"Mr. Rowghani has been selling Twitter shares heavily since May, when insiders were first allowed to sell after the company’s initial public offering in November.
Last month, he sold 300,000 shares, worth about $10 million. And this month, he sold nearly 75,000 shares worth more than $2.5 million. He remains a major stockholder, however, owning about two million shares, according to his latest regulatory filing."
This is a non-story. This is a guy that had a mountain of net-worth 'on paper' and since he is now legally able to, he's brought a portion of that net-worth into the bank.
I don't know about you, but if I had 50MM+ on paper in a single investment, I'd want to take at least a fifth of it and turn it into cash for investing elsewhere, building that dream home, going on vacation, etc.
Now, maybe he's filthy rich already, but this just strikes me as a very typical, sane 'diversify your assets' type of situation.
"There was, in fact, a question at a recent “tea time” — bi-weekly employee meetings with top execs — about Rowghani’s large sale of his shares. Those in attendance told me that Rowghani got up and told the audience that he was not thrilled to answer the question, but noted that he wanted the money to give to research to battle a disease that took his father’s life. It was an emotional address, said those present."
http://recode.net/2014/06/11/twitter-mulling-shake-up-of-top...
My personal take on this is that the company is desperate to seem confident in the future. If the executives sell stock, the employees sell, and suddenly there'd be a large-scale sell-off, I think. My guess would be that the executives are holding onto it to try to infuse some sense of stability for now, but they'll start looking for the exits shortly, and when they leave, they'll liquidate their holdings.
I think you're spot on with your analysis, but I think it hurts the image of Twitter executives holding their stock because they're confident that it'll continue to go up.
how is selling his shares the takeaway and not resigning from his position?
it would seem that they mentioned the share selling because they feel that this was foreshadowing him leaving the company when he did it. it would seem that that share selling was not simple profit taking, even though I agree it would be sensible to sell shares and turn some of that 'net worth' into hard assets or reinvest it
Hmm... This does cast a shadow on Twitter's future. It's a shadow, so it does not have solid ground to back it, but it's a shadow, so it makes people nervous.
I adore Twitter but I am afraid the company is executing poorly. Here are a few examples:
1. I receive daily emails on my main account urging me to advertise. Or more properly I don't see them because I've marked them as spam.
2. Created an account for an event that never got used. Receive two emails every single day trying to get me to engage. You would think after over a year that they'd get the message I wasn't going to use the account but the emails still come every single day.
3. Clicked on Twitter's own ad to find out more information about promoted accounts. The ad promises more information but instead an ad console loads slowly, very slowly. Is there any information as to cost? None, so I go to Google. The top link which is a blog says it will cost me $4 for each follower I gain. I click on the Twitter company link which is lower down the page and it tells me it will cost me as low as 30 cents a follower. Anyone at Twitter HQ noticing that their funnel is badly broken? I'm guessing very few small businesses are using this successfully and signing up.
Since Twitter went public the most innovative single thing on the platform was by an independent developer and that's Dave Winer's Little Pork Chop.
I am still hoping that Twitter turns itself around but the clock is ticking.
You can bid whatever you want for followers. Twitter uses the same tactics as all auction-based advertisers and tries to tell you that you'll have to set prices at $4 per action to see any results, when in reality they'll happily take your 30 cents per action if that's all you're willing to give them. There's no fixed price attached to action acquisition, so for these guys it's all about what you can get someone to pay, and you get them to pay more by telling them several times that they need to pay more to see results.
Whats going on with Twitter? The stock is significantly down and they seem to be going through re-orgs frequently. Have they become stagnant? Its not going to go away but I don't know what else they can do to increase revenue or increase adoption.
>Twitter had 255 million monthly users in March, a 5 percent increase from the previous quarter. It was the second quarter of disappointing growth for the service, and Wall Street was hoping for an increase in the double digits.
Growing at a rate of 12.5 million users per quarter is slow?
I'm sorry, but you can't blame a talented operations guy (among the most talented in our industry -- he led the Pixar IPO) for Twitter's failure to innovate and grow. Especially when you factor in the constant absence of the guy who is supposed to be in charge of product, who spends more of his time tending to his overhyped payments company.
The lack of a transformational acquisition probably didn't make him very happy either, as it's hard to see how Twitter's current product mix moves the needle in any meaningful capacity.
Kara Swisher reports[1] that his intent in selling stock was to raise money to donate to medical research:
There was, in fact, a question at a recent “tea time” — bi-weekly employee meetings with top execs — about Rowghani’s large sale of his shares. Those in attendance told me that Rowghani got up and told the audience that he was not thrilled to answer the question, but noted that he wanted the money to give to research to battle a disease that took his father’s life. It was an emotional address, said those present.
