Threads, the Twitter-like app created by Meta, has seen a sharp drop in activity. The Threads daily active user count peaked on July 7, two days after its launch. Recent data shows that metric has fallen by 70%, but does this mean Threads is headed for the same fate as MySpace and Google+?
Meta's Threads app had explosive growth in its first week but not all users are staying engaged.
It’s far too early to predict the fate of Threads. The big drop in engagement from the early launch days is unsurprising for several reasons.
The Threads Launch Was Huge But Misleading
The Threads launch generated spectacular numbers, with 100 million user signups in the first week. This made Threads the fastest growing app in history.
While explosive growth rates often signify user excitement about an app and its features, Threads’ growth rate was in large part artificial. Threads benefited from by being an extension of Instagram, an app with two billion monthly active users.
If a startup launches an app, it would have to grow its user base by promoting it and hoping word of mouth from happy users would drive additional growth. Hitting even a million users would require a compelling app experience, favorable press, and viral sharing. Threads faced none of these headwinds.
Frictionless Signup
One of the keys to success, I suggested prior to the Threads launch, was a frictionless signup that leveraged Instagram’s user base. This is exactly what happened. Instagram users were presented with a Threads link that let them sign up with a few clicks. No need to write bios, upload photos, etc., the user’s Threads profile could be copied from Instagram.
Most of the effort involved in signing up for a new social app was eliminated with this simple process. Coupled with the massive organic publicity surrounding the Threads launch, for many users it made sense to immediately install the Threads app - even if they were only curious. With so little effort required, the signup question wasn’t Why? but rather Why not?
The Land Rush Effect
Oklahoma Land Rush, 1889
Whenever a new social app launches, early adopters, influencers, digital marketers and others with a professional interest rush to stake their claim. They get their preferred username and establish at least a minimal presence so that if the app takes off, they are well-positioned to participate.
While the Instagram connection made the username issue moot, establishing a presence was still important. I didn’t see anyone in the digital marketing community say, “I’ll wait and see if Threads works out before I install the app and confirm my profile.” With the huge reach of Meta properties, waiting made no sense. They were there on the first day.
Post-Launch Slump
Inevitably, many of the early users signed up and did little else. If they weren’t highly active on Instagram or Twitter, it was unlikely they would suddenly turn into social butterflies on Threads. Once they grabbed their profile, they could return to business as usual.
Even users active on other social channels likely decided to take a wait-and-see approach with Threads. Any time allocated to Threads would inevitably take away from other tasks, social media-related or otherwise.
In short, the fact that tens of millions of users signed up but failed to stay active is no surprise. In no way does that mean Threads is a terrible app or that it is doomed to fail, any more than a hundred million initial users means Threads is brilliant and bound to succeed.
Keys To Success
People will use Threads based on their own experience in the app. If they don’t see interesting content or people, they’ll leave. If they post repeatedly and get no interaction, they will leave. If they experience too much negativity — like spam, blatant self-promotion, rudeness, over-the-top political memes, etc., they will leave.
Interaction
So far, Threads seems to generate more interaction per capita than Twitter. I’ve got more than 40,00o followers on Twitter and a mere 278 on Threads, but I’m seeing roughly comparable levels of likes and replies. (Threads users who aren’t following you may see your posts.)
My numbers are low enough to not mean much statistically, so I looked at author and NYU professor Scott Galloway. He’s active and popular on both platforms, with 560K Twitter followers and 94K on Threads. On both apps he’s often getting thousands of likes and hundreds of comments on original posts. The level of Threads engagement seems at least comparable to Twitter if not better considering the difference in follower count.
So far, it seems, Threads is maintaining engagement levels for active users that are high enough to keep them coming back.
Features
For a social app, Threads is somewhat lacking in features. Notably, one can’t search by topic or keyword to find interesting content. There are no trending topics. There’s just one feed that includes both people you follow and others.
One of the biggest barriers to keeping users engaged is that there’s no desktop app. I spend most of my day on a Macbook Pro connected to two additional big displays. I can instantly pull up Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram and Twitter. But, if I want to check Threads, I’ve got to grab my phone. Similarly, if I find something I want to share, I’ve got to find that thing on my phone, copy the link, and post via the Threads app. There’s zero doubt I have been less engaged on Threads because of its mobile-only status.
It seems likely that Threads was rushed into production to take advantage of chaos at Twitter. That chaos continues today, with a widely mocked rebranding to “X” and elimination of the iconic blue bird.
Coming This Week
Meta recognizes the lack of features in Threads and is be rushing to address some of them. As I was writing this, the company shared what would be released this week:
- Two ways to customize your feed
- Translations
- New ways to filter notifications
- A new follow button
- “Approve all” follow requests
Ironically, I couldn’t share the actual post here because there’s neither an embed nor a “link to” function.
What’s Next?
Threads certainly has a large enough user base to keep growing user activity. The key will be showing users content and people they want to engage with and providing them with the tools to find them.
At the same time, Threads must differentiate itself from Twitter by dialing down the outrage. People may engage with provocative political content, for example, but ultimately those interactions devolve into knee-jerk sharing by supporters and hostility from the opposition.
Threads has the elements necessary to keep growing - they just need to keep adding features that will increase engagement and, at the same time, keep that engagement positive.
