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

Patreon laying off 20% of staff

patreon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 293 posts

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#191

Post by UmYeahNo »

dewey wrote: post #184
dylan604 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then figure out a way to NOT fire them like reduce the salary of the c-suite staff by 50% so they are only making 300% more than the average workers. or reduce c-suite salary to the lowest wage while allowing them to live off of their stock and other benefits like company cars, expense accounts, etc. granted, that's for the larger companies, but the bigger companies never do anything like that

> Like reduce the salary of the c-suite staff by 50% Perfect way to lose your staff to your competitor.

Let 'em have em. They already messed up this company, let them go mess up the competition now. Sounds like a plan. Encourage the lowest performers to go.

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#192

Post by scottLobster »

roenxi wrote: post #160
codegeek wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a founder/CEO myself (a very small company so I don't have experience of mass layoffs for full disclosure). However, I don't get this explanation. If you feel genuine responsibility for the people, then figure out a way to NOT fire them. Or be honest and admit that the company needs to make more money/cut costs. Trust me, no one wants to hear "we love you so much but we have to fire you and I feel so bad". It ju…

The paradox can be resolved by assuming they are fallible and limited human beings - they're laying a bunch of people off, they understand at some level that this is evidence that their poor hiring and management decisions have caused some amount of unnecessary suffering, so they feel bad. But they aren't foresighted enough to have handled the situation appropriately in advance . Or they might have run into the limit…

Is it? Another is that modern society has created a system where advancing to the top ranks of corporate and political leadership requires mediocrity, and excellence is actively discouraged past a certain level of authority.

The mediocre have just enough capability to do something right, but little enough that they're constantly surpassed by their more talented peers and never feel safe. So they go into "soft skills" that their more talented peers aren't interested in, and sandbag themselves with authority once they get it. For an extreme example, nobody is ever firing Mark Zuckerberg no matter how many obviously stupid bets he makes, and even if they did his family would have enough wealth for the next 10 generations at least.

This problem is hardly new or exclusive to tech, but we've endured enough decades of Silicon Valley navel-gazing TED talks without now trying to whitewash them as "well they're just ordinary people". Yeah, and I wouldn't trust an ordinary person to fly a plane, why should we feel good about them running companies?

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#193

Post by cootsnuck »

fourseventy wrote: post #140
officialchicken wrote: post #19

Bottom line: How do these layoffs increase the successful outcome of product launches on the platform in any way?

Well if the company goes out of business because its not making enough profit then all product launches will cease.

Saying that would be a much more reasonable layoff announcement. "Shit is good. But not that good. If we don't change course now, things may be less than good."

If that's what they actually believe, they could just say it.

They don't because optics are more important than honesty. Can't spook would be investors. Must control the market's narrative about the viability and growth-trajectory of your company at all times. It's tiring.

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#194

Post by vladms »

Grombobulous wrote: post #142
K0balt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because, and I say this as a person who has made these calls, some leaders do feel a genuine responsibility for the people that work for them. Perhaps too, the ones that don’t, want people to think that they do. But as a founder and CEO by far the most emotionally taxing thing I have ever had to do is cut staff for the good of the company. You want to treat people the way you would want to be treated if you were…

I think what you’re describing is only a fraction of leaders and possibly a small minority of them. This concept is especially not applicable to profitable companies who have layoffs anyway. Hyper-optimization and AI adoption isn’t actually a business requirement if your business is making a profit. Plenty of businesses refuse to play that game and still make themselves a good living. Founders who want to claim emoti…

The profit by itself does not tell the whole story. There are loan repayments, investments and possibly other financial deals.

> Founders who want to claim emotional connection to their employees should think about things like converting the company to full employee ownership

In a previous (very small) company I worked we have tried something similar that and, guess what, some people refused. They just preferred market level salary, freedom and no ownership worries, rather than take some risks. They were good employees so we just continued with them. But I learned that not everybody has the same views and wishes, and life is quite complex (I was a founder and was always interested by ownership, so was quite surprised about their reaction).

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#195

Post by ryandvm »

powerpcmac wrote: post #5

The rich get richer and the poor get more AI edited and toned condolence posting.

I still don't understand the economics of the full AI rollout.

Who the hell is buying anything if more than 50% of the workforce is unemployed? And among the post-AI employable, every job that isn't highly skilled is going to have the wages pushed to the floor due to rampant unemployment.

None of this shit works unless we figure out "Star Trek welfare"...

