IMO the jury is still out. Twitter was always more than just a UI format, Twitter-shaped text posts with my Instagram friends doesn’t scratch the same itch.

Threads had 48m users in a day which already includes the most popular influencers, journalists etc.

There just isn't enough room in this market for contributors to post on this many text-based apps. And so consolidation will happen.

1) Threads will dominate. Mastodon will be like remora fish.

2) Twitter will be the home for "freedom of speech", Crypto bros, OnlyFans girls.

3) Truth Social, Gab, Post, Blueksy, Spoutible etc will die.

> Threads had 48m users in a day

Threads had 48m users just like that U2 album[1] sold 500m copies on iTunes.

[1] https://www.eonline.com/news/1071481/remember-when-apple-for...

To sign up you need to choose to download the app and click sign up (it isn’t automatic from using your Instagram) so while integrating it with Insta gives it an easy leg up I don’t really see your comparison.

> Threads had 48m users in a day

Let’s see how many stick around. Don’t get me wrong, I suspect you’re right. But given the promotion and ease of login I’m not at all surprised to see huge day one login numbers. The question is whether people like what they see enough to stick around.

I'm certainly not sticking around. I signed up, pulled over my follow list from IG, muted a bunch of brand accounts I didn't follow, realized the feed was 100% algorithmic, and haven't launched it again since.

Facebook has never lied about numbers as a way to kill off competitors. So There's no reason to think their reported numbers aren't perfectly correct.

> Threads had 48m users in a day which already includes the most popular influencers, journalists etc.

Being able to migrate existing accounts in seconds tends to do that. Let’s see how many stick around.

> Being able to migrate existing accounts in seconds tends to do that. Let’s see how many stick around.

You discount Threads user going the “easy” route, but think they will somehow go the “hard” way ?

Even if Threads is crap, it’s pretty obvious it’s gonna steal all of Twitter’s advertisers the moment they start showing ads, because the ad money generating users are moving onto Threads.

Heck, Threads doesn’t even need to show ads and the displacement of ad money away from Twitter will benefit Meta as much of that Twitter ad money will get redirected to Meta properties like FB and IG instead.

There is a related problem for Twitter which reminds me of the Altavista/Google days.

Zuckerberg has said that they won't run ads until there is a credible path to 1 billion users.

So for a year or more it will be Threads with no ads. And Twitter with according to their newly hired CEO "full-screen, sound-on" ads.

My Threads feed is full of massive brands promoting itselves already. Since you can't control the feed those are basically free ads. The only major difference will be that in the future those brands will be paying Meta for the privilege. Get the brands addicted with free engagement early on and then once they're good and hooked you start charging.

The chronological feed is coming soon at which point that will not be an issue.

And as mentioned you can simply Mute/Block them.

But there is going to be a year or more of Threads being ad-free whilst Twitter is not. That's a game changer.

> The chronological feed is coming soon

Not it won't. Facebook removed the chronological feed 10 years ago, they won't reintroduce it in Threads.

"Curated" feeds is how they get announcers to pay for visibility since the user has no control over what it is displayed at a given time

You can block them, which I’ve been doing more than I’d like today. I blocked Gary Vee, Wendy’s, the UFC, The Verge, Khloe Kardashian, and about a dozen more accounts I would never follow.

Also there's a bigger difference which is that FB/Meta ads are in an entirely different league of quality. The only ads I hear people IRL talking about actually buying and liking the products advertised to them are IG.

FWIW (not much) Zuck said they don't intend to monetize Threads until there's "a clear path to 1 billion people" https://www.threads.net/t/CuW5-eWL34x

That seems kind of strange to me, though, because 1 billion is more than 3x the entire Twitter user base.

> path to 1 billion people

Also Insta has 1bn+ active MAUs and Meta us leaning heavily on Insta for Threads

Sure, but those 1 billion people could have signed up for Twitter at any point in the last 17 years if they were interested. Twitter already maxed out its user base, so I'm skeptical that there's a 1 billion potential here.

Personally I signed up for threads and have been liking using it so far even though I never really used twitter. I think it has lower startup cost than Twitter because the algorithmic feed really works well without having to manually follow a lot of people. So I think there is reason for Zuck to dream big.

> I think it has lower startup cost than Twitter because the algorithmic feed really works well without having to manually follow a lot of people.

Twitter has an algorithmic feed.

Either way, Threads runs very lightweight, and can easily go 10 years with no revenue.