COMMENTS
Great work HubSpot! It is so interesting that many users are not maximizing the Twitter opportunity. Very puzzling.
Great stuff Dan. These stats are very interesting (50% have no followers) - and it's the user experience of Twitter than made those stats come true. The average Joe doesn't know about desktop apps, and may even think adobe air (needed for tweetdeck) is a virus.
I bet if twitter added Silverlight or Adobe Flex to their web application those percentages would decrease.
This is very interesting - I would really like to see some more information about "who" is using twitter. Who's on just for fun and connecting with friends, who has a marketing aim? And of course we can't forget #twitterspam !
Great report!
I suggest adding an element to your inactive account criteria. Those that haven't updated for say, 30 days or more, will have abandoned their accounts. Your current criteria eliminates people who may have just signed up as inactive.
Thanks for doing all the heavy lifting on the research :)
Great post. Fascinating to watch the twitterverse evolve isn't it? So many trying to market their business or services in the midst of all the tweets. Wonder what it'll look like a year from as rapid surge of spam has done it's damage.
It is very interesting to see how many of the big Internet fads end up with a "critical mass" of users (is it 10% of Tweeters make up 90% of Tweets?)
Ultimately, the Twitterverse, and Facebook, and others like it, fail because casual users get bored. There will always be a danger of "walled gardens", such as the discussion forums with only a dozen regular users or blogs without much footfall.
Twitter can only survive if far more ordinary people find it useful. I am not sure how long it has to survive if the 10% of users ratio changes any further....
the trouble with twitter is it is DULL.
Perhaps the bubble has already burst. Google Insights Into Search shows twitter searches have stalled. Searches peaked in April.
http://bitly.com/14cMRJ
Very interesting stats... I seem to hear about Twitter everywhere this week. Thanks for sharing this, it's good to know what's going on.
Interesting data, but I'm puzzled.
Can someone explain how, if:
55.50% are not following anyone
54.88% have never tweeted
52.71% have no followers
Only 9.06% have 'fewer than 10 followers, fewer than 10 friends, and fewer than 10 updates'?
Surely it would be closer to 40%, as there must be a lot of overlap between the three groups above.
Dan
If 55.50% are not following anyone
54.88% have never tweeted
52.71% have no followers
What's the intersection of those sets? I'd love to see a Venn Diagram or some more indepth analysis. Are the 55% who haven't tweeted the same as those who have not followed others?
I know several folks who tweet very rarely but use their own account page to see what @oprah and others are up to. Not the "intended" use of Twitter but it works for them.
As I said here http://bit.ly/3XIlo I think that when writing something this interlaced with class, race, and gender issues (especially), you would want to avoid language that is fraught with sexism and racism. Furthermore, ignoring the implications of the inequity of access to technology, internet, and social media tools in a study of the demographics of something as socially prominent as Twitter is shortsighted to put it politely.
Once I got past this, it was an interesting report. But I am still left with a bad taste in my mouth from the above.
Looking forward to reading your full report.
It's interesting to me that even though your percentages for people not really using Twitter are so high I still find Twitter to be a an amazing place to work and play.
I find opportunities and meet interesting people every day. Imagine how things would really open up if even just some of those people not really using and engaging in Twitter started doing so. Wow!
Very interesting data. These numbers will be changing quickly as Twitter continues to storm full speed ahead. Thanks for sharing.
Funny and I read about this post on Twitter - so am I that special?
I've just read the synopsis so far, so I won't ask about the math (I bet it's all clarified in the paper), but I'm wondering whether it's possible to distinguish the private Twitterers who don't have a webpage and want some anonymity from the ones using Twitter for marketing. I have actually seen some businesses with no link to their homepage, but it surely can't be an error nearly 80% are making.
Another great peice of work from you guys - keep it up
In Ireland there was a recent article about the ability of on-line dating to work as we were described as only having 'one degress of separation' - as in its a small country where we all know someone, who knows you.
This has been a problem on Twitter, as there are one or two small groups (12 pers) that interact and effectively exclude or in some cases actively deter anyone from entering the 'conversation' - so they are then by default ignored themselves > most active users end up tiny elite group with no influence at all - pointless.
Any ideas how we can change this ?
I'm equally as puzzled as DanDall:
55.50% are not following anyone
54.88% have never tweeted
52.71% have no followers
Only 9.06% have 'fewer than 10 followers, fewer than 10 friends, and fewer than 10 updates'?
Can you guys clarify?
Thanks,
John
To look at it from another perspective: if some 4.5 million accounts were counted, of which 51.71% have no followers, that means some 2,128,050 accounts do have followers. Yes, I too would be interested to see a Venn diagram of the categories - but any way we slice it, that's a 40-something percent adoption rate of a service where even its biggest fans are hard-pressed to give a concise explanation of the benefits of using it!
I was on twitter myself, by I saw that everyone follow you just so you'll follow them back and start slamming you with all their advertisement!