Twitter Captures 0.001% Of Micro-Messaging Market
If you read the tech press, you’ll be aware that, in some circles, Twitter is regarded as the most amazing new tool released in years. However, while some people think it’s insanely great, others think it’s terminally dull. What is Twitter? It’s what I call a micro-messaging system. You can send 140 character messages out into the ether, and other people can read them. It’s a bit like sending an SMS text message to a group of people… which begs the question - how does Twitter compare with SMS in terms of popularity? Twitter aren’t public about their stats, but Techcrunch has posted some usage nunbers. So let’s compare Twitter to SMS texts…
First, numbers of users. Twitter has around a million users. That compares to around three billion people that send SMS texts. Twitter is three orders of magnitude less popular than SMS texts in terms of numbers of users.
Second, numbers of messages sent: around billion Twitter messages are sent per year. That compares to around two trillion SMS texts. Twitter is three orders of magnitude less popular than SMS texts in terms of number of messages sent.
Or, to put all this another way, Twitter has so far captured around 0.001% of what could be called the “micro-messaging” market. Depending on your point of view, your reaction to that is either going to be - “Wow! Look at all that potential for growth: they still have another 99.999% of market share to go before they own the micro-messaging market.” - or you’ll think their numbers are so far down in the noise that it’s difficult to tell yet if the company is going to get more popular, or if something else is going to come along and replace it.
Asam Bashir wrote:
Personally I just haven’t found a need for Twitter, I don’t really want the same message to go to all my various social-networking activity, I use them for different purposes. Even if the service reached a critical mass of users I can’t see any value the service would provide….
Posted 30 Apr 2008 at 3:04 pm ¶
simon wrote:
I think some people find real value when they have large numbers e.g. thousands of followers because it’s a such an easy way to instantly message everyone.
For almost everyone else, though, I’m just not convinced it’s sufficiently differentiated from SMS messaging to grab people’s attention in the long-term.
As you say, using it to autopopulate the “what I’m doing right now” field of other social networks is a gimmick at best.
Posted 30 Apr 2008 at 3:26 pm ¶
Brent D wrote:
SMS texting can be done on a cheap phone with a standard cell connection. Twitter needs a smart phone with a web connection, which in all likelyhood, costs more to maintain than a texting service on your cell phone. If I were a gaming enthusiast I would probably have MSN Messenger open and texting 10 people simultaneously while playing some game rather than use a web connection.
No, I agree, it’s a short term gimmick at best. But then again, I’m not much into MySpace or FaceBook. I suppose you have to have a reason for using a tool before you get the tool and have to come up with a reason to have it.
Posted 08 May 2008 at 9:52 pm ¶