Day 148: Nextdoor's Latest "Study" — Is This Research or Just Another Infomercial?
Let's start with the stock market.
As of this writing, NXDR trades at $2.02, up $0.06, or about 3%. A little movement in the right direction.
But the bigger question remains: what happened after Nextdoor's November 5, 2026, earnings announcement?
Google, tell me why NXDR is down
I asked The Google why NXDR had dropped so significantly following its earnings report.
Here's what its AI-generated response gave me:
Nextdoor Holdings Inc (NXDR) is down significantly recently due to an underwhelming fourth-quarter revenue forecast and monetization challenges revealed in its Q3 2026 earnings report on November 5, 2026. Despite reaching an impressive financial milestone by achieving GAAP breakeven earnings ($0.00 EPS) for the first time, the stock plummeted by more than 13% immediately following the announcement.
That's Google's explanation, not my independent analysis of what caused the stock decline.
Still, the phrase that caught my attention was monetization challenges.
In other words, Nextdoor has a challenge turning its platform, users, and activity into revenue and sustainable business performance.
And then, right on cue, we get another Nextdoor "study."
Another day, another Nextdoor study
Today, Nextdoor published a blog post titled:
How Much Do Neighbors Spend Dining Out? What Nextdoor's 2026 Survey Found
Here's the link, exactly as published:
https://blog.nextdoor.com/how-much-do-neighbors-spend-dining-out-what-nextdoors-2026-survey-found
Funny thing: I'm still waiting 148 days for the other study I requested.
You know, the one I've been asking Jacob Chavis, Senior Manager of Customer Insights, to provide. I requested the full research study and methodology, not another public-facing blog post.
And once again, I noticed a few things about this new publication:
No methodology report is linked.
Jacob Chavis isn't cited in the blog post.
There's no obvious way to review how the survey was conducted, who participated, or how the results were calculated.
Maybe those details exist somewhere else. If so, I'd love to see them.
But let's look at the opening claim:
"Neighbors spend about $60 a week at restaurants, 21% more than the average consumer."
I'm assuming "Neighbors" means Nextdoor users. That's a reasonable assumption given the platform publishing the survey.
But where did that number come from? Who was surveyed? How many people participated? What was the sample size? How was the average consumer comparison established? Was the survey weighted? What was the margin of error?
Those are basic questions when someone presents research and statistics as evidence.
Without the methodology, readers can't independently evaluate the claim.
Is this a research study or an infomercial?
I'm beginning to wonder whether some of these Nextdoor research posts are better described as marketing content than research reports.
The numbers may be accurate. I'm not saying they're fabricated. But without the underlying methodology, I can't assess them independently.
And that brings me to some of the great infomercials of our time.
Proactiv
I'm particularly fond of the P. Diddy spot featuring Vanessa Williams. If you haven't seen it, here's the commercial. Given some of the more recent headlines, it's quite a trip down memory lane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Srfxa5eYYc
ThighMaster
Who doesn't remember Suzanne Somers demonstrating how this ingenious little device could help keep you in shape? It was practically a television institution.
Snuggie
I've actually purchased a few of these for family and friends. You know the people who are always cold and somehow can't manage to keep their entire bodies warm with an ordinary blanket.
All memorable marketing. All designed to sell a product or an idea.
And that's my point: there's nothing wrong with marketing. Companies need to promote their products. But let's not confuse a promotional message with independently reviewable research.
If Nextdoor wants to tell advertisers that its users spend more money dining out than the average consumer, show us how it reached that conclusion.
Back to NXDR and those monetization challenges
Now, back to Google's explanation of the stock decline.
An underwhelming fourth-quarter forecast and monetization challenges are not exactly the kind of phrases investors want to hear.
And if the company is struggling to generate revenue from its platform, perhaps it's time to look beyond the next product announcement or AI-powered feature.
How does Nextdoor build a business that generates sustainable revenue?
How does it demonstrate value to advertisers, particularly small businesses?
