Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

On Thursday, a newly revised 13D document showed that Elon Musk convened the team to take out $7.1 billion from his $44 billion Twitter takeover offer.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

This is interesting for several reasons.

First, it means that Elon’s claim that he “don’t care about the economy at all” no longer holds true. He needs to be concerned about the economy now. Twitter will need to generate enough money to pay off Elon’s debt and generate returns for investors including venture capital firms a16z and Sequoia. VCs don’t usually pursue 2x returns; however Elon and Twitter make this an exception, and their involvement shows that economics do matter.

Second, it slashed Elon’s margin loan from $12.5 billion to $6.25 billion, lowering the debt load and giving him more room to experiment from a cash flow perspective. In this case, he can be a little more aggressive.

Third, there are rumors that Elon is telling investors that he will serve as interim CEO.

Finally, cryptocurrency exchange Binance got in on the action, especially as founder CZ tweeted last month “Take it private, tokenize, decentralize.” While I think Elon is unlikely to decentralize Twitter in the near term, Binance’s involvement means there may be more decentralized solutions.

Speaking of which… Elon should give the DAO of Twitter superusers a seat on Twitter’s cap table and its board. Call it TweeterDAO.

Giving TweeterDAO a board seat is a step towards token issuance and complete decentralization. That’s one step away from what he believes should be the direct democracy that humans should use to rule Mars. But it’s a big step in the right direction for a board of people with little ownership and little use of the product.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

In a TED interview last month, Elon told Chris Anderson that he wants to retain as many shareholders as the law allows so they can share in the platform’s governance, which he believes the SEC limits within 2000 people. This DAO structure might be a workaround.

Not surprisingly, I think investing in equity in the new private Twitter, either directly or through the DAO, is a compelling bet.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

I don’t know what’s going on inside, just a long-term belief that Twitter can and should do better than it is. Predicting the future of Twitter at Not Boring is a valuable pastime. In July 2020, I wrote If I Ruled Twitter. In February 2021, I went on to write How Twitter Gets Back to Its Best. In March 2021, Mark Rubinstein and I even defended Jack in Two Faced Jack.

In If I Ruled Twitter, I wrote: “Twitter is the least monetized product in the world because it doesn’t know what it is.” Although its advertising business has grown and improved since then , and eventually introduced a handful of subscription services, but it still holds true. The gap between Twitter’s importance and its commercial performance is enormous.

But the company seems to have limitless opportunities to try and turn the business around, given the incredible stickiness of its power users, the home of great online games.

Elon, a power user himself, has some ideas on how to turn things around. Over the weekend, The New York Times shared leaked presentations that Elon used to fund the deal. The plan reportedly includes:

  • Revenues to quadruple to $26.4 billion by 2028.
  • Reduce Twitter’s reliance on advertising to less than 50% of revenue.
  • Generate $15 million in revenue from payments business to $1.3 billion by 2028.
  • Increase average revenue per user by $5.39 to $30.22.
  • The number of users will reach 931 million by 2028.
  • Mystery “X” will have 104 million subscribers by 2028.
  • Hire 3,600 people (after laying off hundreds).

Of course, he also expects Twitter Blue to have 69 million subscribers by 2025.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

While the predictions are starkly aggressive, and Twitter’s potential product (“X”) is unclear, I don’t doubt Elon’s ability to multiply Twitter’s business. You don’t even need to be an Elon fan to believe this; you just have to admit that Twitter has been losing value that a strong management team should be able to capture.

While Elon talks a lot about free speech, which I think he really thinks is a key reason why he does it, when he buys Twitter, Elon is also buying one of the rarest assets on the planet: one of the few large-scale One of the social graphs where more decision makers in the world shape their minds and let their own minds be shaped.

This presents both an incredible financial opportunity and a largely unprecedented governance challenge. Twitter users should be able to engage in both.

So today, we’re going to discuss three things:

  • How does Twitter see itself, and what is Twitter actually?
  • what new twitter should build
  • TweeterDAO

How does Twitter see itself, and what is Twitter actually?

