After weeks of speculation, Twitter confirmed today in a blog post that it has closed a “significant round of funding” led by the Russian firm DST Global.

“We will use these resources to aggressively innovate, hire more great people and invest in international expansion,” the San Francisco company wrote. Previous backers of the company include Benchmark Capital and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

The announcement will not likely bring to an end speculation about the financing, since Twitter did not release the amount it raised or the valuation that investors placed on the company.

Last month, Kara Swisher at All Things D reported that Twitter was nearing completion of an $800 million funding round that would value the company at $8 billion. To put that $800 million number in some perspective, that would be more than six times the amount of venture capital that was invested in Washington state during the entire second quarter.

Wow.

Why such a hefty amount of money?

Well, the same blog post that announces the funding, also provides some new numbers about the company’s growth.

Twitter now boasts more than 200 million Tweets per day –up from 65 million 12 months ago. The company’s staff also has mushroomed to over 600 people.

“More importantly, Twitter is where people around the globe come to instantly connect to what’s most meaningful to them,” the company writes. “This makes Twitter the only place in the world to get a real-time pulse on what people are thinking and doing practically anywhere.”

Comments

  • Guest

    Congratulations! I remember “Twitter Armageddon” when the site reached 2,000,000,000 tweets — a figure the company hadn’t expected to reach in its lifetime. Now we generate 2 gigatweets per fortnight!

  • Guest 2

    So many tweets.  So little revenue.  So much emerging competition.

    I have to believe this is the top of the market for Twitter and Buyer’s Remorse is just around the corner.

    • Guest

      Would you share what the “emerging competition” for Twitter is? Google tried their “Twitter killer” with Buzz. It was so poorly received, when you google “miserable failure” you are brought to the Buzz page.

      Gooplus is doing well … if you’re a dull white male with an Android phone. It’s hardly mainstream.

      Facebook? The less said about that “$100 billion” white elephant, the better. How’s that application platform working out for them?

      Twitter is still winning the race to the top of the statusphere. They have the persons (men and women!) and the mindshare. My money would be on them.

      • Guest 2

        To “generalize” about Google+ after a month of release, in the middle of the summer (N. America/Europe) is to miss where it will likely start growing.  If you look at any discussions around eLearning/mLearning, you’ll see a massive number of educators all looking at Google+

        If it starts being used in colleges and high schools for academic collaboration, and those same students then adopt it for personal use, well, the lifeblood of Facebook is cut off.

        Look at the demographics of Twitter.  Remind you of anything?  How about MySpace during it’s peak?

        The thing is, there doesn’t have to be one clear winner take-all.  Google+, or something else, will all eat into the time users spend on Facebook and Twitter.  Therefore, their valuations are going to decrease, not increase.  Even if they pick up 10% more users, if the overall decline is 20% in user time on site, they lose.  At some point, a proper analytic will be created similar to rating/share for social networks.  It’s a finite universe not an ever expanding one.

        • Guest

          What “academic collaboration” can one do with a Twitter clone? Google Wave was actually useful for that in ways Gooplus was not, and now it’s dead. “Looking at” a Twitter clone for the classroom is a fun exercise but at the end of the day, to pardon the pun, it’s academic.

          The demographics of Twitter are “everyone with a smartphone or a PC.” I shouldn’t have to remind you about Myspace’s unmoneyed tween “market.” Twitter is used daily by rich and poor, young and old, celebrity and commoner. Gooplus et al are used by … whom, exactly?

          • Guest 2

            Circles and Huddle are already being used by educators.  My best guess is that more WAVE’ish features will creep into the Gtalk portion of Google+.

            IMO, Twitter is a place where people shout at each other.  Facebook is a place where you might pat someone on the back every now and then.  Google+ is where you can sit down at the dinner table and converse.

            It’s the best “conversational” platform of the bunch.  It’s well suited for both personal and academic purposes.

            Twitter’s demographic is not quite as democratic as you suggest.  It has very little traction among white teen/20’s, who still reside on Facebook.

            Ultimately, all that matters is that Google+ will take people’s eyeballs off of other networks for some to-be-determined percentage of the day.   If the average time per day on Facebook declines (currently at 14 minutes/day), to 10 minutes day, then it’s value is reduced (vis a vis less time people are consuming ad units on that network).  Likewise, if Twitter declines in the quality and duration of user engagement (even if the subscriber base remains the same or grows), it’s valuation will start declining.

            That’s really my point.  Anyone buying Twitter today @ $8B/valuation is buying at the top of the market.  Sort of like buying a home three years ago in Las Vegas.

            Once upon a time, people thought Compuserve was forever….

          • Guest 2

            Circles and Huddle are already being used by educators.  My best guess is that more WAVE’ish features will creep into the Gtalk portion of Google+.

            IMO, Twitter is a place where people shout at each other.  Facebook is a place where you might pat someone on the back every now and then.  Google+ is where you can sit down at the dinner table and converse.

            It’s the best “conversational” platform of the bunch.  It’s well suited for both personal and academic purposes.

            Twitter’s demographic is not quite as democratic as you suggest.  It has very little traction among white teen/20’s, who still reside on Facebook.

            Ultimately, all that matters is that Google+ will take people’s eyeballs off of other networks for some to-be-determined percentage of the day.   If the average time per day on Facebook declines (currently at 14 minutes/day), to 10 minutes day, then it’s value is reduced (vis a vis less time people are consuming ad units on that network).  Likewise, if Twitter declines in the quality and duration of user engagement (even if the subscriber base remains the same or grows), it’s valuation will start declining.

            That’s really my point.  Anyone buying Twitter today @ $8B/valuation is buying at the top of the market.  Sort of like buying a home three years ago in Las Vegas.

            Once upon a time, people thought Compuserve was forever….

          • Guest 3

            Facebook 13-25 yr olds = 40% of users
            Twitter 13-25 yr olds = 17% of users
            http://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/infographic-facebook-vs-twitter-demographics-2010-2011/

            Twitter adoption is increasingly non-White:
            http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2007/twitter-users-cell-phone-2011-demographics

            Facebook adoption is increasingly with older adults, parents and grandparents.
            35-54 yr old = fastest growing segment

            Twitter has no appeal to teens which limits it’s growth.  As Facebook becomes mainstream skewing to older demographics the need for a youth based counter-culture network accelerates (just as Facebook, at one time, fulfilled that role).

            To believe that this space is in anything but flux is foolish.  To consider that Twitter and Facebook may have peaked is prudent.

Job Listings on GeekWork