<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.disqus.com/</link><description>Tech enthusiast, video blogger, media innovator, fanatical about startups at Rackspace, home of fanatical support for Internet entrepreneurs.</description><atom:link href="https://scobleizer.disqus.com/twitter_raises_new_funds_you8217re_worth_42/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:24:23 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714224</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm still impressed by twitters business model.  Micro Blogging, who would have thought!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I use it about 3 or 5 times per week and am still amazed of how their model works.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jorge Olson</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:24:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714243</link><description>&lt;p&gt;In an amazing parallel-universe coincidence, KDE 4.2 hath been released, answer to everything, being that Microsoft has basically just copycatted KDE in Win7.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Christopher Coulter</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 01:16:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714242</link><description>&lt;p&gt;$250 million must be nice but I don't see how they are going to make Twitter profitable without degrading the service.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dot Com Dud</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:30:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714241</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If I stop using twitter is there any chance I could get them to send me my 42 bucks?!  ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Colin Clark</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:38:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714240</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Do you think a company like Twitter could go public, in a profitable way?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dantplayer</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:21:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714239</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Twitter is great, but I'm wondering if they are already in the same boat as Facebook and YouTube where monetizing is much harder than they expected even as our expectation of service and stability keeps increasing.   Also concerned that Twitter is starting to feel the weight of abusers who are using the system to promote questionable biz schemes, tho hopefully the community can police this stuff as needed.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JoeDuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:29:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714238</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I must add that there certainly is a big wad of real money - real business -laying somewhere on Twitter.  Personally, I fail to see where it actually is; how to grab it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should they provide walled gardens for enterprises?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tomi Itkonen</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:02:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714237</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Where do I apply to get the money? See the credit crunch? I'm skint!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mr W</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:57:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714236</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Twitter's business model?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If they want to go after big money, they've got to get less social and more business focused. LinkedIN has got a revenue model b/c they take advantage of big time business people who use their premium services to do research for their businesses.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;With Twitter being open source, I bet they'll be a lot of premium services that aren't necessarily owned by twitter, but will allow companies do better research on themselves, competitors and do market analysis on their customers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There could be a lot of interesting tools that search all the past tweets and see what was said, constantly monitor and organize this information...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">zaggededge</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:18:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714235</link><description>&lt;p&gt;A bank makes about $35-$40/account /year.&lt;br&gt;Twitter brings more profit than any bank?&lt;br&gt;Twitter is worth more than any bank?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Seen the current state of the financial institutions it could be.&lt;br&gt;Still Twitter is way overvalued.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">LEADSExplorer</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:53:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714234</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I may be worth 42$ to them...but the value they give me is worth far more.  I'm winning in this deal so far ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Adam Singer</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:54:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714233</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That's essentially the same per-customer valuation used in the heady dot-com days. I think I first came across it in the AOL/Time-Warner merger days when AOL was valued at something like $42 per member.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Doug Kaye</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:26:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714227</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well I liked the fact that twitter has raised more funds,I hope these would be utilized to make some much needed improvements to web-based twitter.I have mentioned the same in my post as a feature wishlist : &lt;a href="http://www.abhishekrane.com/2009/01/24/features-wishlist-for-better-twitter/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.abhishekrane.com/2009/01/24/features-wishlist-for-better-twitter/"&gt;http://www.abhishekrane.com...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Abhishek</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 07:42:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714223</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Before a proper business model, I'd assume the worth would be more like minus 42 dollars.  You know: 2009, the year of realism.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tomi Itkonen</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 03:05:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714228</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Actually, the real question is:  if Twitter would shut off my account, how much would I pay to get back on?  Or if someone wanted to buy my account, how much would I sell it for?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Shall we conduct a little hedonic pricing experiment?  i'll start: I'd pay $50-100/year to get my account back.  But I wouldn't sell it for less than $500.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">elliottng</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:08:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714229</link><description>&lt;p&gt;good job robert, cue someone making the "what are you worth on twitter" app.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">drew olanoff</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:02:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714231</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Of course Kraft customers would pay actually for their peanut butter&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tony Bain</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:44:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714230</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm worth more! Twitter recently turned down a half billion dollar acquisition offer from Facebook.:)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Igor Poltavskiy</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:56:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714232</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You could also value it on a per tweet model...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1.1 billion and counting.&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://popacular.com/gigatweet/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://popacular.com/gigatweet/"&gt;http://popacular.com/gigatw...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A $250 million valuation means every tweet is worth 20 cents or so.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:55:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714226</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, it follows that they've read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy....&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Batman</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:45:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter raises new funds: you&amp;#8217;re worth $42!</title><link>http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/24/twittervalue/#comment-9714225</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey!  Good to be worth something.  But, really .. I was wanting to be a little bit more :) lol&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sprite</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:40:21 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>