
What Twitter Earns Each Time You Look at Your Feed - JumpCrisscross
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/10/heres-exactly-what-twitter-earns-each-time-you-look-at-your-feed/280266/
======
thomasd
Hmm, the huge difference between US and <>US are mostly self-imposed I think.
Self-serve ads are only available for businesses or individuals in US.

Outside of US, to even participate in ad-buys, you'll have to seek out
Twitter's agency partners (not transparent, therefore, not obvious who they
are), and when you find them, you'll have to commit to a minimum of $10,000
spend over a period of 3 months, which is highly prohibitive. I understand why
they're doing this, but that's for another post.

What this means to the difference in revenue per 1000 timeline views is the
kind of audience businesses are likely to target. If you are buying ads in the
US, you'll most likely buy ads to target people living in US and if you're
living outside of US, your target audience will likely be outside of US.

Since self-serve ads are fully accessible in US to anyone, the amount of money
spent is obviously a couple of magnitude larger. That means higher competition
(read:bidding) and higher revenue, and therefore revenue per 1000 timeline
view to Twitter.

The US will still be more expensive than everywhere else even if everyone
could purchase ads the same way, but the difference wouldn't be at such
magnitude.

------
nostromo
May I compare apples to oranges?

$0.1 Google revenue per search.

$0.001 Twitter revenue per timeline view.

~~~
sejje
Yeah, the difference being nobody sits around refreshing their google
searches.

~~~
hayksaakian
Im hard pressed to believe what you're suggesting

.1 vs .001 is a 100x difference

Do you spend 100x mor time on twitter

~~~
sejje
No, in fact I don't spend any time at all on twitter.

------
001sky
This article highlihts the dis-proportionate amount of revenues advertisers
pay for "premium" demographics, noting that the USA yields ~$2.2 cpm and ROW
around $0.30 cpm. This is a 7x multiple or premium for a USA user. It also
raises the question of ultimate growth potential: the low value category are
3x more plentiful than the premium one in terms of subscriber base (and
presumably growing faster, too).

~~~
danmaz74
On the other hand, discretionary income is growing fast in many parts of the
rest of the world.

------
jka
I guess the closest analogy here is to CPM (cost per mille - thousand page
views), for online display advertising. On that scale, $0.80 CPM is low;
typical figures I've seen/heard are around the $10 mark.

That's probably related to the fact that Twitter is still _relatively_ ad-
free; it also means they have a lot of ceiling into which they can increase
their revenue, albeit at the usual cost of negative user experience!

Has anyone here worked in advertising for social networks which use timeline-
style feeds? I'd be interested to hear how (and if) the businesses practices
differ from 'traditional' online advertising.

~~~
laglad
Yea, I work at an ad tech company. And the # is closer to $0.60 for the US.

------
walid
Advertising revenue seems larger in the USA in general. It is worth
considering that most advertising based services are US based eg: Google,
Yahoo!, Bing, Facebook.

------
joeblau
I don't see any ads in the Twitter app on Mac.

------
recursive
Wow, they've made almost a penny off me.

