Ryan Roslansky, CEO of Microsoft’s LinkedIn subsidiary, speaks at a LinkedIn event in San Francisco on Sept. 22, 2016.
David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Influencer marketing has become big business on TikTok and Instagram, where popular creators can make good money by helping brands promote their stuff. Now, LinkedIn wants in the game.
As of last week, LinkedIn is letting advertisers pay to amplify posts from users, including those with sizable followings. Its product, called Thought Leader ads, launched in a limited capacity last year.
The Microsoft-owned business is looking for a jolt, as LinkedIn’s revenue growth has been stuck in single digits since 2022. The company is turning to its membership, which topped 1 billion in November, to help fuel expansion.
Influencer marketing to date has largely been a phenomenon of consumer apps, where shticks and gimmicks can turn internet-savvy creators into celebrities with millions of followers. Almost two-thirds of U.S. social media marketing dollars this year will flow to Instagram parent Meta and TikTok’s Chinese owner ByteDance, with Instagram and TikTok picking up a combined 2 percentage points of additional share by 2026, according to estimates from eMarketer.
LinkedIn, which was launched a year before Facebook, will grab just 4% of the market, equal to $4.5 billion in marketing revenue, eMarketer says, and its share will remain flat over the next two years.
“It takes a long time for ads and ad formats to really take root,” said Max Willens, a senior analyst at eMarketer, referring to LinkedIn’s latest endeavor.
LinkedIn introduced Thought Leader ads last year but with limited use. Brands could only amplify posts from their own employees. Mastercard, for example, promoted posts written by some of its leaders in Singapore, with one receiving over 500 notifications on the first day. LinkedIn has used Thought Leaders ads itself for some posts from operating chief Dan Shapero, but not yet for CEO Ryan Roslansky.
By opening up Thought Leader ads, LinkedIn is letting anyone boost a post as long as the author grants permission. Social media marketer Brendan Gahan is so bullish on the format that he’s focusing much of his efforts on helping companies use Thought Leader ads.
“In an era where brand safety is a big issue, LinkedIn has a leg up, particularly in contrast to Twitter,” said Gahan, who started an agency last year called Creator Authority, referring to the social media platform now known as X.
X lost some leaders working on brand safety last year, just as the Elon Musk-owned platform was seeing a surge in hate speech on the app.
LinkedIn has long been an effective site for advertisers because members list their employment details, making it easy for brands to target ads to relevant audiences. Advertising skews toward business-focused products like software and computer infrastructure, though automakers, universities and banks also use the network to reach potential customers.
“If you’re looking to sell a high-end B2B product, and you know the buying group is a CFO and someone in finance and like someone in HR, we can literally put ads in front of those specific people on LinkedIn, because the first-party data is so strong,” Roslansky said at a conference in late 2022.
Thought Leader ads came about after employees saw marketing clients promoting screenshots of other users’ content. Since turning on the offering last fall, the ads have yielded higher engagement than regular ads that run with images, said Abhishek Shrivastava, a LinkedIn vice president of product management.
“Humanizing your brand is critical for B2B and has been underused in that space,” said Shrivastava, adding that clients are very excited about it.
It might not be cheap. Racking up a thousand ad impressions generally costs more on LinkedIn than on Instagram or TikTok, partly because the company charges more for advertisers to reach its more affluent user base. Shrivastava said that rather than comparing the costs to other sites, brands will look at the sales and business leads they get from running ads.
For months, project management software startup ClickUp has been paying to promote LinkedIn posts from its own executives. Chris Cunningham, head of social marketing at the company, said traditional ads on LinkedIn can sometimes be repetitive and generic, and he’s eager to see how promoted posts will perform when influencers get involved.
On other social networks, ClickUp has found more success promoting posts from creators than with standard ads, Cunningham said. Plus, he said, “it’s super easy.”
Betsy Hindman, a marketer in Tennessee who helps companies make the most of their LinkedIn presence, said a brand ambassador with an audience can have a bigger impact than a typical ad.
