Yeah, that would have been so incredibly obvious that this whole episode is surely final and clinching proof to anyone still on the fence that he doesn't have a clue what he's doing.
Pitiful.
> After all, lots of online service subs eliminate ads in the product, so why not Twitter?
Lots of online service subs are eliminating the ad-free thing now, because they know they can prove more value of paying users to their advertisers. I don't think the NY Times subscription was ever ad-free, and many publishers are now removing that perk.
But I agree with you. I would've paid for Twitter Blue if it were completely ad-free. This is the main value of YouTube Premium to me.
I had thought since they first started locking down 3rd party apps years ago that if/when they ever had a "Twitter Pro" or whatever, that allowing subscribed users to use a third party app would be part of it. After all, lots of online service subs eliminate ads in the product, so why not Twitter?
I assumed rational thinking on their part, I suppose.