Live data from Hacker News

Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

wsj.com

271–280 of 498 posts

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no opinion on the MBA bit, but I think you're spot on about people starting to treat companies the way the companies are treating them. ~10 years ago, when I got my first job, I was in the minority, pretty much the only person cynical about big companies' claims how "people are our most important resource", how important is the company "culture" and all of that corporate kumbaya. And, at that point, the vast m…

> People are tired of job hopping to get market pay If nobody moved from job to job, there would be no market .

There would be a lot fewer recruiters, and more experienced engineers.

Also a less monolithic tech culture. Right now every employee is more or less compatible across every company because we all seek to be transferable

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence the layoffs. They still have to try though

Do they really need to "try" by laying peole off? Why is this the standard move despite the business and finances still booming? It's a weird MBA monkey mimicry game. I dislike Amazon yet continue to order stuff at the same rate. How many non-government entities have a base like this? Seems like an enviable position. How many layoff announcements have you seen where the company says "We'd love to keep pursuing this b…

If your best guess for what the market is going to be in 3-5 years is now half what you were guessing last week, surely that means you make some changes, and past a certain point you want to make a bigger change than what's going to happen by just freezing hiring and waiting for natural attrition. I'm no fan of companies doing this, but the logic makes sense.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#273

Here’s a thought that has been percolating in my mind for a bit since these “market adjustments” began a month or two back. Somehow at some point, in what perhaps could be blamed on the ever-hated mass produced MBAs - companies got really comfortable with the “it’s not personal, it’s just good business” of letting go of their employees for a slightest reason, or sometimes for no reason at all - just to make it look t…

> Are they in danger of running out of money? Have we been in a bubble so long that people have forgotten that the raison d'etre for publicly traded companies existing is not to simply exist, but rather make profit and ideally continually expanding profit for share holders? For a startup runway and growth of whatever nature are all that matter. You need to exist long enough for the exit event, and grow in a way that…

> “the raison d'etre for publicly traded companies existing is not to simply exist, but rather make profit and ideally continually expanding profit for share holders”

Should be noted the ideology that the purpose of a corporation is to maximize the profits for shareholder above all else is a modern obsession, and always takes a short term view. Starving a company just for a few good years of share prices is is dumb but often what that ideology leads to. Making profit is part or what a corporation should do, maximizing it above all else is not.

Similarly HOAs are supposed to maximize house value but funny how some of the highest property values are places like Palo Alto that aren’t known for HOAs.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#274
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s unusual about this cycle though is that it’s the fear of a recession due to fed policy that is causing companies to cut back. In past cycles fed policy caused a recession nobody predicted and companies suddenly found their earnings in the toilet and made enormous cuts in head count, R&D spending, etc. Something about this cycle and these cuts feels I dunno, manufacturered or something. Like are 7k high paying…

"It's a recession when your neighbor loses their job. It's a depression when you lose yours." I think this is just availability bias. Ordinary people - the ones who aren't glued to CNBC or the WSJ - tend to measure the strength of the economy by the job market for their friends and neighbors. The job market, right now, is pretty strong for ordinary people. Hence it "feels" like boom times, and that all the chicken li…

I agree with the rationale overall ( people at helm being worried as a signal ). I try to look for similar clues.

Still, as far as tech goes, for some companies that relied on cheap money, the ride may well be over ( I think of weird products like Peleton, which is a niche product, but was scaled as if it was going to become a thing in every house ). I am not sure it translates to everything going out with a bang.

Today's news were that job market[1] is still fine despite clear attempts to make it employer's market again.

[1]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/04/jolts-report-november-2022.h...

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#275
post #21

It's crazy that AMZN announces this and the stock goes up in after hours trading. People are losing their livelihoods yet rich people only care about the potential higher profits. This is very disconnected from reality, amzn needs consumers to buy their products. If layoffs keep piling up higher and deeper something is going to break and hello recession!

In general layoffs especially when they are proactive, which in this case they seem to be, show investors that the company is being fiscally responsible. This isn't an indication that Amazon is going to increase profitability it's a sign to investors that they are taking in recession indicators and adapting accordingly. It doesn't seem malicious it seems perfectly reasonable and sane. Of course it's Amazon so there i…

Also a stock can go up because it reveals information that is not as bad as previously thought.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a wonderful observation. When I was a kid my dad said "companies won't think twice about dumping you, don't worry about dumping them." But he worked in the same place for forty years. Sometimes he was treated well, sometimes he wasn't. It occurs to me what a relic that world is but also how it sounded bizarre when my dad said that to me in the early 00s. At that time there were still "lifers" all over that pl…

The other day I heard on here the phrase "cattle, not pets" used as how to treat servers. This seems useful in this context too.

The reason you have to pay for a cloud of virtual chickens, is because you can’t get decent bandwidth on a few free range beef & dairy cattle.

A single well tended rack in a closet on-site, with a few single cpu servers hosting multiple applications, a SAN, and a fat data pipe could replace hundreds of Kubernetes clusters — if there wasn’t a cartel on network speed.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no opinion on the MBA bit, but I think you're spot on about people starting to treat companies the way the companies are treating them. ~10 years ago, when I got my first job, I was in the minority, pretty much the only person cynical about big companies' claims how "people are our most important resource", how important is the company "culture" and all of that corporate kumbaya. And, at that point, the vast m…

eh what? even 15 years ago it was common knowledge to just jump around every few years to advance your career. maybe it wasn't all out "f* these guys" but we definitely had no illusions about employer "loyalty" lol.