“It’s part of a full end-to-end strategy that includes warming people up along the way with whatever type of content they respond to,” she said.
Building up a roster of creators will likely take time. Some influencers are represented by agencies, and LinkedIn’s Campaign Manager advertising system doesn’t have an automatic process for connecting media buyers with agencies.
“That’s a direction we are exploring,” Shrivastava said.
More data will soon be available to advertisers. Starting in a few weeks, LinkedIn members will be able to look up any company’s collection of ads and see its Thought Leader ads, a spokesperson said. That could help advertisers see what works best.
One potential boon for LinkedIn rests with the fate of TikTok. The app faces a possible ban in the U.S. after the House of Representatives passed legislation last month that would force ByteDance to sell it within six months. Momentum has since slowed, though Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., urged lawmakers to take action on the matter earlier this week.
Willens from eMarketer said agencies are keeping an eye on the issue, but said “nobody feels there’s an imminent threat.”
Roughly 1 in 7 people are leaving unclaimed property on the table, according to the National Association of Unclaimed Property Administrators. While the recent heavy selling in bitcoin and ether is rightly getting all the short-term attention, this estate planning issue is a longer-term one that’s likely to be exacerbated as crypto adoption and ownership increase.
Many people neglect to account for cryptocurrency in their estate plans, or they don’t let their heirs know how to access their crypto holdings. With surveys in recent years from Gallup and Pew Research estimating that 14% to 17% of U.S. adults have owned cryptocurrency, losing access to those funds is a growing concern.
“Leaving property or mutual funds behind in a will is pretty cut and dried, but with more and more assets placed in cryptocurrency, a large share of inherited assets are in danger of forfeiture,” said Azriel Baer, partner in the estate planning and administration group at law firm Farrell Fritz.
This issue could be mitigated, in part, by crypto ETFs, which are gaining popularity with investors since the first batch of spot bitcoin ETFs were approved by the SEC in 2024, such as the iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), followed a few months later by ethereum spot price ETFs, such as the Fidelity Ethereum Fund ETF (FETH). These ETFs allow investors access to the crypto asset class without actually owning crypto outright, helping reduce the chances of actual crypto getting lost.
Nevertheless, estate planning mistakes among crypto owners are common and can be avoided. Here are some of the biggest issues cryptocurrency owners need to tackle sooner rather than later.
Wills, if they exist, often don’t include digital assets language
Only 24% of Americans have a will that describes how they want their money and estate managed after their death, according to a survey from Caring.com. Even people who have wills in place have not updated them for many years, with nearly one in four Americans saying they haven’t touched their wills since their original was drafted, according to the survey.
This can be problematic for many reasons. An old will may no longer reflect people’s current wishes. In a crypto-specific context, anyone who hasn’t updated their estate plan in the past several years may not have language to provide legal authority for the trustee or executor to gain access to digital assets.
“It’s very common for people not to update their estate planning documents for 10, 20 years or sometimes longer. If that’s the case, you’re behind,” said Patrick D. Owens, shareholder at Buchalter and a member of the law firm’s tax, benefits and estate planning practice group.
Absent language about digital assets, your heirs might have to go to court to get the authority for the executor or administrator of the estate to gain access to the crypto assets. Most likely they’ll get access, “but it’s a hassle,” Owens said. “Obviously, it means time and money going into court.”
Even with a will, crypto assets can get stuck in court
A standard will is appropriate for many people, but many attorneys recommend clients also utilize a revocable living trust as part of their estate plan. Drafting a will is less expensive, but a revocable living trust offers more privacy and can help limit the time and expense of the probate process after death.
Baer advises clients to transfer their crypto to a revocable living trust so the trustee has immediate access upon the owner’s death. It could be six to eight months, or more, before a will is settled in probate and in the meantime, heirs wouldn’t have access to the assets. If the price of the crypto was going down rapidly, for example, they would have to wait to sell it if the estate was caught up in probate. Putting crypto assets into a revocable trust to avoid probate can prevent a lot of headaches, he said.
