Jonathan Anastas

11.7K posts

Jonathan Anastas banner
Jonathan Anastas

Jonathan Anastas

@Janastas

CEO, Board Chair, ex-CMO, change agent | ex-@onechampionship @oneesports @activision @ATVI_AB @atari @motortrend @liveone | board & advisor

Los Angeles, CA Katılım Nisan 2007
1.6K Takip Edilen1.1K Takipçiler
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Raman is going to have to outrun her positions on homeless encampments and a DEEPLY unpopular dissenting/losing POV on not taking on removing camps/tents from <500 feet of schools / churches and blaming car owners / car makers for stolen catalytic converters, vs holding thieves accountable. Neither looks moderate nor reasonable in the filter of all 2026. On the flip, the left is mad she fought to reverse some of the mansion taxes (on multifamily homes only).
English
0
0
0
5
SuperPav
SuperPav@TheSuperPav9·
@hearinladotcom You post more and more retarded stuff as time passes, impressive work
English
1
0
0
21
Hear in LA
Hear in LA@hearinladotcom·
while the unserious "news" is obsessed with Spencer Pratt, the real horse race are the true frontrunners, the unpopular Mayor and the relatively unknown (to some) city councilwoman, Nithya Raman of the Los Feliz / Silver Lake area. In any reasonable timeline, Raman would win in a landslide because Bass has made a laundry list of mistakes during her first term including cozying up with the most despicable sorts (the LAPD Chief, @CityAttorneyLA, etc) and bungling the fires while axing the female fire chief. The worst thing that happened to Bass recently was how NYC's new mayor won and is currently showing the world doesn't end if you vote for someone a little off the radar. Raman's big challenge is to convince people that she isn't a scary socialist the way Fox News and MAGA are dying to portray her as being. And even though she is endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America, that means as little hear in LA as being endorsed by evangelists doesn't mean you will rule as a love thy neighbor Christian.
Unrig LA@UnrigLA

CM Raman isn't just the first Mayoral candidate to receive a check for matching funds, it's a BIG one ($613k) as she submitted well over what was required. If she had qualified w/ the minimum she would have only received $463k.

English
10
3
12
1.6K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Here’s the argument: we were promised in LA than a millionaires tax on how sales of all types above $5 million was going to generate a certain amount of new revenue and that revenue was gonna’ create more housing starts. The revenue never materialized at the level it was promised, housing starts dropped further. Tax did not achieve the desired objectives. So much so, that even the DSA candidate for Mayor is suggesting carving out some fairly major exemptions to that millionaire tax - contra to what you might expect - because she believes housing starts are the most important way to address affordability and unlike most of these pro tax people, she has an MPA from Harvard in urban planning. Because in the real world, the new maximum second home purchase price will be $4,900,000, other sales won’t happen, the topline tax number won’t come and all the ancillary economic benefits (shopping, dining, home maintenance jobs etc) will decline. And Miami condos will get the benefit.
English
1
0
2
683
Jill Filipovic
Jill Filipovic@JillFilipovic·
What exactly is the argument against a pied-a-terre tax for second (or third / fourth / fifth) homes worth more than $5 million owned by people who do not even live in the city? It just seems like such a glaringly obvious common-sense policy.
English
454
40
949
155.5K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Interesting
Aakash Gupta@aakashgupta

Chanel makes newly hired senior leaders sit silent for 90 days. No decisions. No fixes. No "here's how we did it at my last company." Just listening. The most rational onboarding policy in luxury, and almost nobody copies it. The instinct that got someone promoted is the same instinct that breaks them as a leader. They were the best at the job. They saw problems fast. They fixed them faster. That pattern recognition is what got noticed. Then they get the title. And every problem that crosses their desk now triggers the same instinct: I see it, I know the answer, I can solve this in an hour. So they do. And the people who report to them learn three things in the first month. Don't bring problems, bring solved problems. Don't think out loud, you'll get overruled. Don't develop judgment, the boss already has it. You've trained your team to be your hands. Six months later you wonder why nobody on the team has an original idea, why every decision still routes through you, why you're working 70-hour weeks doing the same job you had before plus a calendar full of 1:1s. The 90 days of silence at Chanel is a forcing function. You can't fix what you don't yet understand, and the act of waiting until you understand is the actual work. Most companies skip this step because the new hire's salary creates pressure to "show value" immediately. Chanel absorbs 90 days of zero output in exchange for a leader who actually leads instead of one who out-executes their team. The trade most managers refuse to make: short-term throughput for long-term capacity. Watching someone struggle toward an answer you already have, and choosing to let them find it themselves, is the entire job. Everything else is just being a senior IC with a bigger inbox.