Likely depends on your age and/or experience.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#278

Here’s a thought that has been percolating in my mind for a bit since these “market adjustments” began a month or two back. Somehow at some point, in what perhaps could be blamed on the ever-hated mass produced MBAs - companies got really comfortable with the “it’s not personal, it’s just good business” of letting go of their employees for a slightest reason, or sometimes for no reason at all - just to make it look t…

I hate to break this to you, but the decline of company-employee loyalty started 40 years ago, and even before that it only existed as a result of unprecedented post-war prosperity and lack of global competition. This doesn't mean that it's all downside for employees though. Amazon grew a huge business and paid their corporate employees top of market with huge upside over the last 20 years due to their phenomenal gro…

For reference check out the wiki for largest employers - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_employers Amazons hiring growth has been insane.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#279

Here’s a thought that has been percolating in my mind for a bit since these “market adjustments” began a month or two back. Somehow at some point, in what perhaps could be blamed on the ever-hated mass produced MBAs - companies got really comfortable with the “it’s not personal, it’s just good business” of letting go of their employees for a slightest reason, or sometimes for no reason at all - just to make it look t…

> it hasn’t hit Amazon pocketbook now, has it? Are they in danger of running out of money? What happened to “people are our most important resource”?

Amazon just had to take out an $8B unsecured loan to be paid back in a year to cover operating and capital expenses. Despite what the government is telling you, things are really bad and about to get a lot worse. The lowest hanging fruit/the least valuable employees get cut first. That's how they stay in business. That's the smart business move unless they can pivot.

Companies can't just borrow and spend anymore they actually have to be sustainable. Amazon gets loans to buy inventory and equipment and pay employees so they can stock their warehouse and then they pay back those loans later after it's sold. If they don't sell that inventory because consumers have no money they still have to make loan payments so it becomes more costly to them over time and if they want to break even they have to raise prices. This is inflation.

The Fed raising interest rates makes borrowing money to do this more expensive so they don't do it or do it less. Money in the economy evaporated in November 2021 with the announcement of Quantitative Tightening and the end of Quantitative Easing. That means getting loans and free money became expensive and private investment in the markets/companies evaporated. This forces inflation to come down because they can't keep borrowing and inflating. They have to stock just what they can easily sell or they find themselves imploding as they can't pay back their loans. Pretty much every industry is going through this, hence all the industries collapsing. You will see a lot of companies that have been struggling go out of business.

Why is this happening? Free money basically. Our government pandered to political interests (voters and cronies) and overspent for decades, kicking the can down the road and we're now at the end of the road.

The US debt to GDP ratio has been over 120% since 2020 which by IMF definition is an economic death spiral. That means the US is underwater, we don't produce enough money as a nation to pay our bills. By 2028 that death spiral will become irreversible, meaning the payments we make on our loans for all that free money --the bailout money, stimulus checks, the entitlements, that omnibus, the inflation reduction act-- will only go to the interest and no longer the principal. That sets us on track to be insolvent by 2042.

Yeah I know, crazy right? But why? Because when this happens all those companies and private investors that poured money into stocks and venture capital can't rely on them for profits so they instead buy government bonds. They don't give as high of a return but it's guaranteed money in a down economy so they do it. The result is the governmnet receives the money they need to pay their bills and all the those living off free money get a reality check and have to live and operate within their means.

And balance is restored to the universe. Unless people try to cash out their bonds and find the government is bankrupt. This is why government spending is bad folks. They manipulate the economy to prop it up and print money until the Ponzi scheme fails. Rinse and repeat or pass a balanced budget amendment and demand our government stop spending money on pointless wars and entitlements that buy them votes or kickbacks. As long as there is government debt, as long as the government exists, the cycle will repeat. We'll just have to wait and see if we survive this time. Where we are at the end of the road is unprecedented. This has been building since we got off the gold standard which is what allowed them to overspend money we don't have.

Historically this is when there's a world war or a collapse of civilization/Dark Age because most nations are in the same boat. Decadence gets the better of us and lack of restraint (dare I say, conservative behavior) leads to this moment in history once more.

Obviously there's more nuance to it than just that, but that's a concise rough summary of what's going on.

Re: Amazon to Lay Off over 17,000 Workers, More Than First Planned

#280
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are in the business of predicting the market in a quarter, a year, 5 years, etc. They got it wrong and overhired. There's ample evidence of that, and of cooling demand - now and in the future.

They got sucked into the "new normal" that never was, and was never going to be. We are seeing a massive return to the old normal, which means people are going back to offices (not WFH) people are going back to shopping in person not online, people are going back to eating in restaurants not using Grub Hub or ordering online. etc etc etc

I think you are wrong. Not completely, but I think you missed the massive change in attitudes that took place the past few years. WFH is likely going to stay in some shape or form since it is clear it can work ( and heavens know emplopyers full remote positions have their pick of qualified candidates ) and likely some RTO will follow ( with another round of - likely muted due to recession - resignations ), but I would hesitate to conclude that good old days are here again. I am not going back.
Post reply on HN