Five questions answered on Twitter’s plans to be listed on the stock market

We've confidentially submitted an S-1 to the SEC for a planned [initial public offering]."

Twitter has announced it plans to join the stock market. We answer five questions on the social networking site’s plans for stock market flotation.

How did the company announce its plans to join the stock market?

On Twitter of course. The company sent out a tweet saying "We've confidentially submitted an S-1 to the SEC for a planned [initial public offering]."

Twitter said little else about its flotation plans, refraining from giving a timing or price for the offering.

How much is Twitter worth?

Investors have valued the microblogging site at more than $10bn (£6.3bn).

But how does Twitter actually make money?

Mostly through advertising and companies paying for promoted tweets. These tweets post on people’s timeline, typically reaching 200 million active users, who alone send more than 500 million tweets a day.

According to advertising consultancy eMarketer, Twitter is on track to post $583m in revenue in 2013, up from $288m in 2012.

What affect do analysts think floating Twitter on the market will have for the company?

Analysts have said it could result in increased advertising because there could be a drive for increased advertising revenues post-flotation.

"There's a few issues [such as] how many revenue streams can be developed beyond just advertising, the impact of more people accessing the service via smartphones," said Colin Gillis, a New York-based technology specialist at BGC Partners told the BBC.

So why now have Twitter decided to float the company on the stock market?

Andrew Frank, social media expert at technology research company Gartner, speaking to the BBC offered some possible reasons: "[The IPO] gives its investors a way to get some of the money back that they put into the company at the beginning.

"It gives the employees a similar kind of event to reward them for the success they've had so far. And it gives Twitter itself extra funds to invest in new projects and innovation."

Photograph: Getty Images

Heidi Vella is a features writer for

Show Hide image

No, David Cameron’s speech was not “left wing”

Come on, guys.

There is a strange journalistic phenomenon that occurs when a party leader makes a speech. It is a blend of groupthink, relief, utter certainty, and online backslapping. It happened particularly quickly after David Cameron’s speech to Tory party conference today. A few pundits decided that – because he mentioned, like, diversity and social mobility – this was a centre-left speech. A leftwing speech, even. Or at least a clear grab for the liberal centre ground. And so that’s what everyone now believes. The analysis is decided. The commentary is written. Thank God for that.

Really? It’s quite easy, even as one of those nasty, wicked Tories, to mention that you actually don’t much like racism, and point out that you’d quite like poor children to get jobs, without moving onto Labour's "territory". Which normal person is in favour of discriminating against someone on the basis of race, or blocking opportunity on the basis of class? Of course he’s against that. He’s a politician operating in a liberal democracy. And this isn’t Ukip conference.

Looking at the whole package, it was actually quite a rightwing speech. It was a paean to defence – championing drones, protecting Britain from the evils of the world, and getting all excited about “launching the biggest aircraft carriers in our history”.

It was a festival of flagwaving guff about the British “character”, a celebration of shoehorning our history chronologically onto the curriculum, looking towards a “Greater Britain”, asking for more “national pride”. There was even a Bake Off pun.

He also deployed the illiberal device of inculcating a divide-and-rule fear of the “shadow of extremism – hanging over every single one of us”, informing us that children in UK madrassas are having their “heads filled with poison and their hearts filled with hate”, and saying Britain shouldn’t be “overwhelmed” with refugees, before quickly changing the subject to ousting Assad. How unashamedly centrist, of you, Mr Prime Minister.

Benefit cuts and a reduction of tax credits will mean the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for “equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcome” will be just that – with the outcome pretty bleak for those who end up losing any opportunity that comes with state support. And his excitement about diversity in his cabinet rings a little hollow the day following a tubthumping anti-immigration speech from his Home Secretary.

If this year's Tory conference wins the party votes, it’ll be because of its conservative commitment – not lefty love bombing.

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.