English
0
0
0
52
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Schools? Most sub par in LA. Enrollment dropping. Roads? Some of the worst in the west. Public transport? Laughable in LA. Water and power near the highest cost in the nation. Next list? Tell me what percent of the Fortune 500 run deficits like LA and billions went missing they can’t “account for”.
English
0
0
0
4
Todd in Santa Monica
Todd in Santa Monica@Toddinsm·
@Janastas @NickCho Schools Roads Public Transpo Water and power Gov spending taxed money is not always wasted Large corporations are just as wasteful and pay very little tax as percentage of income
English
1
0
0
9
Nick Cho
Nick Cho@NickCho·
Can nothing be done? Lived in California since 2011 & while overall think it's wonderful, the one thing that I've been absolutely perplexed by is Prop 13. It's the worst thing about CA & everyone just accepts it, & almost every other problem with CA is because of it.
English
202
19
337
73.6K
Jonathan Anastas retweetledi
Greg Scaduto
Greg Scaduto@GregoryScaduto·
"He is forty-one years old and still trying to pass a test that ended decades ago, in a house that no longer exists, for people who did not know the damage they were doing."
English
0
195
2K
3.1M
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
All of this!
Jaynit@jaynitx

MrBeast: "If you knew what I knew, you could get 10 million subscribers in six months" "Your videos suck. You think your videos are good, but they suck. They just do. And the sooner you learn how to make good, great videos that people actually want to watch, the sooner you'll get views." MrBeast shares his early reality: "When I was 14, I thought my videos were the best in the world. They weren't, they were terrible. To be successful, you kind of have to have a little bit of that ego where you think your content's great. But also, if you have sub-1,000 subscribers, there's a good probability your videos just suck. They just do." He explains what to do about it: "You need to make hundreds of videos. Improve something every time. And just get to the point where they don't suck. When you make good content, you'll blow up. It's not the algorithm. It's not anything. Most people who are in my position just made terrible videos, and that's okay. Because you've got to make a bunch of videos and improve over time to be great." MrBeast uses an analogy: "You don't just pick up a baseball and become an MLB-level athlete within a year. It takes many, many, many years. YouTube's kind of the same way." On analysis paralysis: "A lot of people get analysis paralysis. They'll sit there and plan their first video for three months. If you have zero videos on your channel, your first video is not gonna get views. Period. Your first 10 are not gonna get views. I can very confidently say that. So stop sitting there and thinking for months and months on end. Just get to work and start uploading." He gives the formula: "All you need to do is make 100 videos and improve something every time. Do that, and then on your 101st video, we'll start talking. Maybe you can get some views. But your first 100 are gonna suck." How to improve something each time: "The second video: put more effort into the script. The third one: learn a new editing trick. The fourth one: figure out a way to have better inflections in your voice. The fifth one: study a new thumbnail tip and implement it. The sixth one: figure out a new title. There's infinite ways. The coloring, the frame rate, the editing, the filming, the production, the jokes, the pacing, every little thing can be improved. There's literally no such thing as a perfect video." On the algorithm: "What YouTube wants is for people to click on a video and watch it. That's what it is at its core. By studying the algorithm, you'll learn that you're more studying human psychology. What do humans want to watch?" MrBeast shares a simple reframe: "Anytime you say the word 'algorithm,' just replace it with 'audience' and it works perfectly. 'The algorithm didn't like that video?' No, the audience didn't like that video. Literally, that's it. If people are clicking and watching, it gets promoted more. The algorithm just reflects what the people want." On titles: "Short, simple, and just so freaking interesting that you have to click. If someone reads it, are they like, do they have to watch it? Is it just so intrinsically interesting that it's gonna haunt them if they don't click?" He adds nuance: "Keep it below 50 characters. Above 50 characters, on certain devices it goes dot, dot, dot, and that's the worst thing because then people don't even know what they're clicking on." MrBeast shares the extremity principle: "The more extreme the opinion, typically the higher the click-through rate. 'Fiji water sucks', that'd do fine. But 'Fiji water is the worst water I've ever drank in my life', way more extreme, would do way better. But then you have to deliver. The more extreme you are, the more extreme you have to be in the video." On the first 5 seconds: "Before you film a video, what is the thumbnail? What is the title? Then what's the first 5 seconds? Then what's the first 30 seconds?" He explains why autoplay changed everything: "On YouTube now, videos automatically play. So many people don't even see the thumbnail because it autoplays so quickly. The thumbnail is irrelevant for them. I have to visually convince you to click on the video in the first 5 seconds. Before, the hook was important because you had to convince people to watch. Now you have to convince people to click and watch at the same time, with the first 5 seconds." On matching expectations: "Your title and thumbnail set expectations. At the very beginning of the video, to minimize drop-off, you want to assure them that those expectations are being met. If you click on a video called 'Tether is a scam' and at the very beginning, he starts talking about literally anything else, you're like, 'Oh, this is BS. This isn't what I clicked on.' But