Twitter’s problems stem from confusion about what it is, and the ad-based business model choices it has made as a result.

In “If I Ruled Twitter,” I wrote that Twitter’s main challenge is its confusion about its own identity:

Twitter thinks it’s Facebook, but it’s LinkedIn.

Twitter thinks it’s an advertising product, but it’s a subscription product. It thinks of itself as an aggregator, but in reality it is a platform. It considers itself a social network, but it is a professional network: a network built for the passion economy, based on the power of ideas, not past experience.

It was early 2020, I had just become a full-time “creator” and the passion economy was on fire, so my focus might have been a little too narrow, but two years later, the main point is supported. Twitter is more of a professional network than a social network.

In How Twitter Gets Its Best Back, I summarize why understanding what Twitter is, who it’s for, and which business model is so important to Twitter:

If on an ad-supported social network like Facebook, the advertiser is the customer, the user is the product, whereas on LinkedIn, most users are the product and power users are the customers. Before it was acquired by Microsoft, only 18% of LinkedIn’s revenue came from advertising; the rest came from selling tools to power users, both companies and individuals.

For Twitter, its power users and the people who should be its customers are 10% of the users who generate 80% of the tweets. We call them creators. Creators are tasked with getting their ideas, products, newsletters, courses, videos, podcasts, investment ideas, and other things they sell in front of people.

Rather than an aggregator that operates like a social network and monetizes through advertising, Twitter should be a platform that operates like a professional network and monetizes through subscriptions.

However, with years of evidence and wisdom, I think I underestimated it. Because for a business as strong and focused as LinkedIn, Twitter needs to be more focused and narrow. Twitter is addictive, engaging, and valuable to users, while LinkedIn is not.

Addictive. Twitter sometimes acts like a professional network, but it’s also where many of the world’s most powerful people go when they’re curious, active, inspired, or just bored. I don’t know of anyone who looks at LinkedIn as compulsively as Twitter does.

Participatory. Ben Thompson included this image in his recent book Back to the Future of Twitter, and it’s a good example of how users interact with Twitter and Instagram.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

valuable. There was a question circulating on Twitter “How much money would you give me without using Twitter?” I asked myself this question as I was writing this, and the answer was jaw-dropping, but not surprising. I did a very unscientific survey and out of more than 1,100 responses, 40% of respondents said they would need to be paid more than $10,000 a year to not use Twitter.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Again, it’s not science, but I think for Twitter’s most valuable user base – the “creators” who send 80% of your tweets – especially those whose business or income benefits from Twitter, This is accurate in direction. For that 40%, Twitter is a huge gain, and you can’t even see its current ARPU on the graph unless I draw it high.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

I don’t think Twitter should start charging superusers $10k a year, but between the $0 Twitter currently charges and the $10k users are willing to pay, Twitter could charge its users to get better users Experience and get better products from (or built on) Twitter.

Twitter doesn’t need to build the world’s largest network to be hugely successful. It just needs to make sure it can better serve a smaller group of high-value users and monetize it better than it does today.

This view illustrates what I think the new Twitter should be built on.

What the new Twitter should build

With a new owner, and this one in particular, the new Twitter is sure to be different from the love/hate Twitter we’re familiar with. There is still debate as to what it will look like.

There are several main points of view on what Twitter should do:

  1. open.
  2. Tend to subscribe.

open

The open camp believes that Twitter should go back to what it was: open APIs and microservices, which Ben Thompson lists as follows:

  • User service (timeline for listing users)
  • Graphics service (for tracing the network)
  • Post service (for posting new tweets)
  • Profile Service (for user profiles)
  • Timeline service (for displaying your timeline)

and many more……

Third parties can build clients and algorithms on Twitter as follows:

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Ben went a step further, arguing that Twitter should be split into two companies:

TwitterServiceCo is responsible for operating all services and selling them to third parties; while TwitterAppCo will build a competitive application product based on Twitter’s services and social graph.

