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

311–320 of 495 posts

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#311

Post by nebula8804 »

guelo wrote: post #253
nebula8804 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the Joe Rogan deal was 100 million. Many people have been stating he was seriously underpaid but I think he was one of the first major deals so maybe there wasn't any strong metric to gauge what he is worth. Furthermore, they play multiple ads during his podcast regardless of if you are a paying customer or not. This one really grinds my gears. If they haven't made back their money yet then I'd be shocked.

"two people familiar with the details of the transaction" told NYT that it was at least $200 million for three and a half years. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/17/arts/music/spotify-joe-ro...

oh I guess I was mistaken. I constantly heard 100 million but it was just a guess since the number was never disclosed officially.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#312

Post by lotsofpulp »

pc86 wrote: post #298
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also I suspect that $150k as the mean TC of those being let go is low. Probably not low. It's an enormous salary for a developer outside of the Valley and Spotify has plenty of employees which are not in the USA.

I applied for an "entry-level" EM role with Spotify in 2021 and the base was 260-275, plus a generous bonus target and stock. TC would have been pushing $400k, for a fully remote USCAN-based role. I say that strictly as a calibration point - it's unlikely engineers are pushing half a million (maybe at the Staff+ level) but there's also not likely any engineers before $150k TC. I'd expect even mid-levels to be in the…

The stock price has more then halved since 2021, and based on their business model and history of profit, as an employee, I would not value the stock portion of compensation much.

As far as I can tell, Apple/Google/Amazon will always provide the ceiling price for how much Spotify can charge its customers, hence capping revenue, and the 3 record labels will always extract just enough to keep Spotify operating.

In a similar situation to Netflix, Spotify’s play would have to be to create their own content to lower their costs, but that is much easier said than done.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#313

Post by overgard »

popularrecluse wrote: post #276
overgard wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah "misinformation". (Which seems to be far-left speak for "has a different opinion and I'd rather censor them than argue with them".) Rogan is a comedian and has never claimed any special expertise. If you're worried that people listen to him over the legacy news media, well, what does it say about them that somehow a comedian has more credibility than they do?

There will always be an acceptable range of discourse in any society, and those that in their own ignorance and confusion spread ideas that hurt the stability and well-being of that society can expect pushback. Sorry if you wanted to say whatever bullshit you want without a challenge. If you don't like it disconnect your internet, as you'd say.

Never said it should go unchallenged. What a lovely strawman you've built. Free speech is great, and if someone says something incorrect, the solution is more speech to counteract it. I think part of why Rogan is so popular is because legacy media and woke activists have such a bad reputation for trying to control the narrative rather than engage in discourse, which is what he does. I just said I don't have a problem with him stating his opinion and I'm sick of people trying to censor a goddamn comedian because they're jealous he built a large audience.

I fail to see how Rogan threatens the stability of society. I mean, it's hilarious other than that you're actually serious about that. I'm far more afraid of censorship than I am of Rogan talking to some goofball. (BTW, you haven't even stated why Rogan threatens the stability of society or what he's done).

I think I'll keep my internet connection friend.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#314

Post by mattgreenrocks »

nytesky wrote: post #255
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> productivity has been lower the last few years Any statistics to back that up? I've read both narratives (this one and the one that conflicts it) countless times over the Internet the past few years. I have no idea what is true. A lot of people defend work from home and say it makes people more productive/work more overall. If that were the case, why are some of the brightest companies like Google/Apple against it?

Not sure about stats, but it’s definitely the impression of companies leadership. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/31/productiv...

It's hard to be surprised by this.

The pandemic may have acted like a reset on how work could fit into one's life. There's no going back from a perspective like that. I suspect that the idea of a career ladder simply doesn't work as well on younger generations as it may once have, for it may assume that growth occurs (making room for people).

It also assumes that people trust institutions to take care of them.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#315

Post by that_guy_iain »

eigen-vector wrote: post #32

This is probably the least tactical message amongst all the companies that have laid off people. Ek's spent most of the time rambling about efficiency and organizational changes to leadership positions who'll be least affected by the layoffs. Then comes the layoff news. It's almost as if he's rectifying someone else's mistake and everyone getting laid off should be thankful about it. I wish CEOs read some of the emai…

> I wish CEOs read some of the emails that recruiting sends to potential candidates before they set out to write a layoff post. Completely tone deaf.