if at the very start you go, 'Tether is a scam and I'm gonna teach you why,' then it's like, okay, you match the expectations. Then you want to exceed them." He emphasizes the importance: "The thing people undervalue the most is literally the first 10 seconds of the video. That 15% difference in viewership between losing 35% of viewers in the first 30 seconds versus losing 20%, that really does make the difference between 2 million views and 10 million views. You just had a more strategic intro that hooked them." On removing dull moments: "You basically want to remove every dull moment. Find the 10 most critical people you know, make them watch the video, and just roast it. If I talk to a camera for 10 seconds without a cut, a lot of people will get bored. Having a B-cam and C-cam three seconds in, cutting to a different angle, now it's more interesting even though it's essentially the same thing." On keeping viewers watching: "Give them why they clicked. Tell them why they should watch. Then just stick on topic. That right there isn't even super complex, but I would already put you in the upper echelon of YouTube. A lot of people drag it out. It's like, 'I'm going to eat $100 ice cream, but first...' and then it's them birthday shopping for their mom. That's not why I came here." On quality over quantity: "It's much easier to get 5 million views on one video than 50,000 views on 100 videos. A lot of small YouTubers just post videos that aren't bad but aren't great, and none of them ever pop off, so they never get an audience. It might be better to upload half or a third or even a fifth of the videos, but make the videos you upload so freaking good that the algorithm has to promote it." He warns against the consistency trap: "When you set a consistent schedule and you're constantly having to upload videos that aren't as good as you'd like because you gotta hit 'Oh, this Monday I said I'd upload', that's a dangerous trap. The viewers notice the quality isn't as good and it makes them less likely to watch. I think it hurts your longevity." On the real metric that matters: "A big thing that everyone underestimates, what was your experience with your last video? If people loved the last video of yours that they watched, they're more likely to watch your next one. When people watch your video, you don't want them to go, 'Okay, that was good, but that's enough of you for the day.' What you want is them to go, 'Holy crap, that was crazy! Oh my god, what's that?' and they watch 10 videos. That's how you get high view counts. People watch 10 videos, not one." On thumbnails: "You want it to be simple. When they're scrolling, you want them to instantly understand what you're conveying and feel some type of emotion. Make it so interesting, or spike their curiosity so much, that if they don't click it, they'll wonder before they go to bed what happened?" He gives an example: "If you uploaded 'I rode a skateboard with 1,000 other people on it', and people are falling off the side, it's about to go off a big ramp if you don't click that, you're gonna be so curious. Later in the day, when you're daydreaming, you'll think, 'What happened to those 1,000 people on that skateboard?' That's the mindset you should have when making thumbnails." On knowledge being the only barrier: "It's all knowledge. It really is. I could start a new channel tomorrow without using my face or my voice, without ever promoting it, and in six months have 20 million subscribers. I just could. It's purely knowledge. If you knew what I knew, you could get 10 million subscribers no matter where you are right now within six months." He addresses the skeptics: "90% of the people watching don't agree with that. Everyone has excuses. 'Nah, YouTube just doesn't work like that, Jimmy.' But I mentor a lot of people. I see it all the time. It is possible. It is simply knowledge. The second you accept that it is knowledge and you start your journey of learning figuring out what makes a good video, what does my audience want, how can I elevate and then you take that knowledge and just assume 'I will never understand what the perfect video is' and every single day be devoted to learning and improving as much as possible there you go." On money not being the barrier: "There are tons of viral ideas that don't require money. It does not require money to go viral. One of my most-viewed videos was spending 24 hours in a desert, we just grabbed a tent and some stuff and went to the desert. It got 60-70 million views. People say, 'I could be MrBeast if I had money.' A, I didn't start off with money; I was poor, I had no money. It took me seven years just to buy a camera saving up from YouTube. And B, some of our most-viewed videos literally anyone can do." On why no one will outwork him: "No one's ever gonna do what I do better than me. It's just not humanly possible. I reinvest every penny I make. I work every hour I'm awake. I devote every atom in my brain to solving this. I hire the best people on the planet. I've been doing this for 14 years. And I think in decades, not years. I'm gonna be doing this for another 20-30 years. If I thought someone was doing better than me, I'd just start sleeping less so I could work even more." But he doesn't recommend it: "I don't have a life. I don't have work-life balance. My personality, my soul, my being is making the best videos possible. That is why I exist on this planet. And I don't recommend it. You should have work-life balance. You should not devote your entire life to this one thing. I have a mental breakdown every other week because I push myself so hard. I don't recommend it." The only question that matters: "Subscribers don't matter. Views don't matter. I mean, they do. But everything you want as a creator comes from making the best videos possible and thumbnails. The video part's the hard part. Ask: 'How can I make my videos better?' Do that every single day for years. And then you'll probably get views."