In Elon is Right: Twitter Should Open Up the Algorithm, Nathan Baschez makes a strong case for if Twitter open-sourced its algorithm for arranging tweets in a timeline, as Elon suggested, and created a new algorithm for a market, then Twitter will be better.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Nathan thinks it would be better for Twitter to let anyone create and market their own algorithm through “the classic tech rule: commoditize your complement.” Like Ben, he also believes that Twitter’s core product is its user and tweet network, not a user-facing client or a tweet ranking algorithm, and by allowing more algorithms to compete, Twitter will actually be its core product Create more demand.

In Ben and Nathan’s view, Twitter users get more choice, and Twitter itself can push all the hassle of controlling algorithms and content moderation to third parties, who can independently develop applications for all types of people, markets and product of the legal system.

While Elon has discussed open-sourcing the algorithm, citing a rationale for manually reviewing decisions, he has yet to say he will open it up to third-party clients or add developers. In fact, his leaked plans put him more in the “Lean Into Subscriptions” camp.

tend to subscribe

We now have a better idea of ​​Elon’s plans thanks to a leaked presentation:

  • Reduce the proportion of advertising revenue to less than 50% within five years.
  • Twitter Blue’s $3 monthly user base grew to 69 million.
  • Introduce payment function.
  • Released Mystery X product and gained 104 million subscribers.

Elon also believes that Twitter needs to reduce its reliance on advertising and move to a subscription business.

Twitter Blue, which currently has 69 million users and charges $3 a month, will generate $2.48 billion in additional revenue in 2025. At the moment it’s an odd hodgepodge of undo-tweet buttons, color choices, and ad-free article features. Adding another 104 million X users at $5 per month (assuming this is a higher-end product) would generate an additional $6.2 billion in annual revenue by 2028.

Also, the reason for twitter optimization seems to be the ad model that causes a lot of bad things to happen on the platform. Shifting to a subscription model, especially if users can get certified blue badges for $3 a month and filter conversations with certified users, could make Twitter a more civilized and healthier place.

When I wrote “If I Ruled Twitter,” I was more inclined to be in the subscription camp. Based on suggestions from other Twitter users, my four suggestions are:

  • Table Stakes: Authenticate to clean up conversations.
  • Twitter+Subscribe: Provides creators with paid tools to find, create and share ideas.
  • The Creation of Twitter: Twitter was supposed to be the place to build a subscription business.
  • Maker Homes: Develop the most underdeveloped real estate online.

Two years later, with Elon at the helm, I think this is the right direction, but Twitter’s opportunities don’t stop there.

if i ruled twitter

I think Twitter should follow a few guiding principles:

  • Keep superusers happy and they’ll get everyone else involved.
  • Power users want to do more in Twitter’s ecosystem.
  • The Twitter graph is one of the most valuable and under-monetized assets in the world.
  • Twitter is more than a social network.

With that in mind, here’s my approach.

First, I’ll start by verifying all real and legitimate business users.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

In Twitter’s tumultuous history, where only specific people can be verified, it’s a truly bizarre product that’s more of an elite status symbol. In the early days of Twitter, verification technology wasn’t great, but it’s pretty good now. Today, every cryptocurrency exchange and fintech product verifies users’ identities through third-party software; Twitter could integrate something similar.

My friend Dror came up with this idea in 2020 when answering my original question:

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Executing this philosophy, and charging certified users $3 per month, should be a priority zero approach, and all other initiatives start with it. By allowing authenticated users to filter, Twitter can both keep bots away from people who don’t want to see them, and make the $3-a-month subscription a must-have for power users.

Adding verification to Twitter’s social graph also makes it more powerful. It could become the world’s largest database of ID-verified users, which third-party developers would happily leverage (with personally identifiable information hidden, of course).

Speaking of which, I agree with Ben and Nathan that Twitter should reverse its 2012 decision to restrict (and ultimately cut off) third-party access to its API.

