Professional investors should stick to investing, product management is clearly not their strong suit based on this laundry list of proposals. :)
Time and time again, companies come up with supply driven theses that give birth to products that fail. Demand driven products succeed. Knowing when to engage in M&A, sell assets, cut costs, expand to new markets and engage in corporate actions requires judgement that few companies have. It's not always about iterating on the product you already have.
Facebook understands this which is why they have made several key acquisitions. They're looking to be the home of the best innovations in social media; whether it comes from internal sources or external teams.
In Twitter's case, they have hit the limit of mind share in most markets. Everyone knows about it; few on the margin have incentives to sign up. Periscope has potential if data costs come down.
This is why people in industry don't always make it as CEOs. Knowing which game to play is key. Thinking like an investor is key too. Don't take it from me; take it from Buffett.
For reference most run of the mill companies trade somewhere around 1x revenue.
Why would their costs go down rapidly; stock based comp? Typically stock based comp has a strike price lower than the current share price. So they save but maybe not as much as the stock price collapse might suggest. Also, they'd still be unprofitable. A lot of professional investors feel they should cut costs, focus on periscope, and start making money off the new organisations that make money off of having access to information now. Things like charging the times and the journal for a live feed from ground action in Syria.