English
0
0
0
29
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Every single business trip to Chicago I sit in my hotel room and doomscroll Redfin listings: the most stunning architectural significant condos on the Gold Coast sell for literally a fraction of the price of a tear down in a bad neighborhood on the east side of Los Angeles. Sure, Chicago has significant problems politically and budget wise. But they’re the exact same problems Los Angeles has, so if you’re trading dysfunction for dysfunction at a quarter of the average real estate value, you could justify it.
English
0
0
0
33
derek guy
derek guy@dieworkwear·
Housing prices are terrible everywhere, but if you live in NYC, San Francisco, or Los Angeles, it's truly SHOCKING what you see when you browse home real estate in Portland, Atlanta, Chicago, and Philadelphia.
English
116
84
5K
478.4K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
I know it’s so dumb. Also, the words of my first CEO ever about free lunch ring in my ears… And this was long before big tech perks: “our office is a 20 minute drive away for most food options, psychologically, employees believe they have a 60 minute lunch break. They don’t count the time driving back-and-forth from lunch in their head, so that means people leave the building, and leave for an hour and 40 minutes. These free gourmet lunches give me at least four hours in productivity per employee per week. Double that if they eat in 30 minutes, and go back to their desks quickly. That makes the entire kitchen staff and the free food profitable. I’m not doing it for them. I’m doing it for company profit.” EVERYBODY won. No one lost. Better food. Free. More profit. No scam. No wasting VC funding. Etc.
English
0
0
2
233
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
This is the most important quote in the article: “The uncomfortable truth is that RSUs have always been a cash equivalent. Employees understand this intuitively — they sell on vest, consistently, and budget their RSU income the same way they budget their salary. When a company grants an employee $200,000 in RSUs, that employee expects $200,000 in real, spendable dollars. There is little ownership mentality or long-term alignment baked into the instrument.@ And this is a much broader conversation than just SaaS. But because SaaS is the sector under pressure right now it’s where the conversation is happening
Chamath Palihapitiya@chamath

This is 💯 The outcome is that employees will want more direct comp and you will see it in EBITDA and FCF.

