ok, not just that... 

Some tele-doctors and writers tell that Meta (insta + FB) are still much more cost effetive than twitter/X:
that is, the same post, posted at the same time, generates more engagement, views, and SALES in Meta than X. Like 5x or 10x more.

And even X is still orders of magnitude more cost-effective than nostr. 

For these guys, posting is their bread-winner. A brazilian who sells events in X tried nostr, but it was not worthy his time. 

Sometimes we forget we are a little bubble, normies/NPCs are the vast majority. 
Not just that, full censorship platforms are still larger than X, even if for us they look like dinosaurs (of the carnivore variety).
 

 This is true and you raise good points, but it depends on what industry we’re talking about.
Any libertarian, conservative, cryptocurrency, privacy, or even broader tech influencer whose closed off to new platforms is just trying to milk their moat. 

 libertarians, BTC-guys, privacy... these guys are here due to quality, not quantity. 
when they want to reach a broader, normie audience, or sell stuff, they go to Big Tech social networks. 

Another point: nostr does not even have reliable reach measurements. 
if a vendor can not know how many views, clicks, etc, his posts generated, he can not estimate their worth. 
posting is worktime for them, there are not here for the info.  

 True, but I put all crypto in this group, not just bitcoin.  which is a much larger audience
now a lot of them you will likely call "shitcoins" and that's often true.  but they are shitcoins because of them NOT coming on nostr