I highly doubt CEOs write these posts.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#316

Post by that_guy_iain »

shadowtree wrote: post #280

The core question is how many employees do you need run a stable internet business? Stable means no massive new product lines, growth, etc. Spotify is what it is. An app across a handful platforms, streaming infrastructure, and a legal/purchasing dept for music rights. Does this need 7000 people? Zero chance. Is it 1000? 700? 250? No ones knows yet, but everyone remembers WhatsApp at acquisition and watches Twitter t…

I would be surprised if there tech team was larger than 2000 people. Majority of those people will be marketing, sales, legal, talent/content, etc.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#317

Post by qikInNdOutReply »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #307
bastardoperator wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that complex. Who benefits from these mass layoffs? Everyone at the top benefits, and everyone at the bottom suffers. You are spot on when it comes to impact of layoffs. If you want to destroy productivity, firing people is a sure proof way of doing that. To your point, I can't take any executive seriously if they're not self reflecting on their own failure. Mass layoffs should equal a new board i…

> If you want to destroy productivity, firing people is a sure proof way of doing that. In Spotify’s case, the business not making money, and hence not having a stock price that keeps up with the market, is also a way to destroy productivity. Higher productivity people are probably not going to want to work at a charity.

Have you ever seen some of the heavy hitters, programing game engines for open source? These guys do that, cause they want to recover some sanity after programing crap for companies all day. Sorry to say it, but great works will never flourish in some monpolistic mega cooperation with tribal infighting.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#318

Post by rabuse »

ben7799 wrote: post #125

I've seen some good analyses lately showing spotify's business model just can't survive in the long run with the way things are going in the economy and the record companies are squeezing them while simultaneously maneuvering to own them/buy them over time. Apple/Amazon/Google are diversified giants that can seemingly get away with running things without a need to make as much money as Spotify/Tidal/Whatever which ju…

The music industry really doesn't have a choice in this though. If Spotify and Apple music die out, then it's back to sailing the high seas again, and they get nothing. A Plex-like music streaming app will be born, with an idiot-proof way of downloading music from torrents, and they're fucked.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#319

Post by bastardoperator »

chitowneats wrote: post #289
bastardoperator wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that complex. Who benefits from these mass layoffs? Everyone at the top benefits, and everyone at the bottom suffers. You are spot on when it comes to impact of layoffs. If you want to destroy productivity, firing people is a sure proof way of doing that. To your point, I can't take any executive seriously if they're not self reflecting on their own failure. Mass layoffs should equal a new board i…

> If you want to destroy productivity, firing people is a sure proof way of doing that. Not as sure proof as paying people to do nothing. Or worse, paying people who are actively working against the interests of the company, intentionally or otherwise.

If I pay someone to do nothing, who is at fault? The person who shows up ready to work everyday or the person who made a bad hiring decision and doesn't have the work for that person? I'm not arguing against layoffs, I'm arguing that the people making the hiring mistakes are not accountable. If I as a CFO give the green light to increase the company's workforce by 10% and two years later make a full reverse, that CFO/Board should be let go too or since they're all about taking "personal responsibility" should step down.

Most companies employ a board of narcissists that only care about themselves and their wallet and they get paid the most so I'm not sure your analogy is hitting with me.

Re: Spotify reducing employee base by about 6%

#320

Post by ROTMetro »

lumost wrote: post #284
shmatt wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very naive to think these huge orgs don't have dead weight which is much bigger than 6%. If you start figuring some of your moonshot ideas aren't hitting their OKR's, you have a few options: * Just let them keep doing whatever without delivering what they claim they can * Create new moonshots for them just because * Move them to other products, but that doesn't mean they'll create more value as an org with (now)…

After 1-3 years of tenure things start to look different imo. Sure you get bad hires, and you also get people who become lazy. But on any given project you tend to have some split of people who work on the wrong things, don’t work on anything, or fail to deliver. People who consistently hit one of these categories usually move on on their own - either because of culture fit or comp growth. It’s much easier and health…

And those people become lazy because they put A LOT into the company those first 1-3 years. And after they coast a bit, they usual come back strong because 1. They are intimately familiar with the corporate culture and the internal software paradigm and 2. They have emotional investment. It's like getting divorced in your early 40s because things are not the same as a few years before, and not getting to the good part of a relationship.
Post reply on HN