Generally, a revocable trust is paired with a pour-over will so that assets not included in the trust at the time of a person’s death are transferred to the trust and distributed accordingly.
Not sharing basic crypto information can cost millions
You don’t have to tell heirs you’re worth a fortune in bitcoin before you pass away, but you should make sure they know how to access your crypto after you’re gone.
Baer worked on an estate where tens of millions of dollars in crypto were lost to the heirs because they didn’t know the decedent’s private keys, which function as digital passwords to grant access to cryptocurrency funds and prove ownership of blockchain assets.
Someone should know how to access the assets, whether through written instructions in a safe box, a safe at home, or directions kept with a lawyer or with one of the various crypto inheritance services that help ensure crypto assets are passed on to your family members, Baer said. Don’t put these private keys or other sensitive information in a will, because wills become public through the probate process, he added.
Many designated fiduciaries can’t handle crypto
The person you chose to handle your other assets may not be the right person to deal with the crypto portion of your estate.
Not everyone understands crypto, the associated volatility or how to transact with digital currency, meaning lots of money can inadvertently be lost. The recent volatility in the price of bitcoin is a reminder that if you name someone who needs weeks to get up to speed on how to transact with bitcoin, the financial losses could be meaningful, Baer said. “Uncle Bob may be a great person, but he may have more challenges transacting with an asset class he’s totally not familiar with,” he added.
Sometimes, even institutional trustees might not be able to take on the responsibility for crypto. Owens had a client pass away with half a million dollars in bitcoin and ether. The institutional trustee who oversaw the client’s account refused to take on the responsibility for the crypto and a special trustee was named. Luckily, the client had a nephew who took on the role, but finding a suitable replacement can often be costly from a time and money perspective, Owens said.
Failure to plan for crypto estate taxes
With the massive explosion in the values around cryptocurrency, many people have large crypto holdings, which could be subject to significant taxes, whether that’s income taxes or estate taxes, and failure to plan could be detrimental to their families, said Jonathan Forster, shareholder at law firm Weinstock Manion.
There could, for example, be estate taxes due, depending on the size of the estate. The federal estate tax exemption for 2025 is $13.99 million per individual. Some states also have a state-level estate tax.
Knowing the impact crypto ownership might have on your estate is an important consideration while you are alive. Forster has clients whose crypto holdings are worth more than $50 million. They wanted an efficient way to make gifts for the benefit of their children to get some money out of their estate. They created a limited liability corporation, transferred the crypto into the LLC and gifted an interest in the LLC to an irrevocable trust for the benefit of minor children with an independent trustee, Forster said.
Many crypto investors fail to keep track of cost basis, which can be problematic for many reasons, including if you’re considering gifting digital assets during your lifetime. If you want to gift the assets while you’re alive, you need to have the basis so the recipient can properly account for the crypto if it’s eventually sold, Baer said. “It can be onerous to keep track of basis, but it’s important,” he said.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX, is initiating a secondary share sale that would give the company a valuation of up to $800 billion, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.
SpaceX is also telling some investors it will consider going public possibly around the end of next year, the report said.
At the elevated price, Musk’s aerospace and defense contractor would be valued above ChatGPT maker OpenAI, which wrapped up a share sale at a $500 billion valuation in October.
SpaceX has been investing heavily in reusable rockets, launch facilities and satellites, while competing for government contracts with newer space players, including Jeff Bezos‘ Blue Origin. SpaceX is far ahead, and operates the world’s largest network of satellites in low earth orbit through Starlink, which powers satellite internet services under the same brand name.
A SpaceX IPO would include its Starlink business, which the company previously considered spinning out.
