I think the answer is that when Twitter IPO'd there were very clear expectations for the company to perform similar to its perceived contemporaries: Facebook and Google. If you look at the perpetually meteoric rise of GOOGL or FB, it's understandable why shareholders are disappointed -- Twitter burns a lot of capital.
So, if its growth has petered out and this is as much money as it can produce, it's understandable to me the line of thinking would then be to cut costs as much as possible so the profit margin can grow. 4k people makes sense when your company is adding value every day, but to these shareholders those aren't translating into results.
My $0.02 -- thoughts?
> Personally I dream of making a living establishing a patio11-type software business. Something where I can do a high quality job and own all of the decision-making.
I have that dream too, but when I have it I always wonder if given that situation I'd be able to stop myself from wanting my baby to keep growing, even if it meant giving up those decision-making abilities and taking on investors.
So, if its growth has petered out and this is as much money as it can produce, it's understandable to me the line of thinking would then be to cut costs as much as possible so the profit margin can grow. 4k people makes sense when your company is adding value every day, but to these shareholders those aren't translating into results.
My $0.02 -- thoughts?
> Personally I dream of making a living establishing a patio11-type software business. Something where I can do a high quality job and own all of the decision-making.
I have that dream too, but when I have it I always wonder if given that situation I'd be able to stop myself from wanting my baby to keep growing, even if it meant giving up those decision-making abilities and taking on investors.