I mean there’s Reddit ofc, as well as Twitter in its entirety, Discord is implementing some dumb updates, there are issues with Tumblr as well as everything to do with Meta, and I’m sure there are plenty more (and I haven’t even touched other digital media, for example the Sims). Why is it all happening in the span of about a couple months?
It’s the money.
US Fed has raised interest rates, destroying money for the first time in decades in an effort to stop our inflation problem
The knock on effects is that banks literally have less money to lend to companies. Some companies are affected more than others by this environment. Tech was hit hard, extremely hard.
With hundreds of thousands of layoffs, tech industry is contracting. Silicon Valley bank literally evaporated in the span of 3 days. Twitter was losing money and had to sell out. StackOverflow is losing money and is currently selling out.
In this environment, Reddit is about to launch it’s long awaited IPO, the time when the public is allowed to directly buy Reddit stock and invest into the company. That’s what Initial Public Offering means. If Reddit does well, Reddit will pull in lots of money this year through this IPO.
The CEO of Reddit needs to prove Reddit is profitable, or if not profitable… Will eventually be profitable. Stockholders don’t care about Reddit drama for the most part, but most are smart enough to read financial sheets. Reddit needs to show growing revenue, growing profits and cutting costs to attract money.
As such, all of what Reddit’s CEO has done makes sense in the context of the IPO. He is betting that shareholders won’t notice the drop of high quality content creators from Reddit, since that’s not a financial number that’s reported. He can IPO, raising millions, maybe even billions for himself. The golden parachute outta here when everything gets screwed up in a year or two and collapses.
I think today’s investors are smarter though, and the bearish economy and high interest rates means more investors will pay attention to underlying issues.
U just enlightened me sir. Thank you.
Generally the drama isn’t a big deal. But in a specific case the only value of the site is in the community moderation and the depth of data on the site.
He needs investors to buy in but he also needs advertisers to buy in. Advertisers do not love paying for negative drama.
I don’t think that Reddit can compete against Youtube, Facebook, or TikTok with regards to ads.
They can make some money, yes. But Reddit will never have high-end ad revenue, not with its current model (or any changes they’re making).
I disagree in it really making sense (at leastlong term, but I recognize this is also “normal” for these corporate types) - it destroys long term viability for short term goals.
Happens all over the corporate world. They are encouraged to operate this way usually the guy there when the actions were taken getz out well before those long term consequences arrive. Hopefully Steve does bear the consequences himself, he dezerves it for being a horrible person in general.
Yeah, investors are going to be even more inclined to identify exactly why the platform might be successful in the future. They’re not going to blindly throw money at new IPOs (as much) because debt isn’t free anymore.
Late stage capitalism You make a business and it goes well, you make some money everyone is happy.
But with time your profits will plateau or even decline. It’s natural, but businesses don’t understand that it is insane to expect a company to always turn crazy profits when the product does not evolve.
Companies like apple and Microsoft don’t worry as much because they are constantly evolving with new product.
Companies like Twitter, Facebook, reddit, Netflix have hit a wall where there really isn’t anywhere else to go so they start making shareholder centered decisions made by people who aren’t even in touch with the user base of their product.
Reddit, Twatter etc never made any money
Twitter made 44 billion dollars. Pretty sure it didn’t cost that much to run. Ergo Twitter made money.
That’s the big hurdle. That’s the big catch. Social media companies are contingent on speculation to drive profits. Facebook isn’t worth what it is without speculative buying in the markets. Twitter, same story. That’s where reddit is at, they want a payday and to move on. The funny thing is this same reasoning exposes just how awful a businessman Elon Musk is. Twitter is going to literally drive him from the top ten richest in the world list all on its own. Give it time.
The funnier thing is Steve Huffman is such a loser he is looking up to Elon in this past week. The guy wants so desperately to be able to buy popularity like Elon did.
Profit. Not revenue.
Twitter was profitable only in 2018 and 2019.
Twitter was purchased at 44 billion in late 2022. It did not cost Twitter 44 billion to run for the years prior. That is very much profit for those shareholders considering especially that 44 billion was a significant percentage higher than the value at the time. It cost less than half a billion to keep Twitter’s lights on every quarter. They started in 2006. So assuming from the get go it cost half a billion a quarter (and you know it didn’t right?) … that’s 32 billion to run Twitter the years it was open. And they sold for 44 billion, meaning 12 billion in profit in a windfall.