How does it maintain the trust of the neighbors who create the content and activity that make the platform attractive in the first place?
And how does it rebuild investor confidence?
Let's not forget the dividend question. Another year without a dividend appears likely, given the company's financial position and outlook. A dividend isn't automatic, of course, but shareholders naturally want to see a path toward returns on their investment.
Then there's executive compensation.
I have no inside information about how Nirav Tolia's compensation or bonus is structured, or what he may receive as a result of this quarter's performance. But it raises a question worth asking: Are executive incentives tied to sustainable profitability and long-term shareholder value, or can compensation still reward performance when the business is struggling to deliver those outcomes?
I'd like to see the answer.
Trust is part of monetization
Here's the connection I keep coming back to.
When users lose confidence in a platform, they may stop participating. When advertisers don't see measurable value, they may reconsider spending. When investors don't see a convincing path to profitability, they may reconsider their investment.
Those things can affect a company's ability to generate revenue.
You can't simply announce new features, publish another survey, and expect everyone to buy into the story.
The product has to deliver. The research should be transparent. Advertisers need measurable value. And leadership needs to communicate.
Strange how that works: when users and investors lose faith in a product, it becomes a lot harder to make money from it.
Day 148: Still waiting
So here we are.
NXDR is back at $2.02 as of this writing. That's a positive move, but one day's movement doesn't resolve the bigger questions.
Nextdoor has published another survey-based blog post, but I'm still waiting for the complete research study and methodology I requested 148 days ago.
Jacob, if you're reading this, I'm still waiting.
Nirav and the leadership team, the invitation to talk remains open.
Day 148. The request is still outstanding.
👉 Read more of my ongoing Nextdoor case study at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 147: 147 Days, One Research Request, and a Stock Price Below $2 — Is Anyone at Nextdoor Listening?
Another day, another email to Nextdoor leadership.
Today marks Day 147 since I first requested the complete research study and methodology referenced in a Nextdoor blog post. Not the public-facing article. Not another link to the same information I've already read. I'm asking for the actual study and the methodology behind it.
And here we are, 147 days later.
You would think this would be a relatively simple request. Either the study is available, or it isn't. If it is available, send it. If it isn't, say so. If Jacob Chavis is no longer the right person to contact, tell me who is.
Apparently, getting that simple answer is proving quite a challenge.
The problem isn't just the missing study.
I've said this before, but I'll say it again: the lack of a response is becoming a story of its own.
When a company publishes research and identifies someone to contact for additional information, it creates an expectation that someone will actually respond. I'm not asking for confidential information, trade secrets, or access to Nextdoor's internal systems. I'm asking for the referenced research, which was reportedly available upon request.
If there are restrictions on sharing it, explain them. If you’ve overlooked the request, acknowledge it. If someone else handles research inquiries, introduce them.
Silence doesn't answer the question. It just creates more questions about communication and accountability.
And then there's the stock price.
Following this week's earnings report, NXDR continued its downward trend, closing Friday below $2.
That's worth paying attention to.
I don't claim to know precisely why investors are reacting the way they are. A stock price can move for many reasons, and I don't have access to every investor's thinking. But I do think there are legitimate questions worth asking.
After 15 years, why has Nextdoor struggled to establish consistent profitability?
Are increases in revenue and weekly active users translating into sustainable business performance?
Are new AI-powered features creating meaningful value for neighbors and advertisers?
Are small businesses getting the tools and information they need to measure advertising effectiveness?
How does Nextdoor balance automated moderation with the needs of local publishers and community members?
Does leadership's approach to communication and accountability inspire confidence?
These are questions and possibilities, not declarations about what is driving the stock price. But investors have every reason to look beyond product announcements and user growth. They want to understand the business, its prospects, and its path to sustainable profitability.
I'd rather write a different story.
Here's the part that I think gets lost in all of this.
I would much rather write a blog post saying that someone at Nextdoor finally reached out, provided the study, answered the questions, and helped resolve the issue.
That would be a much more interesting update than another day-counting exercise.
