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

Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

newsroom.spotify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#641

Post by paulddraper »

jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

> don't fill up your task when gas is cheap

Of course you should!

> do doughnuts in the parking lot

Of course you shouldn't!

Did Spotify do that?

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#642

Post by I_Am_Nous »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #582
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was blind but now I see, we ARE human resources, and it's very likely none of us are irreplaceable, none of us matter really all that much to our employers... Interestingly, there was a really good article in the NY times yesterday that made that exact point: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/03/business/economy/doctors-... Basically, the article was talking about how being a doctor or pharmacist used to be a very…

Quite a stretch from "This company hired too many people and ended up having to lay off some" and "Hmm, maybe we're not as irreplaceable as we like to think" to "Let's all make ourselves less attractive to our employers by threatening to gang up on them." But I guess unionization is the universal solvent for every HR problem around here.

If Human Resources are just replaceable resources, you don't care about them outside of what they can do for you. If a company is consistently failing to recognize their employees as people who deserve dignity, maybe a collective group is necessary to ensure they start to. This can be government based or be a private union, but companies don't usually make changes beneficial to employees without some kind of outside pressure.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#643

Post by lukeschlather »

crazygringo wrote: post #596
jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

This is completely backwards. They didn't hire "for the sake of hiring" -- they hired specifically to build up their podcasting and audiobook efforts, which were totally new products within the app. Which they thought were essential to staying competitive -- e.g. what if people start moving over to Amazon instead with its Music+Wondery+Audible, or other competitors? Now it's turned out those bets haven't been as succ…

I am honestly looking to move to a competitor because of their podcasting and audiobook efforts. Well, and I don't necessarily care about those things per se but Spotify used to be a focused music app, and they keep removing things from the app in favor of whatever new "growth thing" they want to do this year. I never know when I load up the app what is going to have changed and take me an extra 5 minutes to find what I want.

They have done so much damage to their app's usability by trying to "grow" that someone could probably sell me on some ultra-premium subscription that actually had a good music player that functioned more like the music players of 15 years ago.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#644

Post by rPlayer6554 »

jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

You can't have your cake and eat it too. There are plenty of other lower risk companies that have way lower chances of layoffs, but they don't pay as well. Working at a company that tasks risks and has a high rate of return also has a higher chance of making the wrong bet and needing to cut you. If you want a perfectly stable job go work in the government: you'll be practically unfirable.

- someone who was layed off from a FAANG corp. I was not done a disservice, I knew what I was getting into.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#645

Post by dimitrios1 »

ActionHank wrote: post #505
jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

Just remember they signed Joe Rogan for over 200 million and he's not brought in nearly that amount for them. Did they retrench the people who made that decision? Did they retrench the management who approved that contract? Spotify employees should be pushing for some degree of corporate and fiscal responsibility given they are retrenching, but they still gave Joe the bag.

> Just remember they signed Joe Rogan for over 200 million and he's not brought in nearly that amount for them.

The fact that they signed Joe for that amount, and continued to air everything throughout all the controversies, throughout all the COVID years, and through some artist departures over him, signals that he has more than recouped that investment for them.

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-rogan-more-popular-ever-statist...

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#646

Post by marcosdumay »

nojvek wrote: post #472

Post-pandemic, the trend of Corporations raking in higher and higher profits, while needing fewer and fewer staff scares me. The most obvious and likely outcome is it drastically separates the ultra wealthy from middle class. With rise of AI and automation, that trend will likely accelerate. The top 10% hold more than 50% of wealth. It's likely in a few decades, the top 1% will hold more than 50% of the wealth. They…

Short term profits are almost completely defined by historic investment (and thus, historic staff).

How long term profits will react to those changes is entirely still to be seen. There's nothing telling you profits will get higher and higher, or that they will diminish, or anything else.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#647

Post by culopatin »

jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

On the other hand, 17% of headcount had a job during that time. Which one is better?

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#649

Post by rez9x »

crazygringo wrote: post #596
jmarchello wrote: post #495

Anytime I see layoffs like this, All I hear is "We hired for the sake of hiring when money was cheap and we wanted to signal 'growth', But now reality has set in and we need our employees to serve a purpose beyond simply headcount". In my opinion they did these employees a disservice by hiring them in the first place. We need our companies to act more responsibly regardless of the price of capital. Innovate sure, but…

This is completely backwards. They didn't hire "for the sake of hiring" -- they hired specifically to build up their podcasting and audiobook efforts, which were totally new products within the app. Which they thought were essential to staying competitive -- e.g. what if people start moving over to Amazon instead with its Music+Wondery+Audible, or other competitors? Now it's turned out those bets haven't been as succ…

I recently left Spotify for Apple Music, in large part because of this new development path. I don't want podcasts, audiobooks, etc mixed in with my music. I prefer separate apps.

I think what bothered me more was the focus on branching into these new paths without any innovation in the music department--I'm sure there was innovation that wasn't visible to me. I'm tired of the same black and green color scheme. I don't like that I don't have a 'Library' and everything just goes in liked or a playlist.

I think their expansion into other media was a signal to me to look for someone doing a better job at specializing.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#650

Post by I_Am_Nous »

commandlinefan wrote: post #563
fullshark wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the consequence for doing your employees a disservice? Maybe a few of the best and most important employees get jaded and quit. Morale company wide takes a hit. These companies don't seem to care and I guess I'm not sure they should. For me, it's not just morale that's gone to shit, but I feel like I've woken up to the nature of the employer/employee relationship with all these layoffs. I was blind but now I s…

> none of us are irreplaceable But the smart ones know now to be as irreplaceable as possible, however they have to.

Be careful though, my father in law has told stories about people who made themselves irreplaceable by being the only person who can fix a machine because they allegedly fixed it in a way that breaks often enough that they can be the hero. A stain like that on your resume means your burned trust for potentially short term gains and may find trust is not given as easily as a result.
Post reply on HN