Spite, no longer believing in the company, not wanting a large chunk of their wealth tied up in something they no longer have much of a hand in, or just wanting their money so they can buy a bright new FU sports car and blow some cash on whatever their next idea is?
How long does it take to sell stock when you're an insider? Isn't there some kind of planning/disclosure process that has to occur? If so, I wonder how long this has been in the works, and how long the Board knew about it.
[+] [-] djloche|11 years ago|reply
"Mr. Rowghani has been selling Twitter shares heavily since May, when insiders were first allowed to sell after the company’s initial public offering in November.
Last month, he sold 300,000 shares, worth about $10 million. And this month, he sold nearly 75,000 shares worth more than $2.5 million. He remains a major stockholder, however, owning about two million shares, according to his latest regulatory filing."
This is a non-story. This is a guy that had a mountain of net-worth 'on paper' and since he is now legally able to, he's brought a portion of that net-worth into the bank.
I don't know about you, but if I had 50MM+ on paper in a single investment, I'd want to take at least a fifth of it and turn it into cash for investing elsewhere, building that dream home, going on vacation, etc.
Now, maybe he's filthy rich already, but this just strikes me as a very typical, sane 'diversify your assets' type of situation.
[+] [-] nrao123|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JonFish85|11 years ago|reply
I think you're spot on with your analysis, but I think it hurts the image of Twitter executives holding their stock because they're confident that it'll continue to go up.
[+] [-] thesis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] autokad|11 years ago|reply
it would seem that they mentioned the share selling because they feel that this was foreshadowing him leaving the company when he did it. it would seem that that share selling was not simple profit taking, even though I agree it would be sensible to sell shares and turn some of that 'net worth' into hard assets or reinvest it
[+] [-] justicezyx|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _pmf_|11 years ago|reply
A clever man.
[+] [-] rmason|11 years ago|reply
1. I receive daily emails on my main account urging me to advertise. Or more properly I don't see them because I've marked them as spam.
2. Created an account for an event that never got used. Receive two emails every single day trying to get me to engage. You would think after over a year that they'd get the message I wasn't going to use the account but the emails still come every single day.
3. Clicked on Twitter's own ad to find out more information about promoted accounts. The ad promises more information but instead an ad console loads slowly, very slowly. Is there any information as to cost? None, so I go to Google. The top link which is a blog says it will cost me $4 for each follower I gain. I click on the Twitter company link which is lower down the page and it tells me it will cost me as low as 30 cents a follower. Anyone at Twitter HQ noticing that their funnel is badly broken? I'm guessing very few small businesses are using this successfully and signing up.
Since Twitter went public the most innovative single thing on the platform was by an independent developer and that's Dave Winer's Little Pork Chop.
I am still hoping that Twitter turns itself around but the clock is ticking.
[+] [-] k-mcgrady|11 years ago|reply
Me too! I used their ad service once and despite telling them not to send anymore emails I get bombarded with marketing emails every single day.
[+] [-] cookiecaper|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cookiecaper|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tlrobinson|11 years ago|reply
It's got to be somewhat depressing to know the market thinks your presence at a company is worth almost negative $1 billion.
[+] [-] tg3|11 years ago|reply
And extraordinarily depressing.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_over_replacement_player
[+] [-] yalogin|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ForHackernews|11 years ago|reply
I read somewhere that the vast majority of Twitter accounts are bots or completely inactive.
[+] [-] valarauca1|11 years ago|reply
Growing at a rate of 12.5 million users per quarter is slow?
[+] [-] capkutay|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dmcy22|11 years ago|reply
[1] http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/20/technology/social/whatsapp-1...
[+] [-] ceejayoz|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] numair|11 years ago|reply
The lack of a transformational acquisition probably didn't make him very happy either, as it's hard to see how Twitter's current product mix moves the needle in any meaningful capacity.
Twitter's loss.
[+] [-] far33d|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rco8786|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrewljohnson|11 years ago|reply
Not to say I don't like Twitter a lot. I use it everyday to follow news and conversations.
[+] [-] mantrax5|11 years ago|reply
Why should they dump their stock before being fired? Is there a reason not to wait a little bit? It just looks plenty passive-aggressive.
Unless, of course they believe the stock will take a nosedive shortly after (which never happens).
[+] [-] rsfinn|11 years ago|reply
There was, in fact, a question at a recent “tea time” — bi-weekly employee meetings with top execs — about Rowghani’s large sale of his shares. Those in attendance told me that Rowghani got up and told the audience that he was not thrilled to answer the question, but noted that he wanted the money to give to research to battle a disease that took his father’s life. It was an emotional address, said those present.
[1] http://recode.net/2014/06/11/twitter-mulling-shake-up-of-top...
[+] [-] Fomite|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mbreese|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] therobot24|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] femtards885|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lowglow|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lsh123|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] msie|11 years ago|reply