I have offered to speak by phone, through video, or even over virtual coffee. I'm open to a constructive conversation. I want Nextdoor to succeed. I also believe that asking questions, providing feedback, and expecting companies to respond are reasonable parts of doing business.
This isn't about demanding special treatment. It's about a company following through on an invitation it made publicly.
My request, once again
So, as I sent in today's email to Nirav Tolia and the Nextdoor leadership team, I'm asking three straightforward questions:
Can someone provide the complete research study and methodology?
If Jacob Chavis is no longer the appropriate contact, who is?
If the study cannot be shared, can someone explain why?
That's it.
No elaborate presentation. No complicated negotiation. Just an answer.
Day 147. The request is still outstanding.
Nextdoor, the ball is in your court. I'd be happy to write a different ending to this story.
👉 Follow the ongoing case study and the latest updates at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 145: NXDR Falls Below $2 — Is Nextdoor Building a Better Platform or Just a Better Story?
Well, that didn't take long.
After Nextdoor released its quarterly earnings report, NXDR took a serious nose dive. The stock closed at $2.12 on November 5 and finished at $1.96 on November 6, falling below the $2 mark. That's another 7.55% decline on Friday alone.
So, what happened? Was it the earnings? Investor expectations? The company's long-term financial performance? Or perhaps investors are looking at the bigger picture and asking questions that Nextdoor still hasn't answered.
I have a few hypotheticals of my own.
Day 145: Still waiting for Jacob Chavis's research reports
Let's start with a recurring theme in this case study.
It's Day 145 of waiting for the research reports associated with Jacob Chavis, whom Nextdoor publicly identified as the contact for additional information.
I've sent emails. I've followed up. I've asked for the reports and the methodology behind the research.
Still waiting.
Perhaps investors are wondering how a company that promotes its research and insights can make it so difficult for someone to obtain the underlying information.
Perhaps they are wondering whether transparency is a priority when the questions become uncomfortable.
Perhaps they are wondering whether Nextdoor understands that responding to questions is part of building trust.
Just a thought.
Look at all the shiny new products!
Nextdoor published another product update:
What's New on Nextdoor: Product Updates
There's plenty to talk about.
The November 5 update highlights:
AI-powered Ask in search: Neighbors can ask questions in plain language and receive responses drawn from years of neighborhood conversations.
Local events in the feed: Events are being surfaced to nearby neighbors, with Nextdoor reporting 46% more views after the change.
Groups reaching beyond members: Group posts can now appear in feeds of neighbors who haven't joined.
A faster feed: Nextdoor reports improvements in loading speed on Android and the web.
Sponsored search expansion: More advertising categories are being added.
Neighborhood Intelligence: Advertisers can target and measure at the neighborhood level rather than just by ZIP code.
Nextdoor Blog
That's a lot of product activity.
And I'm not suggesting that these improvements have no value. Some sound useful. Others raise questions about advertising, privacy, moderation, and how neighborhood conversations are being used.
But here's my hypothetical:
Perhaps investors are wondering whether more features automatically translate into a profitable business.
Perhaps they're asking whether AI-powered search will generate enough additional advertising revenue to justify the investment.
Perhaps they're wondering whether expanding sponsored search will improve the experience for neighbors or simply put more advertisements into their feeds.
Perhaps they're asking how Nextdoor will demonstrate that neighborhood-level advertising produces better results for small businesses.
And perhaps they're wondering whether the company is measuring the success of these products by the value they create for users and advertisers—or simply by the number of new features it can announce.
A product announcement is not the same thing as a successful business model.
Fifteen years of building, but where's the profit?
Nextdoor was founded in 2011. We're now approaching 15 years of the company's existence.
And what are we still discussing?
Profitability.
The latest quarterly report showed:
Q3 2026 metric
Reported result
Nextdoor's net loss was considerably smaller than the $12.9 million loss reported in the same quarter last year. Adjusted EBITDA improved from $4.4 million to $10.3 million. Those are meaningful improvements.
But the company still reported a net loss.
