectation or aberration in their publicly traded status.
The banks, board and the CFO priced the shares and they've been printing money
for all their employees using the deep liquid market that all these people
fawning over tech companies perpetuate.

So I'm a little confused at what is so interesting about their poor
performance. Have you seen the stock market, some companies' shares go up,
others go down.

~~~
vonklaus
I agreed with the parents sentiment but I think it should be up to the
incestors. I also agree with you. I was stating why 3 years of being public it
was still relavent to discuss the news of the original post.

That said, a public company that has an incomplete product roadmap-- or
poduct, shows no profit and has a poorly understood revenue strategy is
immature. GM has been public for a comparable amount of time. It is well
understood what they do-- they make and sell cars. Twitter aggregates and
dynamically prices advertising and monetizes information. It is much harder to
understand a new business model and one that is not making money. It was not
ready to IPO.

Yes, the market goes up and down. Twitter was a shitty company, still is a
shitty company and will be a shitty acquisition. I understood that and I
didn't buy it. Thats how the market works.

Edit: While the market goes up and down, Twitter has pretty much just gone
down. It was in the 50s 2 years ago and has pretty much just fallen.