Twitter could also charge third-party developers to access its microservices APIs — like users, graphs, timelines, and releases — and have them build standalone third-party clients for Twitter, as Ben suggested. Giving people the power to choose other experiences would ease concerns about content moderation and the centralization of Twitter.

It also lets developers build services that are completely different from core Twitter, but leverage Twitter’s database of authenticated users and interest graphs to develop recommendation services or dating apps and more.

However, I actually disagree with splitting the Twitter app into a separate company. I think Twitter should do the opposite and quadruple the product experience of the Twitter app.

Part of that, as Nathan suggests, could be building an algorithmic marketplace so people can control their own timeline experience. It would also reduce concerns about free speech and content restrictions; if I wanted a feed with only crazy political views, I could create it or buy it. Twitter might even allow people to build algorithms that give them access to tweets from “banned” users.

But I think Twitter is thinking much more than that, based on two clues in the leaked promotional material:

  • pay
  • increase manpower

As pointed out by many who really understand what they call re:engineering, Twitter could run its current product with a much smaller team of engineers than it currently employs. But while Elon does plan to fire a bunch of people in the short term, he plans to hire many more over the next six years.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

He also plans to achieve $1.3 billion in payments revenue by 2028, using his experience at PayPal to build a better payments product than current payments services.

There is no U.S. precedent for combining social/professional networking and payment products, but in China there is: WeChat.

I think Twitter should not only be open to developers who want to fine-tune the current product, but should and will build an ecosystem of apps like WeChat Mini Programs, all within the app.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Promotion is king, and while Twitter isn’t doing enough monetization, it’s where most information-based businesses go to find and communicate with users. Twitter needs to capture that value, and the Twitter App Store can not only help it do that, but also provide a better, richer experience for power users who prefer to stay at home.

The fun thing about building platforms and primitives is that this group of people will come up with more engaging projects than I thought, but the benefits of Twitter are clear: no longer let people discover things on the platform and buy off the platform . Some obvious examples include:

  • Better DM. Twitter could invest itself in better DMs, or it could allow third parties to build DM clients on top of the Twitter app. I and many others are willing to pay a premium for a good Twitter DM client, and Twitter takes a small cut of it. The beauty is that all clients are interoperable and even external protocols like SMS, SMTP and XMTP can be introduced to provide a communication hub.
  • Podcasting and communication apps. After acquiring the newsletter app Revue, Twitter’s value proposition for writers was clear: We’ll get you more readers by inserting charts. The problem is, the product itself wasn’t very good the last time I checked. I’d rather spend a little money to plug my Substack more directly into Twitter graphs and profiles.Likewise, native podcasting apps may better connect discoveries on twitter with the listening experience, or even make it more social.
  • Notes and knowledge applications. Every once in a while, a product like Roam explodes, and this happens almost exclusively on Twitter. This is where those who like to organize their notes gather. Twitter could make it easier to discover knowledge applications, better integrate them into products, and even connect a global knowledge graph like Roam wants to do.
  • Customer service chat. Instead of angrily tweeting at the company, people can communicate directly with the company through a chat interface designed for customer service, like a walkie-talkie inside Twitter.
  • NFT markets and cryptocurrency exchanges. Cryptocurrencies are another prime example of buying off the platform, spotted on Twitter. Twitter makes it easy for you to see an NFT or token in your feed, buy it on a market or exchange, and use it for token threshold trading, all from within Twitter. I think an open Twitter can play a role in building better in and out channels and a more seamlessly integrated wallet experience.
  • Turn your profile into a social home. Shared spaces have been a success for Twitter. It should go the extra mile to allow third-party developers to create a variety of social experiences on the platform, which I once called “the most underdeveloped real estate on the internet.” I can host an open world through Cyber, allowing Not Boring readers to work together in a room here, or even a space with Teamflow. Twitter profiles can be gateways to an open Metaverse. Likewise, I’m willing to pay for my profile to better reflect who I am, what I care about, and make it a cool place to be.