And here's another hypothetical:
Perhaps investors are asking when all those years of building a neighborhood network will translate into consistent GAAP profitability.
Perhaps they're wondering how many more years of investment it will take before the business can stand on its own financially.
Perhaps they're asking whether the company has a clear path to sustainable profits or whether every earnings report will come with another explanation of why the next quarter will be better.
Growth is important. Revenue is important. Active users are important.
But eventually, a business needs to make money.
Will the executives get rewarded while shareholders wait?
Here's another question I've raised before.
If the company reports better numbers, does the executive team receive bonuses or other performance-tied compensation?
I don't know the details of the current bonus calculations or whether anyone received a bonus for this quarter. I'm not claiming that they did.
But it raises a worthwhile question.
If management is rewarded for increasing WAU, growing revenue, and reducing losses, how are shareholders rewarded for sticking with the company?
The earnings announcement also discussed the company's intention to continue investing while opportunistically returning capital to shareholders through its share buyback program. That's not the same as a dividend, and investors may reasonably want to understand how that approach benefits them.
Perhaps investors are asking whether executive compensation is sufficiently aligned with long-term shareholder returns.
Perhaps they're wondering whether management's performance measures should put more emphasis on profitability and the stock price.
Perhaps they're asking when the average investor gets to see a meaningful return beyond hoping the share price eventually goes up.
Just asking questions, Nirav.
Perhaps the problem isn't the products. Perhaps it's trust.
Let's put all of this together.
145 days waiting for research reports.
Questions about moderation and the treatment of local publishers.
Questions about advertising effectiveness and small-business support.
Questions about the value of verified addresses.
Questions about user-generated content and who benefits from it.
Questions about profitability and shareholder returns.
Questions about how management communicates with people who provide feedback.
Perhaps investors are looking beyond the quarterly financial statements.
Perhaps they're asking whether Nextdoor listens to its customers.
Perhaps they're wondering whether the company understands that trust is central to a neighborhood platform.
Perhaps they're asking whether the company can grow its advertising business without damaging the community experience that attracts people in the first place.
And perhaps they're wondering whether leadership is willing to address difficult questions instead of simply announcing the next product improvement.
I don't know whether any of these things contributed to the stock's decline. A stock price moves for many reasons, and I wouldn't pretend to know what every investor is thinking.
But these are questions that deserve answers.
Nirav, try something different
Nextdoor has a new product announcement. It has AI. It has Neighborhood Intelligence. It has 24.5 million Weekly Active Users. It has nearly $79 million in quarterly revenue.
Those are things worth discussing.
But the company also has a stock that closed below $2, a continuing net loss, and people asking questions about transparency, moderation, advertising, and accountability.
Perhaps it's time to spend less energy telling everyone what's new and more time explaining how it all creates sustainable value.
And while we're at it, perhaps someone could answer my email.
Jacob, I'm still waiting.
Nirav, I'm still providing feedback.
Day 145. NXDR is under $2. The questions are still worth more than a product announcement.
Day 144: Nextdoor's Earnings, Shareholder Rewards, and the Website They Helped Me Build
Well, Nextdoor and NXDR had an interesting couple of days.
Yesterday, NXDR closed at $2.44. Today, ahead of the quarterly earnings report, the stock was trading at $2.12. That's a drop of more than 13%.
Then came the earnings report.
The results were pretty much what I expected: a smaller loss, but still a loss; increases in Weekly Active Users (WAU), revenue, and adjusted EBITDA.
The numbers had some positives. But there was something missing.
A dividend for shareholders.
More activity, more revenue, but what about the shareholders?
Let's look at the situation.
Weekly Active Users are increasing. Revenue is increasing. The company's losses are getting smaller. Adjusted EBITDA is improving.
Management can point to all of that as progress.
But what does the average investor get out of it?
I have to wonder whether Nirav and the rest of the C-suite team will be rewarded with bonuses for the quarter's performance. I don't know their compensation arrangements or bonus results, but shareholders should be able to understand executive compensation.
