

How Twitter Can Avoid Becoming the Next AOL - smacktoward
http://www.wired.com/2014/06/is-twitter-morphing-into-the-next-aol/

======
simonholroyd
This article really fails to answer the question its headline poses.

~~~
robobro
It's Wired. What'd you expect?

~~~
dewarrn1
Gonzo journalism targeting a tech audience.

Turning back to Twitter, I like the service, and find 140 characters
refreshingly brief. I don't know how to preserve it, but they've got huge
mindshare and should be able to leverage that profitably.

------
arasmussen
> Cashing out by the people who understand Twitter’s prospects best is an
> ominous sign for the company and adds to the very long list of concerns
> about its future.

When you make many, many millions of dollars, you need to pay tax on it. Where
do you think you get the money to pay the tax for it? You sell shares.

~~~
throwaway344
Someone would only pay taxes on the stocks if they sold it, via capital gains.
If they're just being taxed on income, they can use that income to pay their
taxes. Or am I misunderstanding you?

~~~
arasmussen
You're misunderstanding how and when vested RSUs get taxed. Capital gains is
the tax you pay on your profit from owning a stock (after owning it for over a
year). When a company gives you shares/RSUs, that is income and you must pay
income tax on that right when it vests and the company has IPO'd.

See: [http://business.time.com/2013/11/07/twitter-employees-
will-o...](http://business.time.com/2013/11/07/twitter-employees-will-owe-an-
average-of-420000-in-taxes-after-ipo/)

~~~
throwaway344
Ah, sorry, I was misunderstanding the rules. Thanks!

------
doctorpangloss
>In my view, the company has two options: find new sources of traffic, or
evolve the product.

It seems we've omitted their purchase of MoPub, the world's largest mediator
of mobile ads.

------
poopsintub
I don't think Twitter has a had a quarter in the black yet. It's a bit
premature to say it is a success, nevertheless compare it to the monster AOL
was.

------
beartime
I truly think a redesign is the only thing keeping from Twitter today to
Twitter 10x. It is too cluttered and they are innovating their design too
slowly. Remember how fast Facebook released changes (albeit facing massive
protest)? People got over it and they are still growing. Twitter needs more
contextual filters!

------
rythie
I don't see the comparison to Twitter at all.

------
stretchwithme
Diskettes!

------
_Zach
AOL's Q4 2013 revenue was $656 million. True, they aren't part of a hipster
tech elite, but with money like that who fucking cares ?

~~~
slashink
Sometimes I forget that AOL seems to be doing fine, the question is though
How? Is it by social inertia?

~~~
Alupis
They appear to be doing more than fine:

[http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AOL](http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AOL)

Although, should note... a quarter's revenue of $656 million is a far cry from
major tech companies, and that is revenue, not profit.

They own several media companies, including Engadget. Likely where they make
majority of their revenue now days.

(that and the old people who still think they must pay AOL $10 a month for
their email and the AOL web browser... yes, it's still a thing... and people
do still pay for it... _sigh_ )

~~~
blumkvist
Engaged is barely profitable and even the revenue is not that big. Majority of
their money (profit and revenue) comes from subscriptions. Some from ads on
aol.com other properties (but AOLtech is pretty weak)

