Twitter failed because the service only connects 304 million people as core users. This is how the world interprets the latest quarterly balance sheet. This interpretation does not convince me. In most cases the underlying reach dogma is based on a false hope, and overall is rather bad for the internet, society, and business.
The reach dogma is false because only a few media formats (I include Twitter among them in the broad sense) can be relevant for all, or even most people. My hypothesis: In each language area there is only one social network, only one video platform, only one highbrow and one lowbrow general-interest media format, that has daily contact with more than one third of internet users.
The reach dogma is unsatisfactory for the original target group of each media offering, if the further development of the core product suffers due to an expansion to the widest possible reach.
The reach dogma is unsatisfactory for everyone if the development of services and business models based on the reach dogma decreases market diversity as a whole. Everything for everyone from everyone generally means everything is so-so. Something special for some works also with the promotional business model (see Vice).
The reach dogma is inadequate as the basis of business models because it obstructs the view for experiments with the core target group. If the goal is maximum reach for advertising sales, new ideas for making money with the original users are not worth pursuing (not scaled!). It may be that there is no tech bubble at the moment.
But in my opinion there is certainly a bubble with business models following the reach dogma.
Otherwise I cannot explain why, for example, an idea arose in 2014 to make an excellent productivity tool like Wunderlist into a “home of the world’s lists” and into a media platform like BuzzFeed.
Published under CC BY-ND 3.0, author is Konrad Lischka, please link to: http://www.konradlischka.info)