And if the leadership team is being rewarded for improving performance, why shouldn't the people who have invested in the company see some benefit?
Why not a dividend?
Now, I understand that dividends aren't automatic. Companies have to consider profitability, cash flow, capital needs, and future investment before deciding whether to distribute money to shareholders.
But it's a fair question: At what point does improved performance translate into a tangible return for the average investor?
If WAU is up, revenue is up, losses are narrowing, and management is celebrating progress, shouldn't shareholders eventually get to share in the rewards?
The average Joe is putting money into the company, too.
Who actually creates the content that brings people to Nextdoor?
I want to revisit something I've raised before: Should social media platforms compensate the people who create the content that drives traffic to their sites?
Think about what Nextdoor is without its users.
No one posts about a lost dog. No one asks for a plumber recommendation. No one shares a neighborhood event, a local warning, a community announcement, or a funny observation about the neighbors.
What happens?
People have fewer reasons to visit.
If people stop visiting, advertisers have fewer reasons to spend money on the platform. And if advertisers pull back, revenue is affected.
The content is the fuel that keeps these platforms moving.
Yet the people creating that content generally aren't compensated for the value they help generate.
I'm not suggesting every person who posts a neighborhood update should receive a paycheck. A thoughtful model, clear eligibility, and a way to measure meaningful contributions would be needed.
But it's worth asking whether platforms should share a portion of the value generated by the people who keep their communities active.
The platform provides the technology. Advertisers provide the money. But users provide much of the content and activity that attract the audience in the first place.
Why shouldn't we reconsider that relationship?
Thank you, Nirav, for not answering my email
And now, let's get to Day 144.
Last week, I sent another email to Nextdoor leadership. Once again, no response.
So I'd like to thank Nirav Tolia, Jacob Chavis, and the rest of the Nextdoor C-suite.
Thank you for not answering my emails.
Thank you for not engaging in the conversation.
Thank you for giving me plenty of material to write about.
While waiting for a response, I learned something I didn't know much about before: building a website and attracting an audience.
Not a social media platform. A website.
My own website.
From barely 200 visitors to 9,400 unique visits
Two months ago, NielFlamm.com was getting barely 200 unique visits a month.
Today, as of this blog post, the site has reached 9,400 unique visits.
That's a significant change, and it didn't happen by accident.
I've been learning about:
Search Engine Optimization (SEO)
Writing titles that encourage people to click
Creating effective meta descriptions
Unique visitors and page views
Bounce rates and visitor behavior
Writing content that resonates with people
Keeping content relevant and timely
Understanding what brings visitors to a website
I've also learned that simply publishing something isn't enough. You have to think about the audience, the subject, how people find your content, and whether what you're writing gives them a reason to stay and explore.
I've been experimenting, learning, adjusting, and publishing.
And here's the interesting part: I'm doing this as someone who started out with very little knowledge of how to create a website, attract visitors, or build an audience that could eventually support advertising.
I'm still learning. I have plenty more to figure out.
But going from barely 200 unique visits a month to 9,400 is something worth celebrating.
Nextdoor reports a 14% increase in Weekly Active Users. That's a meaningful metric for a social platform.
My website is measuring something different: people finding and visiting content I've created independently.
I'm not comparing the two metrics as if they're interchangeable. They're not. But I am demonstrating that an individual can build an audience by creating relevant content, learning how search works, and consistently giving people something worth reading.
And I'm doing it without a multimillion-dollar platform behind me.
The irony isn't lost on me
I've spent months asking Nextdoor questions about transparency, moderation, research, advertising, customer experience, and the value it delivers to users and small businesses.
I've asked for information. I've offered feedback. I've invited conversation.
The response? Silence.
But that silence has pushed me to learn new skills, build my own website, improve my content, and develop an audience.
I started this case study because I had questions about Nextdoor.
Now, I have a growing website, a better understanding of digital marketing, and a much clearer picture of what it takes to attract visitors online.
And I'm not finished.