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#196

Post by scott_w »

whatever1 wrote: post #177
K0balt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because, and I say this as a person who has made these calls, some leaders do feel a genuine responsibility for the people that work for them. Perhaps too, the ones that don’t, want people to think that they do. But as a founder and CEO by far the most emotionally taxing thing I have ever had to do is cut staff for the good of the company. You want to treat people the way you would want to be treated if you were…

Why a company has to survive but not its people? For example when it comes to the IRS bill, the company will literally cease operations and sell all of its assets to pay IRS. Why the employees do not deserve this?

> Why a company has to survive but not its people?

If the company collapses, those people lose their jobs anyway?

> Why the employees do not deserve this?

It's not about what employees "deserve," it's about the simple fact that the law allows the tax authorities to wind up a business to cover the tax bill. See the UK, where HMRC wound up Rangers FC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_and_liquidation...).

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#197

Post by zer00eyz »

codegeek wrote: post #92
K0balt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because, and I say this as a person who has made these calls, some leaders do feel a genuine responsibility for the people that work for them. Perhaps too, the ones that don’t, want people to think that they do. But as a founder and CEO by far the most emotionally taxing thing I have ever had to do is cut staff for the good of the company. You want to treat people the way you would want to be treated if you were…

I am a founder/CEO myself (a very small company so I don't have experience of mass layoffs for full disclosure). However, I don't get this explanation. If you feel genuine responsibility for the people, then figure out a way to NOT fire them. Or be honest and admit that the company needs to make more money/cut costs. Trust me, no one wants to hear "we love you so much but we have to fire you and I feel so bad". It ju…

I have been through the process of cutting staff in a few different roles (director, outside consultant), more times than I care to count.

> If you feel genuine responsibility for the people, then figure out a way to NOT fire them.

I have never seen that end well. One deep, clean cut, is far better than many little ones.

If you have to do back to back cuts because the first wasn't deep enough people start to panic. If you cut back the niceties, you're telling folks there is trouble and you're likely putting off that inevitability (and making the eventual cut deeper, with smaller pay outs for everyone).

The moment you sense the issue, look at the numbers. Figure out what the worst case scenario is, and look at that. Does a deep cut get the people going severance, and the "lets save everyone" approach mean your locking the front door and handing out last paychecks?

> Or be honest and admit that the company needs to make more money/cut costs.

This isn't the convo you have with the people who are leaving, this is the conversation you have to have with the people you didn't let go. Your choices are A) look like an asshole for cutting too many people or B) look like you did not cut deep enough and people panic or see that it isnt the last round. There is NO in between. The only thing that spares you in scenario A is that you gave people enough runway in their exit - 16 weeks (from the article) is a great starting point, but a week per year is an insult.

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#198

Post by buellerbueller »

keiferski wrote: post #188
buellerbueller wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I hardly think expressing some understanding of the position of a company owner makes me a fan of Ayn Rand. And just a tip: many of your comments seem to belong on reddit, not here. Different culture, where short obnoxious takes aren't welcome.

brevity is the soul of wit, brah, but you seem allergic to both. my point, if you insist on me being long-winded about it, was to make an allusion to the fact that you have a positively Randian take on employee-employer relations, where CEOs/founders/owners can do no wrong, and employes are merely "bitter" obstacles that must be dealt with in order for former to receive that which is due to the morally superior. perhaps the reason this take is common on HN is that the version of capitalism that is running its course in the world today is good for only a very few?

personally, i preferred the short version

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#199

Post by cootsnuck »

Barbing wrote: post #155
chrisss395 wrote: post #103

I see others mentioning the severance package being decent for a US company. I'm glad they received something, but I'm sorry, can we stop calling this decent? It's markedly lopsided when a company can one day decide to lay off a large portion of their workforce and think 4 months is anywhere near acceptable. The average time to find a new job is significantly longer, especially depending on role and seniority. I'm ti…

>instead of actively running the business. I’d like to be convinced of this point.

What about your CEO actively spending their time pursuing their own creative interests and doing speaking gigs railing against AI? And posting them on the company YT and his own YT just a week before somberly announcing layoffs where you cite AI as part of the reason... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17_HcR95YBc

To be fair, tech companies I've worked at that have done layoffs have had seemingly full-time CEOs. So I guess at least Jack is having a good time.

Re: Patreon laying off 20% of staff

#200

Post by ponector »

linkjuice4all wrote: post #143
stronglikedan wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an illogical and unrealistic meme template that is...

Yes, much like the “we’re all family but we’re reducing headcount by…” Treat people like professionals: admit that you did a bad job but that you’d rather protect yourself and not give up any of your salary/benefits and instead you are going to layoff your “family”.

We are all family!

They just forgot to mention it is a pretty dysfunctional one.

Post reply on HN