In response to stories, during the last week or so, Twitter has both closed, or been pressured to shut, its places of work in Hong Kong, the Philippines, Mexico, Africa, Australia and South Korea. Twitter has additionally shut down a number of of its places of work in Europe and India, amid broad-reaching actions.

Not the entire employees in these places of work have been made redundant, as some have been requested to work at home as a substitute, whereas a number of the workplace areas have additionally been closed on account of non-payment of lease, as Twitter’s new administration crew works to rationalize the corporate’s place.

A type of places of work, Twitter’s Asia-Pacific headquarters in Singapore, is now again in motion, after the Twitter 2.0 crew paid its lease obligations. That’s vital, as a result of whereas Elon Musk has largely been centered on Twitter’s influence within the US (not less than in his exterior communications), all of Twitter’s progress over the previous few years has come from the Asia Pacific area, with India, particularly, turning into a serious focus for the platform.

With this in thoughts, Twitter’s workplace closures in these key markets may very well be significantly impactful, with native representatives usually offering a key hyperlink into native advert markets, content material tendencies, political shifts, and many others.

So whereas Twitter’s seeking to minimize prices, these closures might finally result in a discount within the firm’s general revenue, and it’s onerous to see which may have a extra vital influence on Twitter’s backside line.

As reported by Enterprise Insider, earlier than Elon Musk’s takeover on the app, Twitter beforehand had places of work in additional than two dozen main cities all over the world, together with Paris, Madrid, Berlin, Manila, Mumbai, and Jakarta. Twitter additionally had round 20 places of work within the US.

Now, the corporate’s seeking to cut back its workplace footprint to only some main cities, together with the San Francisco head workplace (the place it was additionally not too long ago refusing to pay lease), New York, and LA, together with worldwide outposts in London, Tokyo, and Dublin.

Which, once more, will considerably cut back its operational bills, however the broader impacts on the corporate might additionally, finally, outweigh these advantages.

However then once more, in a post-COVID world, the place everybody is way extra accustomed to assembly by way of video calls and dealing on-line, possibly native places of work simply aren’t as essential as they as soon as had been, and possibly Twitter can use this push as a method to considerably drive down prices, and get itself again heading in the right direction.

Which it desperately wants right.

Shortly after his takeover on the app, Musk claimed that Twitter was dropping $4 million per day, on account of large bills and restricted consumption. He’s since sought to implement new avenues for the app to make more cash, together with his $8 per 30 days verification plan, whereas he’s additionally culled round 75% of the corporate’s employees, with Musk persevering with to cull worker numbers wherever he can.

It looks like that, inevitably, may have damaging impacts. You may’t minimize 1000’s of employees with out some issues falling aside, or possibly dropping out in native markets. However up to now, Twitter remains to be operating, and few could be daring sufficient to forecast Musk’s failure on this respect, given the success he’s overseen at his different firms.

Perhaps, if Musk can get the best employees in place, with the best strategy, he can mitigate the impacts, whereas crushing the app’s prices, on the trail to a brand new method ahead for the app.

Perhaps. A number of these impacts will even compound over time, so possibly, proper now, the one true change is to Twitter’s backside line, which seems to be nice for Musk and Co. of their means of bettering the enterprise.

However someday quickly, extra issues might properly come up, they usually could also be much more expensive than the fast financial savings.