So, thank you, Nextdoor
Nirav Tolia, Jacob Chavis, and the rest of the Nextdoor leadership team:
Thank you for ignoring me and giving me content to host on my own site.
You may not want to engage with my questions, but you've certainly given me plenty to write about.
NXDR may have had a rough day in the market, and the latest earnings report may give management some positive talking points. But the questions about shareholder value, user-generated content, transparency, and accountability aren't going away.
Meanwhile, I'll keep learning, publishing, and growing NielFlamm.com.
Day 144. You didn't answer my email. But you helped me build an audience.
Who knew?
Day 143: Nextdoor Doesn't Own the Verified Address — The U.S. Postal Service Has Been Doing This for Centuries
Today, while picking up my mail, I came across something that got me thinking. It was a collection of unexpected advertisements, but they all had something in common.
They had my name. They had my mailing address. And they were trying to sell me something.
Sound familiar? You might be receiving the same kind of mail.
Some were from real estate agents offering to evaluate my home's value. Others were from LeafFilter, a former employer of mine, and an HVAC company offering services or a new heating and cooling unit.
So why am I bringing this up in my ongoing Nextdoor case study?
Because Nextdoor doesn't have a monopoly on verified addresses.
The verified address isn't a new invention
Nirav Tolia frequently highlights verified addresses, along with AI, as important differentiators for the Nextdoor platform.
And I understand why knowing that someone is connected to a particular neighborhood can be valuable. It can help create a more localized experience and give advertisers a way to reach people in specific communities.
But let's not pretend that connecting a name to a physical mailing address is some groundbreaking technological achievement.
The United States Postal Service has been delivering mail to addresses for generations.
In fact, the U.S. Postal Service dates back to July 26, 1775, when the Second Continental Congress established the position of Postmaster General and laid the foundation for the American postal system.
That's more than 250 years of connecting people, businesses, and physical addresses.
Businesses already know how to reach households
Think about the companies sending these advertisements.
Real estate agents want homeowners who might be interested in knowing their property's value.
HVAC companies want homeowners who may need maintenance, repairs, or a replacement system.
Home improvement companies want to reach people who might need their products and services.
They can use bulk mailing through the United States Postal Service to put their message directly into a household's mailbox.
They don't need Nextdoor to verify my address.
They don't need a social media account to know where I live.
They don't need an AI assistant to figure out which neighborhood I belong to.
They have a mailing address and a way to reach me.
Of course, direct mail and digital advertising are different channels. Nextdoor can offer targeting, engagement, and interaction that a postcard cannot. I'm not suggesting they're identical.
But the larger point remains: verified addresses are not exclusive to Nextdoor, and they aren't a new concept.
So what's the real competitive advantage?
If Nextdoor wants to promote verified addresses as a major selling point, I'd like to understand what makes its approach meaningfully different.
Is it the ability to target specific neighborhoods?
Is it the ability to combine location information with community interests and engagement?
Is it the quality of the audience data?
Is it better conversion measurement for advertisers?
Those are legitimate questions, and those are the kinds of things that could distinguish a digital advertising platform.
But a verified address alone isn't enough to build a competitive advantage. The real value comes from what a company can do with that information, how responsibly it uses it, and whether it delivers measurable results for advertisers.
And that brings me right back to my recurring question about Nextdoor: What exactly are small businesses getting for their advertising dollars, and how does Nextdoor demonstrate the value?
Nirav, the mailbox has been around for a while
I appreciate that Nextdoor wants to highlight its technology, AI capabilities, and verified neighborhood connections.
But sometimes I think the company spends so much time promoting what it believes makes it unique that it overlooks the fact that many of these concepts have existed for a very long time.
The next time Nextdoor talks about verified addresses as a major differentiator, perhaps someone should take a walk to the mailbox.
The U.S. Postal Service has been connecting businesses with households since the days of the Continental Congress.
Day 143. The mail keeps coming, the questions keep coming, and apparently, verified addresses aren't exactly a new invention.
Nirav, more feedback for you!