Twitter announces layoffs

Post by kingryan » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 3:39 PM UTC

mrmcd wrote: post #130

roymurdock wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Morgan Stanley, Fidelity, Vanguard, Jennison Associates, and Blackrock need a stronger Twitter. [1] Also interesting to note that over the past year insiders have only bought 1.5m shares while offloading 12.5m. [1] http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/twtr/ownership-summary

This doesn't always mean that insiders are dumping stock because they know the company is doomed. Sometimes yes, but when you have a company like Twitter where a pretty significant percentage of compensation is in stock options and RSUs, then you're going to have lots of insiders selling in batches, so they can actually use that compensation to get things like houses and cars and diversified investment portfolios.

Post by fredkbloggs » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 3:43 PM UTC

melvinmt wrote: post #72

dangerlibrary wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few automated trading algorithms would become marginally less effective. Some poorly written ones might crash or make a few million dollars worth of bad trades. So, you know, there's that.

The world also needs fewer* trading algorithms.

Post by Coincoin » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 3:44 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #98

The number, 336, is roughly 10% of their employees - which is pretty much exactly the number that Jack Welch recommended turning over each year to improve the work force. I often wonder whether these "layoffs" aren't actually layoffs, but simply performance based assessments. It's not like Twitter is shutting down an entire office, or abandoning some technology, and letting everyone associated with that office/techno…

Post by fredkbloggs » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 3:45 PM UTC

mrweasel wrote: post #22

I'm a little surprised that they're only firing 336 people. Unless this is just the first round of layoffs and more will follow once products and management has been streamlined/trimmed whatever you want to call it.

Post by mc32 » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 3:45 PM UTC

ethbro wrote: post #180

rudolf0 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're jargon as well as buzzwords. They mean things, but they're unnecessary. "Roadmap" -> plan, strategy "Structural change" -> internal reorganizing, lay-offs "Nimbler" -> fewer employees, which we hope will make us become more agile "Streamlined" -> ambiguous and essentially meaningless by itself "Impactful" -> revenue- and/or growth-generating, maybe "important"

You're suggesting we revert to Chaucer's English because linguistic drift is bad? I'm as much a hater of overuse of jargon as the next person, but for his intended audience I don't think this is an example of that. If one doesn't know what any of those words mean, then "Hello, welcome to Hacker News."