Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I couldn't disagree more - it sounds like the Dickbar was monetizing rather nicely. Otherwise Twitter wouldn't be writing things like this in their blog:

We believe there are still significant benefits to increasing awareness of what’s happening outside the home timeline. Evidence of the incredibly high usage metrics for the QuickBar support this.

'Incredibly high usage metrics' - sounds pretty good for the purchasers of their sponsored trends, no?

Now, Twitter could be lying about the Dickbar's usage, but I doubt it. Lying involves conspiracy. It sledgehammers the morale of honest employees. The truth's likely to leak. The leadership of Twitter's not that stupid - if they mention incredibly high usage metrics, it's because there were incredibly high usage metrics.

So, if Dickbar was great for monetization, why remove it? I suspect it got yanked because it conflicted with a higher priority - control over the client. If the vast majority of users love the Dickbar, but a small sliver of people were turned off enough by it to start using an alternate client, that throws the Tweetdecks of the world a lifeline at a time when Twitter would rather they drown.

After the Tweetdecks have transitioned to enterprise tools or simply given up, then Twitter can launch Son of Dickbar. Until then, growing client market share is way, way more important than prematurely boosting monetization. It's not like Twitter lacks access to capital.



Otherwise Twitter wouldn't be writing things like this in their blog ...

This is called "saving face," and it's something that people do when they have to backtrack on a mistake.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: