Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plaid Layoffs

plaid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 345 posts

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#281

Post by SgtBastard »

game_the0ry wrote: post #253
tacker2000 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is in real life your analogy would actually map the alphas to the ceos and the betas to the shareholders/stakeholders. The employees are nowhere in this. Edit: as the other post said, they would be the sticks, shovels and other assorted tools…

I studied business in undergrad and took Organizational Behavior [1] as a class - technically, employees are stakeholders. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_behavior

Germany gets this balance right.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#282

Post by refurb »

pxue wrote: post #267
game_the0ry wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the chimpanzee world, this would be handled differently. In chimp world, when alpha chimp causes chaos that brings down the community, a group of beta chimps will tear apart alpha chimp limb-by-limb, then they elect a new alpha from the group of beta subversives. This also how the organized crime works - leaders get a lot of benefits, but they also get the downside accountability when they fuck up ("skin in the ga…

The beta chimps are the shareholders and the board.

Not really, the CEO is the beta and the alphas are the shareholders.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#283

Post by refurb »

game_the0ry wrote: post #219
jdnffjvnv wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you advocating for mob violence against CEOs for laying people off?

I am advocating for accountability. Understand: accountability has a way of manifesting itself one way or another. Today, we complain on the internet. Next week, we see more riots where people tag walls with "eat the rich." Next year, the guillotines come out. [1] [1] This is a loose analogy that is not meant to be taken literally.

The CEO will be held accountable by the board and shareholders.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#284

Post by refurb »

Mistletoe wrote: post #151
boringg wrote: post #70

I get that layoffs seriously are terrible but a lot of these tech companies are providing some pretty seriously nice exit packages. I fail to understand the amount of acid in the comment thread? Layoffs suck, corporate speak is always cringey. What would people want as alternatives outside perfectly executed business plans that don't have layoffs? Handheld individual exit goodbye packages? Im seriously asking for leg…

I think the vitriol is more tied to the founder model of get as big as you can, as fast as you can, by hiring as many as you can, so that the valuations keep getting bigger and bigger so you can cash out. Then you cut loose all the people you know you didn’t actually need.

Start-ups are a gamble. Presumably people know this when they accept the job. Small chance of massive pay off, much larger chance the whole thing implodes.

That's why I don't work for start-ups.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#285

Post by vineyardmike »

nunez wrote: post #235
RC_ITR wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think this is a sign that plaid is anywhere near their last valuation of $13bn, then I have news for you. The real problem is inequality. Zach is facing consequences, but the drop from $1bn to $100mn (a 10x decline in wealth) is so much less impactful than $250k to $25k (illustrative of what an employee is more likely facing).

maybe for you, but if this person was living on a >$100mn lifestyle, then that 10x decline will actually hurt them!

No it won't!

They may feel bad about less yachts and luxury, but they are absolutely not hurting. No one is starving, no one is losing their housing, no one is unable to pay the heating bill.

Not even close to hurting. Lets not pity the $100mn-aires that just laid off 260+ people.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#286

Post by kevinventullo »

nunez wrote: post #239
mynameisvlad wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is having one of the worst days of his/her life Oh no, how sad. Pretty sure the people being laid off are having far worse days than the person who gasp had to write a letter.

i mean sure, yeah, they're maybe cash-rich, but firing people still sucks unless you're inhuman. knowingly upending hundreds of lives and families who are less financially secure during a not-recession-recession and a slow hiring market must be emotionally difficult to deal with.

If you asked both of them who’d they rather be in this scenario, they’d give you the same answer.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#287

Post by cercatrova »

jamiequint wrote: post #185
Mistletoe wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the vitriol is more tied to the founder model of get as big as you can, as fast as you can, by hiring as many as you can, so that the valuations keep getting bigger and bigger so you can cash out. Then you cut loose all the people you know you didn’t actually need.

This is a strawman. Nobody operates this way. You don't raise more money by hiring more people. In some markets you raise more by making more revenue even if unprofitable, which is not great but is very different than raising as a function of number of employees.

> You don't raise more money by hiring more people.

Actually you do. VCs in Silicon Valley often look for "growth" ie seeing that you're hiring more people. If you raise 10 million yet keep the same 2 or 3 person team, they'll start asking questions and it's harder to raise your next round.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#288

Post by palunon »

bink wrote: post #223
adamrezich wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

aside from the funny proper noun, how should things be handled differently? why do people think that corporations' primary goal should be to maintain employment of everyone in their company, that there's some sort of moral imperative to do so? is this just because social media has been pretending that corporations are people for so long now that we've forgot that they actually aren't?

This is a pretty cynical take on the idea of retaining qualified employees during a downturn. When I hear people talk about doing what you can to not have mass layoffs I don't think what they mean is that the company has an obligation to the employees that overrides their obligations to their shareholders. The way I read it is that people are saying that retaining good employees is beneficial to the company and the s…

> When I hear people talk about doing what you can to not have mass layoffs I don't think what they mean is that the company has an obligation to the employees that overrides their obligations to their shareholders

Depends on who's talking/the situation. When you hear people talking about not closing a profitable factory instead of laying people off to delocalize, that's pretty much what they mean.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#289

Post by cercatrova »

playoff_burner wrote: post #255
makestuff wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is likely enough money to get an MVP working to pitch to investors. Obviously not if you have a family to take of as well.

I see. Thanks. It's really 30-40k because the 4 months' severance includes the regular pay during the 60 day exit window. The potential is obvious: get something off the ground in 2 months. Do you know what someone mostly new to founding a startup should do to start? I've got ideas, I've got potential cofounders, and I can prototype MVPs, but I don't understand the landscape beyond what I remember from How To Start a…

Just fyi, you can also bootstrap with that cash, you don't have to raise (and indeed in this macroeconomic climate, raising is harder than it has been). Check out the IndieHackers podcast (also a website/forum like Reddit but I found the podcast more useful) [0], YC Startup School on Youtube [1], read the Mom Test, Lean Startup, and so on.

[0] https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy50cmFuc2l...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@ycombinator/videos

If you have an email or other means of contact, I'm available to discuss further.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#290

Post by gbronner »

Bagelsandlox wrote: post #244
function_seven wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll try to explain why I think it's gross. All of these tech companies come up with cutesy terms for employees. "Googlers", "Plaids", "Metamates", "Splunkers", "Pinployees". It seems like a cheap way of tying workers' identities to The Company. It's a cheap gesture used in an attempt to create a distinct "culture". So in the context of a mass-termination, it really rubs me the wrong way to refer to these people as "…

Hi, I was affected by this layoff unfortunately. Plaid just gave me 16 weeks of pay, 6 months of insurance premiums, waived the vesting cliff I hadn't hit yet, and let me go with way more dignity than I've ever seen in my 20 year career (19 of those years spent at "normal" non-silicone Valley companies)... ...they can call me whatever the hell they want at this point and I'll be OK with it lol

Isn't it absolutely amazing that VCs are willing to pay you 4 months worth of income to do absolutely nothing?
Post reply on HN