Thanks for taking the time to provide the link to the report and
correct some of the statements in the story. We usually try to find
the original report; I didn’t try hard enough before writing this post
and am slightly red-faced as a result.

That said, my take was inspired by the over-dramatic headlines we
continue to see from various news outlets. Just as last year the media
was over-dramatizing Twitter’s growth, we have seen many headlines
recently over-dramatizing the slow down in growth.

As your study shows, there are many data points yet to come on that trend line!

Best, Tonia

You will need to look at the RJMetrics report found here and not just at the SFGate analysis:

http://themetricsystem.rjmetrics.com/2010/01/26/new-data-on-twitters-users-and-engagement/

What you are failing to point out is that the RJMetrics data run only through December, while the WebProNews data is through January. Also, the WebProNews report specifically states the total registration numbers do not account for suspended or abandoned accounts, but the RJMetrics report states that it does, thus the “35 million less” difference. But here you are comparing January WebProNews numbers (110 million) to December RJMetrics (75 million). You should have stated the difference is 25 million, so it appears around 25% of accounts have been suspended or abandoned.

Also, you have compared the decline in December new registrations from the RJMetrics report (6.2 million) to the increase in January from the WebProNews report (9.4 million), a major flaw in your analysis.

If you read the conclusions in the RJMetrics report, they point out that “Twitter is still growing like a rocketship” and “with 75 million total accounts, an active userbase of around 20% still leaves around 15 million highly active tweeters.”

I wholeheartedly agree with your Winston Churchill quote.

Cheers,
Matthew Daines