Still following?
And for a social media company’s primary shareholders, selling that company is the ultimate goal and only way to realize true profits. That’s the social media scam. Zuckerberg right? You think he wants to run Facebook? He has to, he’s an employee at this rate. Well compensated sure but he doesn’t pull the strings.
What’s hilarious is Elon didn’t understand all that. He bought Twitter for cash money. There is no way on God’s green earth he manages to turn a profit with it because no social media company has been able to either - not with an entire board and public stock, so certainly not with a private company either. All the profit mechanisms they had before were contingent on the stock market, on speculation. That’s all gone now. It’s private. There is no public stock price to affect.
Absolutely, this explanation is on point. A case can be made about the economy of profit or burst, vulture capitalism and all that sbut that’s not the point here. There’s simply only so much room to grow and social media are a fickle thing by it’s very nature.
This is just what living in late stage capitalism looks like.
It’s so weird that stuff is being intentionally designed to be worse.
it’s not, the primary objective is to rake in ever bigger heaps of money. this is just a side effect
So what you’re saying is we should ban money
I’ve never seen a more stupid comment. Your attempt at a satirical remark is at a kindergarten level. From reading it I deduct you believe there are no other solutions to it.
There are solutions to it. You’d find them if you used your cognition beyond playground squabble
I don’t miss r/rareinsult
Almost like it’s impossible that was the least bit sarcastic.
There is the “enshittification theory” — https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys
Article specifically mentions TikTok but is relevant for Reddit.
Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.
this. oh god this sums it up so well. any platform that features a “feed” and the company offer to “personalise” it for you - that’s where enshittification will occur.
Silicon Valley Bank collapsing is putting pressure on tech companies to actually turn a profit, so they’re turning to slimy tactics just to survive IPO
I don’t think it’s from a specific bank, but it is probably related. From being inside the tech world, the general sense is that the “macroeconomic environment” is different, because of the interest rates, so companies are getting pressure from all of their investors and banks to behave differently. At a lot of places, this has led to layoffs, trying to reduce costs, etc. It also manifests as trying to squeeze out more profit at all costs.
I like the “enshitification” term for the actual process that Reddit and others are going through.
I learned a lot from reading that article; thanks a lot! It’s something I had an intuitive sense about, but the cynical moves these platforms have been making are much less mysterious now
That’s an interesting thought, seems potentially plausible. Is this something you’re spitballing yourself, or is this an idea that’s been flying around?
I work in tech startups and it’s well known that equity is much harder to come by and comes with much more strings since the SVB collapse. The VCs are hurting and SVB was a wakeup call for them to be more active about getting value from their ventures.
was SVB a big investor in these companies or is there some other reason it’s collapse is having an effect?
I read that SVB was often the only bank that would do business with tech companies and their execs because of their weird balance sheets
The VC money is drying up and they’re demanding a return on investment as the world’s economy struggles on at the moment.
Indeed. VC is going into “AI” instead so now services have to be financially sustainable. And that is not really the problem, it’s when companies intentionally do it in a way that fuck the user.
Sustainable as interpreted by a non-techie bean counter looking at maximising next quarter’s profits and ignoring everything past that.
They’re doing an IPO so yes, that is what sustainable means nowadays, as shitty as it is.
Pretty good answer tbh
Interest rates went up and investors aren’t able to get cheap money. So investment is drying up. A few banks collapsed. Tech companies are trying to make a profitable business. Instead of a zombie company
This is it in a nutshell, without any “late stage capitalism” nonsense.
Reddit, like Twitter and other prominent tech companies, was supported largely by outside investment. The company didn’t make a profit, but investors continued to put money into it in hopes that it would eventually net them a return. Low interest rates make investment capital easy to come by and relatively low risk, but higher borrowing rates have dried up a lot of that funding. This forces the company to find other ways of sustaining itself.
I think the free money train in leaving the station and everyone is scrambling to be profitable. But that’s just an assumption based on twitch and Reddit right now.
So I guess you’re saying this is Powell’s fault, huh. 🤔
What did twitch do now?
Reddit, Twitter, etc, have been running at a loss for ages, burning through vulture capitalist money to build up a solid userbase. Now they need to start turning a reliable profit, which means enshittification of the user experience to make more money per user.