Some people may continue to use Twitter for free, while many of Twitter’s power users will happily pay more for a better, richer experience within the app and the wider Twitter ecosystem. I know I will.

I am not a product developer. While I can imagine Twitter wanting many of these products to be available in apps, there’s also a case where they’re built as standalone apps launched from within the main app, or completely standalone.

In the core Twitter app, I think it’s critical to keep the Twitter feed interface simple, but there’s more room for experimentation and innovation.

While I don’t think Twitter will be as central to people’s lives as China’s WeChat – it’s hard to imagine why I would order food or Uber on Twitter – it could better serve the needs of power users and allow more Potential users see the value in it and capture some of the value it creates and loses today. Who knows, maybe there’s a way to make ordering a meal or a ride as easy as a tweet, and I hadn’t thought of that.

If Twitter can clean up validation, open up its API, build a thriving app ecosystem on top of its microservices, and get more and more out of the $10,000-plus power users are willing to spend on the platform, then Egypt Long’s $44 billion acquisition of Twitter would look cheap.

But these are just random thoughts of mine. I shouldn’t rule Twitter — neither should anyone, including Elon — but I think Elon needs a way to put superusers at the heart of the conversation and share the positives. I think we need a TweeterDAO.

TweeterDAO: If We Ruled Twitter

Power users are the lifeblood of Twitter: 10% of users create content that everyone else can consume. They need a place at the negotiating table.

Twitter board members are known for sending their first tweets the day they announced their appointments to the board.They also don’t own much of Twitter. From a financial or product perspective, they don’t have much interest involved, and this is reflected in the product.

Given the opportunity to design a new board from scratch, Elon should give a group of Twitter power users a seat. The easiest way to coordinate is through a DAO.

I used to joke about buying Twitter with a DAO:

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

That’s a joke. While I think decentralizing Twitter is a good long-term goal, for now, Twitter needs to remain focused on turning the business around. In order to build a healthier and stronger platform, it requires making difficult decisions, which are easier to make in small groups than in large groups.

But I do think there is value in the idea that my friends Sahil Bloom and Mario Gabriele came up with: using a DAO to let Twitter users invest in companies and get board seats.

Doing so will achieve several important goals for Elon and the company:

  • More Twitterr owners. Elon said he wants Twitter to have more than the 2,000 owners allowed by the SEC, and a DAO could be one way to do that.
  • Alleviating concerns about centralization… having representatives of the DAO on the board, and thus willing to share private information with superusers, would be one for Elon to allay concerns that the world’s richest man controls his most influential platform useful way.
  • Not fully decentralized…. The DAO will only have one seat, so it cannot make decisions independently, which gives Elon room to make tough decisions.
  • Superuser voice. In this post, I’ve highlighted the importance of superusers to Twitter’s success, and with many changes coming, involving them in decision-making will be one way to ensure that Elon and company don’t drive away superusers. While it’s good that Twitter will be owned by a power user, his experience may not quite be on par with that of a regular power user.
  • Novel governance structure. While this won’t matter to most owners, it’s clear that Elon bought Twitter in part because it’s a new challenge and experience. I think he’s one of the most likely to accept giving the DAO a board seat.
  • Thousands of people are invested in Twitter’s success. Giving Twitter’s power users a seat and giving them a financial stake in the company’s success will build a core team who, because of their voice, are motivated to help the new Twitter succeed. This could be very important as Twitter makes major changes.

So how will it work?

First, the DAO’s founders need to negotiate with Elon’s team and agree on terms and structure — how much the DAO will invest, what information can be shared with the DAO, how the DAO will choose its representative board members, etc…

With the temporary green light, DAO founders will need to build the entity and tech stack, determine the governance model, and decide whether their members can actually own a stake in Twitter (which might be feasible under the newfound old structure) or whether they only own governance rights and governance tokens for legal advice.

