CircleCI Layoffs

Post by mousetree » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:29 PM UTC

zamalek wrote: post #33

015a wrote: post #30

I don't want to turn a discussion surrounding layoffs into a lens about the business itself; it sucks to be laid off, and I wish everyone who was impacted great expediency in finding a new role. But I'm going to anyway: I genuinely don't understand how CircleCI is still a business. Every major code repository provider has CI built in. All of the ones I've interacted with (Github Actions & Gitlab) are just as good as…

We also recently left them for self-hosted GHA runners. The other problem is that their pricing is insane - we're building exactly the same code for ~20% of the cost.

Post by Tao3300 » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:33 PM UTC

meta2023 wrote: post #35

015a wrote: post #30

I don't want to turn a discussion surrounding layoffs into a lens about the business itself; it sucks to be laid off, and I wish everyone who was impacted great expediency in finding a new role. But I'm going to anyway: I genuinely don't understand how CircleCI is still a business. Every major code repository provider has CI built in. All of the ones I've interacted with (Github Actions & Gitlab) are just as good as…

You're being downvoted for telling people exactly why they got laid off. It's time to wake the fuck up engineers. When you complacently don't pay attention to your business and core offering, this is what happens.

Post by icedchai » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:36 PM UTC

Tao3300 wrote: post #43

meta2023 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being downvoted for telling people exactly why they got laid off. It's time to wake the fuck up engineers. When you complacently don't pay attention to your business and core offering, this is what happens.

Engineers aren't generally setting the priorities on what gets fixed when or what the business is actually offering. The complacency problem is usually in management. Can't speak for how CCI is run, but that's how it is at most places with more than 10 people.

Post by notyourwork » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:43 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #39

calrueb wrote: post #21

With these non-IPO companies doing layoffs is the correct way to read these announcements "we are letting people go to lower expenses because we are not profitable and are actually at risk of running out of money" or is it more "we are letting people go to lower expenses because our investors are asking that we look better on paper because they would like us to have a liquidity exit event (acquisition, private equity…

All of the above. Suppose you have a company with no money, but with a bank willing to loan you money at market rate. You can do three projects, one costs $1 mil, and after a year brings you $1.5 mil in profit, the second costs $1 mil and brings $1.05 mil after a year, and the third costs $1 mil and brings $1.01 mil. In 2021 interest rates were near zero, so all three projects would have given you a profit. The worst…

Post by pitched » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:55 PM UTC

icedchai wrote: post #45

Tao3300 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineers aren't generally setting the priorities on what gets fixed when or what the business is actually offering. The complacency problem is usually in management. Can't speak for how CCI is run, but that's how it is at most places with more than 10 people.

Exactly this. I've worked for founders at small companies ( not want to listen to advice or suggestions. It would be almost impossible to change anything at a larger firm. Let's just keep doing the same old thing that isn't working.