MG Siegler: "Twitter is dead!" Is Twitter really fading, as the sound rises?

.

Editor's note: Talk of Twitter's decline has never stopped, is Twitter really going downhill? A blog post in medium by the famous venture capitalist, Mg Siegler, may give us some thought.

As the satirical Porlandia says, when the fashion man finds that the general public begins to do what they thought was popular, they give up what they loved. This is the best description of Twitter's current status.

Some early adopters have claimed that Twitter has finished, a view that seems to have started to grow and become profitable, starting with the--twitter service that started last year's Twitter listing, but you see, Twitter is no longer "ours".

But it's hard to say that Twitter has reached the ceiling. Twitter may have made a mistake, and it's been criticized, but in my memory it's the most-rated start-up. The comment that Twitter is "screwed up" has been seen every year from 2008 to 2013.

Beware of Twitter-related discussions about the decline of Twitter.

--@davepell

The first (or loudest) people who claim "Twitter reaches the ceiling" now have new weapons: open financial data. Because Twitter is now a public company, with quarterly disclosure of financial data and some financial data not as fast as Wall Street expected, it has led to a rapid fall in Twitter's share prices to last year's IPO offerings.

This situation is more likely to lead to the emergence of Twitter doom, because there are listed data. But don't mind, Facebook went public two years ago, and Wall Street had worries about its share price plunging, and if you look back, people will find that Facebook's share price has actually fallen to its IPO, and Facebook is "screwed".

Now this is a comeback: "Twitter is dead because it's not Facebook." Look, the blogosphere is so annoying.

In fact, Twitter is now being vilified by the media, but in the future the media will be able to write the story of Twitter revival, as it is. Why create something that cannot be overthrown? Why overthrow a thing that cannot be revived? In fact, the whole thing is three fragments. Including Twitter's rise, fall, and return. The story of Twitter is: bleach washes and repeats.

An ironic and distorted fact is that some people claim that Twitter is "over" because it is not attractive to mainstream users, and that the fashionable people think Twitter is not small enough to feel Twitter is over. If 200 million of active users are not mainstream. What is the mainstream? Their answer is probably billions of users to mainstream it.

Or there are other reasons to claim that Twitter is dead.

And what I've learned is that when I turn on the TV and watch any sports show, I see tweets, Twitter usernames, and Twitter messages. I don't know how much of the SportsCenter per night is going to be about Twitter, but it's not a small number.

At the same time, I'm watching a couple of shows, including CNN Anthony Bourdain's talk show, and Netflix's parts unknown show, what do I see? In a program on Libya, Bourdain is visiting the Freedom fighters, asking about the riots and the reasons for Gaddafi's downfall, and the answer is "Twitter."

I've seen Twitter, Bourdain is also commenting on the broadcast of a parts Unknown in real time.

Speaking of CNN, when you switch to this station, you'll see Twitter,twitter, Twitter.

Twitter is not the mainstream, not at all.

But it is not that Twitter is not facing difficulties and challenges. I think the product is like a mixture of a lot of immature experiments. But in its product kernel, it always contains interesting, energetic, and very important content, just need someone to be able to penetrate into the product, carry on the conformity optimization, remove the encumbrance, for useless content dour No.

Anyway, I'm not worried about Twitter's development. Twitter will go a long way. The same story has been recurring in recent years. This round of public criticism of Twitter, at least for the 20th few times, has been "screwed up" by Twitter.