And the worst bit it even happens to non free platforms.
Like Spotify pushing a TikTok style interface, and ramming my home screen full of things I don’t care about. Like, you’ve known me for a decade you should know I’m not into drake and podcasts by conservative men.
I don’t understand why Reddit doesn’t just buy up one of the 3rd-party apps that have the tech that people say is so badly needed. If the 3rd party apps actually make money then just buy one of them and make money with it.
Sounds like you’re trying to blackmail spez there.
I think it’s the fallout of allowing private companies to monetize the internet. Way back in the early days of the internet, it was a pretty de-centralized experience. Then we started centralizing things, companies realized there was revenue to be made, and those companies (because they were corporations) valued the money over the people. Capitalism, basically. Only way to fight this is to take the internet back to what it was in about 2006.
If people don’t use Reddit or Twitter or Facebook, those companies have very little value. The value in any social media is generated by the people who use those things. If there’s no people, there’s no value.
All these companies have done about as much growing as they can. I remember listening to the radio on my drive to work a year or two ago, and they were talking about how Facebook had done internal research and concluded that they had captured something like 95% of the possible user demographics, meaning that they were unlikely to be able to reach new customers because either you have Facebook and you use it, or you’ve already heard of it and you don’t want it/don’t use it anymore.
It was interesting, because Facebook/Meta, like Twitter, Reddit, Discord and Tumblr are all for-profit companies that exist to make money, and yet, the expectation of infinite growth from the market never ceases. There will never be a time when the company has grown “enough”. Enter the short-term smash-and-grab strategies. The idea is that they know that their business model has peaked in terms of growth and profit and they now need to extract value from the company before the market catches up to that fact. Social media is inherently unprofitable. Nobody wants to actually pay for it, and they do not produce a product, so eventually once the ad revenue has reached critical mass, the users become the product and are essentially ransomed off. Reddit just tried to pass the buck onto the 3rd party app developers rather than the users, but since the API restrictions affects regular users as much as it does developers, it had the same effect.
Suffice to say, unless you are a member of a social media platform that is a non profit, this is going to keep happening. Even if you land on a site that prides themselves on being excellent stewards of their company and never prioritize profits and growth over stability and customer satisfaction, eventually they will be forced to make a decision - lose a lot of money or lose some customers. The answer, sadly, is all too obvious to them by now.
Do anyone knows how lemmy survive? Are we a product?
Good news.
Computers are much cheaper and text is very low bandwidth. A $100/month server will be able to host a large chunk of us, and donations will likely be able to cover these meager costs.
Without a need to grow exponentially, we can mostly sit happy on single physical server and $100/month (or so) independent instances.
No need to build $million+ data centers like the big boys. We can take advantage of our small size instead.
Thanks
That being said… I think that we as users should monetarily support our instances. I do support the instance I use for Mastodon. I will do the same for Lemmy once I settle on one.
Lemmys developers mostly fund themselves by a grant of the Dutch NLNet Foundation, they have talked about it in the past.
Yep. Once capitalism completes the growth phase of the latest boom-bust cycle, companies start focusing on increasing revenue. Turns out when the economy starts declining people aren’t willing to spend money on random shit. People didn’t want to spend money on it during the boom, they’re even less likely to do so as their expenses go up and wages stay stagnate. A truly idiotic economic system.
Social media is inherently unprofitable. Nobody wants to actually pay for it, and they do not produce a product
i miss when people were just excited to be able to chat with others online
Oh, I agree. Sometimes I yearn for the halcyon days of “Web 1.0”, before the corporations muscled their way in and took what regular people built from the ground up and perverted it into a mechanism of capitalism and corporate greed. It was like the wild west and every session was an adventure.
Maybe I just have rose tinted glasses on, but it seemed to me like the internet was a more pleasant place when things were more decentralized.
Capitalism, babyyyyy!!!
It was capitalism all along…
It’s Enshitification https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/enshittification
Enshittification is the answer. I mean, everything costs $, but my opinion? That’s worthless!
This is the consequence of the fed raising interest rates and companies finding it much harder to find money to pay salaries and operating costs. So companies have to actually seek profit or go bust and CEOs and board of directors are getting desperate and showing how little they understand what makes their products great.
What you really mean is that this is the consequences of the Fed’s pulling back on the corporate welfare program of qualitative easing.
