It has amassed 110 million users in a week. It feels like the start of something new and noteworthy. Maybe "era" isn't the right word, but I think we can still take away the message they're trying to convey.
My working theory is that because the nature of relationships on Twitter and IG (seed data for Threads) is different, the conversations will be different. If anything, Threads is going to be a hotspot for memes and pic-based content bc the pic features are way better already.
Yes, it has given everyone who already had a Meta account, a new Meta account... so that's hardly an achievement for a platform with THREE BILLION USERS?
(Because 110 million is basically "no one" compared to the full FB userbase. It's just the statistical "a small percentage of a fuckton of people is still a lot of people")
~3% adoption in days? I wish I saw those numbers in the "cross-enrolment" ventures I work on, even if the resulting users are not active. And I'm talking about rolling new features, not expecting users to download another app.
I'm sure you do, but what numbers mean changes once you have literal billions of users. 3% is nothing. 3% active dailies, that would be something, but that's absolutely not what we're dealing with here. These are just click-through signups.
I don't think you actually know the daily actives, right? You're just guessing that the sign ups are churning at a high rate? I have no idea either way, because I've only seen reporting on the sign up numbers, not the actives numbers. Have you seen something I haven't?
Apparently. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/13/meta-threads-engagement-has-... and a whole bunch of other places, which are tracking the drop off now that the shiny's worn off and we're all discovering is still shit. Less than 40m active users, and not a lot of time spent even by those. And no reason to think that trend isn't going to keep up for a while longer.
How many million users will it have next week? That's the real test, not just a new button appearing in an app where people tend to doom-scroll for hours.
maybe, but massing users is not the same as massing people who actually use it. They just tied it to instagram no? It doesnt mean these users that clicked a button will actually use threads
Correct. The 110 million users needs to have a huge asterisk next to it. I signed up for Threads to see what it was like. Haven't gotten back on since. Obviously plenty of people have. But that 110 million number is basically meaningless without knowing how many people have used it a second or third time.
Not that I'm one to defend Facebook and it's robotic overlord, but that sort of essentially meaningless user counting is commonplace. What proportion of twitter's official user count are regularly active and how many have not touched it at all recently?
I agree completely. I'm trying to highlight that this is a particularly egregious way of counting users. I fully expect that if this continues past a few months, then shareholders will demand real numbers ("active" users) as you mention to in your comment.
No, it is a seperate app that users have to get from their device's respective app store. After you download the app you are given the option to login with your Instagram account. After authenticating you are then asked to setup rest of your profile like setting your bio, website, and importing follows. Google and Facebook provide oauth libraries for Android, iOS, and web that could similarly be used to let people log in with an account they already have.
