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

Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

newsroom.spotify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 495 posts

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#221

Post by werds »

fulltimeloser wrote: post #211

I hope we can keep companies like original Spotify around, where I can find almost all the music I want to listen to. I wish companies could keep a limited scope for their offerings and just be really good at just that. Spotify's focus on pod cast is kind of crap. It's like TV eras cheap production value reality shows from late 1990ths all over. I guess the capitalist mantra of perpetual growth is leading them down a…

I would happily see Spotify die, they have exploited the artists more effectively than any other organization since the advent of streaming.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#222

Post by oxfordmale »

thehappypm wrote: post #220
oxfordmale wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost picture is as follows: money saved on staff reduction - money spent on layoff packages - (temporary reduction in productivity, because of lower staff morale) Research shows there is no long-term benefit of layoffs other than the short-term gain in cash flow. Layoffs are only beneficial if they are needed for survival of the company

Lower productivity is highly questionable. I’ve really only seen layoffs boost productivity. Suddenly there is less overhead and fewer cooks-in-the-kitchen. Morale hits are real, but tend to fade if people feel confident that they’ve survived another day.

Research shows layoffs result in a lowering of productivity:

https://www.boardoptions.com/Learning%20from%20the%20past%20...

https://pavestep.com/post/the-effects-of-downsizing-on-remai...

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/how-layoffs-cost...

https://garfinkleexecutivecoaching.com/articles/career-advic...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/radhikaphilip/2020/07/23/the-pa...

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#223

Post by thehappypm »

phamilton4 wrote: post #197
achiang wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to use the fully loaded cost of an employee when estimating opex savings, which includes health care costs, retirement funding, etc. Rule of thumb is that fully loaded cost for US employees is approximately 2x yearly salary (although people who've actually run a company can correct my potentially stale or incorrect understanding).

Understand 2x, I was also looking across all the jobs at spotify. There are some that go as low as 70k salary, a majority seem to be 170k+. It was just for ease of calculation. even if we take 500k that's still 0.033% of revenue -_-

Again, revenue is not really all that relevant for this kind of business. They’re a low margin business because they must pay huge bills to record labels. R&D doesn’t cut record label costs.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#225

Post by dmitriid »

fulltimeloser wrote: post #211

I hope we can keep companies like original Spotify around, where I can find almost all the music I want to listen to. I wish companies could keep a limited scope for their offerings and just be really good at just that. Spotify's focus on pod cast is kind of crap. It's like TV eras cheap production value reality shows from late 1990ths all over. I guess the capitalist mantra of perpetual growth is leading them down a…

Both Spotify and Netflix depend on content that they don't, and can't, own.

Netflix became a desert after WB, Disney and others decided they wanted their own streaming services and took their content with them. And since Disney basically owns everything, Netflix now has nothing (except their own content).

Spotify is fully at the mercy of the three-four big companies that own nearly all the music in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_industry#Consolidation

And don't forget, you also need to complete with companies with near-unlimited money and quick access to users like Apple, Google, Amazon

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#227

Post by ohyoutravel »

jzb wrote: post #93

I dunno, maybe if Spotify wasn't spending hundreds of million on podcast deals and actually focusing on what its users want, they wouldn't need to lay people off. Any way you slice it, there's no way that the Rogan deal pays for itself. Spotify is stingy AF with the artists that drove people to the service, and then firehoses Rogan with cash and tries to shove podcasts down people's throats. I was a happy Spotify sub…

Apropos of little, I cancelled my family Spotify plan because of the Joe Rogan deal and moved to Apple Music. Totally forgot that’s the reason I moved us until your comment.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#228

Post by AlwaysRock »

jzb wrote: post #93

I dunno, maybe if Spotify wasn't spending hundreds of million on podcast deals and actually focusing on what its users want, they wouldn't need to lay people off. Any way you slice it, there's no way that the Rogan deal pays for itself. Spotify is stingy AF with the artists that drove people to the service, and then firehoses Rogan with cash and tries to shove podcasts down people's throats. I was a happy Spotify sub…

> Any way you slice it, there's no way that the Rogan deal pays for itself.

Especially when you still get ads on podcasts. Listening to any podcast on Spotify is so frustrating because I pay for the service and STILL get a half dozen ads an episode.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#229

Post by paulcole »

popularrecluse wrote: post #158
paulcole wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can be OK funding differing points of view but not OK funding a specific differing point of view.

We just live in a world now where propagating false and dangerous misinformation is merely offering a differing point of view. We were happy to let subject-matter experts help build the modern world, but then turn on them as we seek out the information that comports with the way we wish the world to be. It's good to be skeptical, but a very significant portion of the population has serious epistemic deficiencies.

I honestly don't have a clue what you're talking about here.

My point was that you can think Elon Musk is a jackass and not buy a Tesla even if you do think Jeff Bezos is a jackass and still shop at Amazon.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#230

Post by h4waii »

ben7799 wrote: post #206
default_png wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is though, I have probably thrown 3K into Spotify, If I cant get a "Flat rate subscription for All / Most of the music out there" - > I will 100% just go back to downloading discographies of the artists I like. People saying "Support the artists" - I don't care about the artists, I just want to listen to whatever takes my fancy, and if they can't do that at my price point, they will end up getting nothing from…

$3k is a lot of money to rent music. It's kind of odd to realize people have spent that kind of money to rent music and have nothing to show for it without continuing to spend money. $3k would still buy a very large physical collection. Most people didn't have that kind of money into a physical collection back in the day. Vinyl prices are a joke, but CDs are often cheaper than a digital download if bought new and the…

"Nothing to show for it" is strange way to requiring getting value from something.

2 hours after I eat lunch, what do I have to "show for it"?

I'm perfectly fine with all the hours of music and the accompanying enjoyment I've received from paying Spotify, and that doesn't start to take in to consideration the amount of new music I have easily discovered.

Post reply on HN