English
0
0
0
60
Jonathan Anastas retweetledi
The Ankler
The Ankler@TheAnkler·
Hollywood could work more like the NBA, @franklinleonard argues, making a very good point about discovery infrastructure and how we find talent. See the full discussion - mrf.lu/bmdR Sponsored by IW Group in partnership with the Directors Guild of America
English
10
29
188
21.2K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Naw. It doesn’t work in most use cases and it’s not safe. I grew up riding the NYC subways. Daily. Won’t do it in LA. Few examples of the equal efficiency with all the examples of the lack of safety. Subway was far faster from 50th and Park to 23rd than an Uber/cab. In LA, Los Feliz to the western edge of Weho far far faster by car.
English
0
0
0
44
e taylor
e taylor@erinisaway·
people in LA will be like I can’t / won’t do this or go there and it’s literally just because they either are freaked by poor people or don’t want to be seen as a poor person and the class striving makes me sick, ride the damn train if you’re broke
English
34
66
809
19.6K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
@bowlofdix @missmayn My first LA home mortgage was $1900 a month at 9% interest. I’d be embarrassed to tell you what my monthly payment is today at a lower interest rate by far.
English
0
0
0
16
ally
ally@missmayn·
before moving to LA i heard a ton of LA hate until one of my more successful comedian friends said, "LA is awesome. of course you only hear it's awful when it's coming from people who couldn't make it and had to move home."
English
102
269
4.7K
100.1K
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
LA is walkable in very limited pockets. I live under the observatory and the walk to hillhurst and Vermont. Hollywood? Too chaotic. I tested it w/ my wife’s parents from the hotel they were at (Cara) and near Friends and Neighbors. As non LA people they were WAY too freaked out to do it again. Too much drug use and homeless
English
1
0
0
101
Jonathan Anastas
Jonathan Anastas@Janastas·
Oddly, a random’s friend’s success and non-generational default in picking Los Feliz (Tarzan’s old house) and not the Sunset Strip dropped me here 25 years ago well ahead of the curve. I went from Weho to Outpost and Mulholland to Beachwood to Los Feliz in my own journey. Being a parent (it’s an east side cliche move I know) got me out of the Hills and into Los Feliz. I get it. I get it.
English
0
0
1
29
Hear in LA
Hear in LA@hearinladotcom·
@Janastas Well… the purpose of our podcast is to celebrate the Angelenos who make each neighborhood wonderful. As someone lucky enough to live in East Hollywood for the last 25 years, I’ve been blessed with watching Los Feliz flourish.
English
1
0
1
47
Hear in LA
Hear in LA@hearinladotcom·
As someone who has lived on the westside for many years and has also lived in Hollywood for even longer, it is fascinating to me how the wealthier neighborhoods struggle in the way the beef heiress accurately describes. In the ‘80s, Westwood and Third Street Promenade were so vibrant. It’s been fascinating watch these areas, which were surrounded by affluence, deteriorate for a multitude of reasons, but ultimately, I believe, due to lack of soul. Meanwhile Melrose hangs in there and the further east you wander, the cooler things get, with notable exceptions of course. It’s been fascinating watching Echo Park, Highland Park, and Eagle Rock flourish in unexpected ways. I cannot find any examples of that sort of positive change west of the 405 in the last 30 years. It will be interesting to see how this everchanging city develops in the next 25 years - especially in the Valley and South of the 10.
beef heiress@rebirthcanal

I have now intentionally traversed Los Angeles from ~Vermont Avenue four times along Pico, Olympic, Washington, and Santa Monica… they all have their charms tbh. But the fucking dead zone of rich people with no taste and purposely pedestrian-hostile stretches on the west side 🤮

English
51
24
411
66.6K