Very good article. One more point. They should stop saying verified at all. It's not a verified account. It's a premium account.
Also, most of the value of Twitter is from the tweets of the former verified people. Tweets from Stephen King get folks to come to Twitter because they know that's it's the real Stephan King. Once hes gone or not longer verifiable (because they don't verify people any more) the value of Twitter goes down.
To put it another way, whether you like Fox news or CNN, the value of their news is lessoned by not knowing if it's really coming from Fox News or CNN.
This was a smart article. But as others have said, his "strategy" has been so incredibly bad, it's hard to believe he really wants a good one. He seems more interested in antagonizing legacy verified accounts than getting subscriptions from them. I'm a legacy verified account on there, with an above average following even though I'm not a celebrity, and the messaging was solely couched in threats and mockery. Not one single incentive was given. Even the pop ups do not stress any positives—it is all "pay up or lose your check," that's it. As you say here, he immediately devalued the product—not just the Blue subscription model itself, but Twitter as a whole, by appearing to work hard to actually drive major verified users (someone like Stephen King, as noted elsewhere) off the platform. Without access to accounts like that, and the at-a-glance knowledge that you are dealing with the real person, the appeal of the site goes away. It's shocking to see someone allegedly successful in business be so spectacularly bad at this.
I’m a Twitter Blue subscriber and very pleased with the product. It lets me write at length, instead of cramming thoughts into 280 character chunks arranged in clumsy threads. For me, the blue check is less about prestige than a sign of support for Elon in his free speech project and kicking back against government censorship.
Great post and would love to hear your thoughts on the whole "no news is bad news" thing. Seems even when there's some drama, people just can't stop talking about Twitter, and I wonder if it’s part of Elon’s plan?
Very informative article on the mechanics of luxury versus inferior goods marketing.
What's interesting though is how the legacy blue checks publicly tweeted that they didn't want to be seen as paying for their blue check and requested that it be removed. Which in itself is a form of social signaling like "Hey, I'm not in this lower class who pays for this stuff, I'm a legacy blue check who's notable!"
This was great. From the get go, they really bungled their messaging (among other things—although it has been fun to watch!) I think it’s one of those things where it would have been helpful to take a page from the books of major couture fashion houses when they went from couture only to ready-to-wear.
This is smart. Elon seems to want is to antagonize legacy blue checks more than he cares about pursuing a smart strategy for Twitter.
Very good article. One more point. They should stop saying verified at all. It's not a verified account. It's a premium account.
Also, most of the value of Twitter is from the tweets of the former verified people. Tweets from Stephen King get folks to come to Twitter because they know that's it's the real Stephan King. Once hes gone or not longer verifiable (because they don't verify people any more) the value of Twitter goes down.
To put it another way, whether you like Fox news or CNN, the value of their news is lessoned by not knowing if it's really coming from Fox News or CNN.
This was a smart article. But as others have said, his "strategy" has been so incredibly bad, it's hard to believe he really wants a good one. He seems more interested in antagonizing legacy verified accounts than getting subscriptions from them. I'm a legacy verified account on there, with an above average following even though I'm not a celebrity, and the messaging was solely couched in threats and mockery. Not one single incentive was given. Even the pop ups do not stress any positives—it is all "pay up or lose your check," that's it. As you say here, he immediately devalued the product—not just the Blue subscription model itself, but Twitter as a whole, by appearing to work hard to actually drive major verified users (someone like Stephen King, as noted elsewhere) off the platform. Without access to accounts like that, and the at-a-glance knowledge that you are dealing with the real person, the appeal of the site goes away. It's shocking to see someone allegedly successful in business be so spectacularly bad at this.
I’m a Twitter Blue subscriber and very pleased with the product. It lets me write at length, instead of cramming thoughts into 280 character chunks arranged in clumsy threads. For me, the blue check is less about prestige than a sign of support for Elon in his free speech project and kicking back against government censorship.
Great post and would love to hear your thoughts on the whole "no news is bad news" thing. Seems even when there's some drama, people just can't stop talking about Twitter, and I wonder if it’s part of Elon’s plan?
My account is in limbo for being Elon Musk's mother for several hours on March 31st. Only the blue check remains.
Very informative article on the mechanics of luxury versus inferior goods marketing.
What's interesting though is how the legacy blue checks publicly tweeted that they didn't want to be seen as paying for their blue check and requested that it be removed. Which in itself is a form of social signaling like "Hey, I'm not in this lower class who pays for this stuff, I'm a legacy blue check who's notable!"
Fantastic piece👏
This was great. From the get go, they really bungled their messaging (among other things—although it has been fun to watch!) I think it’s one of those things where it would have been helpful to take a page from the books of major couture fashion houses when they went from couture only to ready-to-wear.