We’ve been printing free money for the wealth holding class since they fucked up our economy gambling on poor people not being able to afford housing.
They got used to the welfare and instead of getting their houses in order, they started gambling with our future tax dollars like they were guaranteed forever. That’s why Trump was such a removed about politicizing the fed and blaming interest rates. He, and everyone else, knew our economy was getting artificially propped up and wanted to kick the can down the road four more years.
Now the wealth class is going to take out all their angst out at the American people to see if they can cause the government to flinch first.
The real problem is that the wealth class doesn’t give a shit if they’re making money of Americans or not. They’d happily follow the economies around the world. The government doesn’t have that option.
Everyday Americans, and to a lesser extent, the world, suffer while Mommy government tries to get corporate daddy’s wild free money addiction under control.
Dad is going to either go for a pack of smokes and some milk in China, or maybe Russia a few years ago, or beat the kids until mommy lets him drink again.
Blaming interest rates plays a lot better than telling the kids that daddy doesn’t have a job and needs to go to rehab because he doesn’t know how to make money and just gets it from Mom and the kids college fund/next months rent.
The tech bubble is over (kinda, they’re trying to spin it back up with AI) and so is the free money party. Rates are rising, and investors aren’t content to throw money at companies that still don’t know how they’re going to make any money. To make money, they’ve got to squeeze it out of somebody: either users or advertisers.
In Twitter’s case, they squeezed it out of a vain billionaire who they convinced to buy the company. The shareholders got their money, and now making a profit is somebody else’s problem. Reddit could’ve similarly tried to court a buyer, but there’s no guarantee they would have found one (maybe Meta?). Instead they’re trying to a gin up some revenue either out of third party apps or by pushing third party app users onto the main app so they can advertise to them. I haven’t been following Discord and Meta’s stuff, but the reasoning is probably similar.
The behavior of corporates and - especially - VC-backed ones was always out there (the dot-com bubble of 2000 was in a context of relatively high interest rate), but Ben Bernanke dumped gasoline on it through quantitative easing, as you rightly pointed out. By trying to save banks and a sluggish economy, the Fed enabled every growing distortions in corporate behavior since 2008. No wonder the 99% are pissed off. These attempts to “save the economy” resulted in ever-increasing exploitation of workers. I still think that it would have been better for the Fed to let a wave of bank bankruptcies sweep the US so that investors and management would be kept on their toes against bad corporate behavior.
You are so right. For social media, The Thing that makes their products great is us. They are really showing how little they understand us.
Hopefully these instances show that we as the user/consumer can make decisions en masse and have a positive influence long term.
oh they’re betting on users/consumers making decisions en masse ; they just want to be able to instruct us what decisions to make and for us to follow through.
That’s what Facebook has been able to do, sometimes (see: targeted advertising that got #45 elected in the US.)
It doesn’t always work (see: numerous articles trying to cajole people to Return To Office work rather than Work From Home, to prop-up the value of office buildings.)When have people had a positive long-term influence on anything?
When have people had a positive long-term influence on anything?
Because capitalism, that’s why.
This is the correct answer. Even the most hardcore capitalists have to realize that endless year-over-year growth is impossible. The invisible hand will eventually correct the market – we may be seeing the start of that now, and it’s going to affect the biggest first.
Even the most hardcore capitalists have to realize that endless year-over-year growth is impossible.
The fact that they continue this cycle of “extract every last drop of money and then move on to the next big thing” shows they really don’t. They’re more than happy to wreck everything as long as they have enough cocaine to hold them over.
I don’t think there was ever any illusion that reddit or Twitter were operating as charitable organizations, or even as non-profits.
Sure, and nobody would blame them if they simply tried to create a sustainable business with positive cashflow. The type of capitalism that is referenced here is the one where you squeeze every last penny out of the platform and would even sell your users trust, which your long term profit relies upon, if it means higher numbers in your quarterly report.
It’s probably just a relic of tech entrepreneurs being programmers rather than businesspeople, but there certainly is a real aversion to just boring, reliable profitably over time.
So you think your average MBA holder would not go the “extract short term value at all cost” route? Because it feels like they would. Maybe it’s more of a “the wrong people making it to the top” problem.
OPs question suggests there was at least some illusion !
You’re not wrong. It seems that some people are inevitably always going to be under that illusion.
