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

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#771

Post by pmelendez »

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…

>Honestly, what do you expect Spotify to do? Not try to stay competitive

That's a reductionist way of looking at it, but an alternative way would have been what Daniel said on that letter; They were "more productive and less efficient and they needed to be both".

From my ivory tower I do see some things that could have been done differently, such as adding only one new offering (maybe just podcasting), or rely more in contractors than employees and set the temporary expectation of the roles up front.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#772

Post by coldpie »

bede wrote: post #762
coldpie wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for a few months Heh. There's a zillion perfectly good competitors in this space. Why not just permanently switch to one that doesn't fund conspiracy theory wackos?

Not absolute, but pausing a sub with an explanation sends an immediate message. Which services would you recommend? I'm mostly after a broad and fresh electronic music catalogue.

I use DI.fm (lots of fresh electronic music there!) and Google Music via my YouTube subscription.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#773

Post by deng »

Spotify is a completely mistery to me. I'm asking: What does Spotify really have? They don't own the music. They don't own podcasts (OK, they may have some exclusives like Rogan). All they have is a license, a bit of software, and lots of users. How will they ever turn a profit? What's the end game here?

I just switched my whole family from Spotify to Deezer and it was literally a matter of minutes. There are even services that move all your favorites/playlists over and it worked flawlessly.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#774

Post by zehaeva »

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…

Can't wait for the Butlerian Jihad to begin!

Flippancy aside, as others have pointed out, Spotify isn't turning a profit. Other than the tangency of blaming AI for all of our ills, this seems like a non-sequitur.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#775

Post by dalbasal »

So...

Bodybuilders do this thing called "bulking and cutting." The best way to add muscle fast is to overeat. Work out lots. Sleep lots. Eat lots.

You get fat, but you also get muscular because food is never a limiting factor.

Then, they lose the extra fat with a crash diet.

Google, FB and such are such money machines that they never have to cut. They can just bulk. The others... they want some of that rapid growth potential too, but can't afford to add fat forever.

Corporate bulking and cutting.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#776

Post by Tao3300 »

pcurve wrote: post #519
techstacktoe wrote: post #2

All things considered, the note seems honest - lays out the facts and considerations. The severance package seems quite generous as well.

I agree, but this part bothered me. "Today, we still have too many people dedicated to supporting work and even doing work around the work rather than contributing to opportunities with real impact. More people need to be focused on delivering for our key stakeholders – creators and consumers. " While this is likely partly true, this is mostly management's fault. I didn't see anything in the email that talks post-mor…

> too many people dedicated to supporting work and even doing work around the work

Damn, that's every job I've ever had.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#777

Post by commandlinefan »

I_Am_Nous wrote: post #650
commandlinefan wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Actually doesn't matter if you do or if you don't, since it can't be proven. What matters is whether or not somebody accuses you of "fixing it in a way that it breaks".

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#779

Post by lotsofpulp »

mrguyorama wrote: post #764
robin_reala wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it’s just me, but as a CEO if you misjudge enough to have to fire a double-digit percentage of your staff shouldn’t you face some consequences, like demotion or losing your job yourself? Daniel only owns 7.5% so it’s not like he’s a majority that can push anything through.

Since when does the ruling class of C levels and board members feel ANY pain? Any apologism for the "Idea men" and "Decision makers" is absurd until they start feeling the pain from THEIR bad ideas and poor decisions. They will make a shitty zoom recording saying "I take full responsibility for cutting 20% of our yearly payroll" while signing off on their own bonus. Wish I got to sign off on my own bonus!

The members of the board sign off on executive compensation. And shareholders vote for board members.

Re: Spotify will reduce total headcount by approximately 17%

#780

Post by mrguyorama »

iamflimflam1 wrote: post #550
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…

“The graveyards are full of indispensable men(/women)” It doesn’t matter how important or irreplaceable you think you might be - life/businesses/people will carry on without you.

Even if you THINK you are indispensable, even if you are 100% CORRECT that you ARE indispensable, plenty of gamblers exist in management, and will happily try and route around you. Maybe it doesn't work out every time, but it works out often enough to encourage companies to keep doing it.

It's so much easier to fire one person than the entire department. It's really hard for your manager to replace you when your coworkers say "naw we aren't doing their work without being paid their salary". And guess what? If you're a cunt, unions can, you know, not strike! They can 100% stand by as someone gets fucked over. Ask any member of a teachers union.

Companies don't jettison entire profitable divisions of the company to kill Unions in the crib (walmart) because they DON'T get the workers a larger slice of the pie lol. Companies don't play you anti-union propaganda on your training day because unions mean they pay less for talented workers lol. If unions truly reduced the price of real talent, companies would start unions themselves!

Post reply on HN