Importantly, it needs to figure out how to filter superusers. That’s why it’s called TweeterDAO – it’s for those who tweet.Maybe members need to verify that they have tweeted in the past three months. Maybe it’s enough to just go online to know what the DAO is happening and how to contribute, and to contribute.

It needs to raise capital to invest in the new Twitter — probably between $50 million and $100 million, but that will be negotiated.

And then… assuming it does all that, it actually needs to govern.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

The DAO must elect a representative to serve on the board and present to vote to inform its representative how to vote on the Twitter board. It has to make recommendations to the board. It must organize itself so that it does not become a one-hit wonder.

This is not a YOLO deal. Considered structures may not even allow transfer of ownership. But it will be an opportunity to influence the future of the platform many of us rely on professionally and even socially.

“Aren’t you creating another public company?” you might ask. Granted, giving a large group of people ownership and voting rights sounds a lot like owning equity in a public company, but there are a few differences:

  • Twitter is a public company, but its board, the people who make the decisions, don’t represent Twitter users.
  • Given that the ownership group involved in the new Twitter is much smaller, and the collection of individuals into a more cohesive DAO, the DAO will have a greater say than a collection of retail investors.
  • Having the DAO on the board would demonstrate a commitment to openness, which is important for maintaining or rebuilding trust in Twitter.
  • Since Twitter will be private, this is the only way for a large group of users to have ownership.

Nothing but a vague idea at the moment, but the window is open and Elon is raising money. Governance is at the heart of the dialogue. I think a DAO composed of those most invested in Twitter’s success would be a powerful addition to Twitter ownership.

Further reading:

Musk says he will reverse Trump’s lifetime Twitter ban

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Twitter’s future owner on Tuesday spoke out on the social network’s biggest problem, leaving little room for skepticism, and if Musk gets his way, the platform’s doors will open wide for Trump.

“I do think it’s incorrect to ban Donald Trump. I think that was a mistake,” Musk said in an interview at the Financial Times Future Car Summit.

Trump was permanently banned from the platform in January 2021 for inciting violence, when thousands of his supporters violently stormed the U.S. Capitol.

Tweeter DAO : If we ruled Twitter

Musk went on to explain that he believes banning Trump “alienated a significant portion of the country” and did not silence the former president — given the country has closely tracked Trump’s uninterrupted Twitter activity for four years in a row , this claim is dubious. Musk said: “…banning Trump from Twitter doesn’t end Trump’s voice. It will amplify this error on the right, which is why it is morally wrong and it is Totally stupid.”

For now, Musk seems to believe the former president’s claim that he has no interest in returning to his former social network of choice, where he used to communicate directly with his nearly 90 million followers. Currently, Trump is spending his days on his own fledgling social app, Truth Social.

In his comments, Musk didn’t directly address Trump’s role in the Capitol attack, but instead focused on the political implications of the decision and his belief that only bots and trash navy accounts should face permanent Sexual Twitter ban. He also claimed that the permanent ban “fundamentally undermines trust in Twitter as a town square where everyone can have their say”.

Asked if that meant he would reinstate Trump, Musk asserted that he would overturn the former president’s lifetime ban, calling it a “morally bad decision” and “extremely stupid.”

“Obviously, I don’t own Twitter yet,” Musk said. So it doesn’t seem like a sure thing, because what if I don’t own Twitter? He also cited former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. Dorsey’s hazy comments that the platform should not issue a lifetime Twitter ban, despite Dorsey’s personal involvement in the decision to suspend Trump.”

While his vision is centered on “free speech” with little moderation, Musk has expressed his support for some of Twitter’s existing content moderation tools, including temporary account suspensions and scrutiny when content is illegal or “only disruptive.” limit the display range of its posts. “

Information sourced from Notboring, slightly modified

Posted by:CoinYuppie,Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/tweeter-dao-if-we-ruled-twitter/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.

Like (0)
Donate Buy me a coffee Buy me a coffee
Previous 2022-05-11 10:24
Next 2022-05-11 10:25

Related articles