Musk recently discussed whether SpaceX would go public during Tesla‘s annual shareholders meeting last month. Musk, who is the CEO of both companies, said he doesn’t love running publicly traded businesses, in part because they draw “spurious lawsuits,” and can “make it very difficult to operate effectively.”
However, Musk said during the meeting that he wanted to “try to figure out some way for Tesla shareholders to participate in SpaceX,” adding, “maybe at some point, SpaceX should become a public company despite all the downsides.”
The logo for Google LLC is seen at the Google Store Chelsea in Manhattan, New York City, U.S., November 17, 2021.
Andrew Kelly | Reuters
A U.S. judge on Friday finalized his decision for the consequences Google will face for its search monopoly ruling, adding new details to the decided remedies.
Last year, Google was found to hold an illegal monopoly in its core market of internet search, and in September, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled against the most severe consequences that were proposed by the Department of Justice.
That included the proposal of a forced sale of Google’s Chrome browser, which provides data that helps the company’s advertising business deliver targeted ads. Alphabet shares popped 8% in extended trading as investors celebrated what they viewed as minimal consequences from a historic defeat last year in the landmark antitrust case.
Investors largely shrugged off the ruling as non-impactful to Google. However some told CNBC it’s still a bite that could “sting.”
Mehta on Friday issued additional details for his ruling in new filings.
“The age-old saying ‘the devil is in the details’ may not have been devised with the drafting of an antitrust remedies judgment in mind, but it sure does fit,” Mehta wrote in one of the Friday filings.
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company has previously said it will appeal the remedies.
In August 2024, Mehta ruled that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act and held a monopoly in search and related advertising. The antitrust trial started in September 2023.
In his September decision, Mehta said the company would be able to make payments to preload products, but it could not have exclusive contracts that condition payments or licensing. Google was also ordered to loosen its hold on search data. Mehta in September also ruled that Google would have to make available certain search index data and user interaction data, though “not ads data.”
The DOJ had asked Google to stop the practice of “compelled syndication,” which refers to the practice of making certain deals with companies to ensure its search engine remains the default choice in browsers and smartphones.
The judge’s September ruling didn’t end the practice entirely — Mehta ruled out that Google couldn’t enter into exclusive deals, which was a win for the company. Google pays Apple billions of dollars per year to be the default search engine on iPhones. It’s lucrative for Apple and a valuable way for Google to get more search volume and users.
Mehta’s new details
In the Friday filings, Mehta wrote that Google cannot enter into any deal like the one it’s had with Apple “unless the agreement terminates no more than one year after the date it is entered.”
This includes deals involving generative artificial intelligence products, including any “application, software, service, feature, tool, functionality, or product” that involve or use genAI or large-language models, Mehta wrote.
GenAI “plays a significant role in these remedies,” Mehta wrote.
The judge also reiterated the web index data it will require Google to share with certain competitors.
Google has to share some of the raw search interaction data it uses to train its ranking and AI systems, but it does not have to share the actual algorithms — just the data that feeds them.” In September, Mehta said those data sets represent a “small fraction” of Google’s overall traffic, but argued the company’s models are trained on data that contributed to Google’s edge over competitors.
The company must make this data available to qualified competitors at least twice, one of the Friday filing states. Google must share that data in a “syndication license” model whose term will be five years from the date the license is signed, the filing states.
Mehta on Friday also included requirements on the makeup of a technical committee that will determine the firms Google must share its data with.
Committee “members shall be experts in some combination of software engineering, information retrieval, artificial intelligence, economics, behavioral science, and data privacy and data security,” the filing states.
The judge went on to say that no committee member can have a conflict of interest, such as having worked for Google or any of its competitors in the six months prior to or one year after serving in the role.
Google is also required to appoint an internal compliance officer that will be responsible “for administering Google’s antitrust compliance program and helping to ensure compliance with this Final Judgment,” per one of the filings. The company must also appoint a senior business executive “whom Google shall make available to update the Court on Google’s compliance at regular status conferences or as otherwise ordered.”