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

Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 329 posts

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#131

Post by AlwaysRock »

mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

Do you actually believe that CEOs are seeing other companies doing layoffs and sending off emails to someone saying hey we need to do layoffs too?

It seems much more likely to me that many companies over hired and/or have 2-4% of their staff they were planning on letting go anyway and now that so many other companies are doing layoffs it allowed them to cut other low performers without being the only company in the news.

We talk all the time about large company bloat. This just seems like normal annual pruning + a little extra from over hiring during covid + a chance to cut xyz projects that havent worked out or someone doesnt like or whatever without catching as much bad pr as they normally would.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#132

Post by PragmaticPulp »

mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

I don't know about Confluent, but I can tell you that sales (and therefore revenue) have seen significant drops in most industries. This is wholly expected in a rising rate environment.

When sales drop, revenue also falls. When revenue falls, models get re-evaluated and numbers get re-calculated. Reducing expenses becomes a priority.

When reducing expenses becomes a priority, SaaS contracts get evaluated very closely. Unnecessary seats are removed. Contracts are re-negotiated. Income for SaaS companies like Confluent drop rapidly, and they may continue to drop more. So I don't think this is blind trend-following, I think this is a rational response to a rapidly changing market.

A company can be profitable and it can still make sense to lay off certain employees. In-house recruiter positions are some of the first to be cut right now because companies are pulling back on hiring. If you have a hiring freeze and very low hiring forecasts for the next year, why would you continue to employee a lot of recruiters?

Market conditions change. Companies adapt to the change. When you have people in positions that are seeing less demand for the coming year, it doesn't make sense to keep them on the payroll and have them sit idle. It's rational to readjust the workforce.

Nobody likes getting laid off, but no position is truly permanent.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#133

Post by throwaway24124 »

InTheArena wrote: post #56

Oh my sweet summer child.... As someone who lived through the .COM crash and implosion and then 2008, any company with "strong cash reserves" and "trajectory to profitability" is not making more money than they are spending. They are, to use the SV term - losing runway. This is catastrophic because it's infeasible to raise money right now to extend the runway. If the plane is not airborne (making significantly more m…

So I work for a company with "strong cash reserves" and "trajectory to profitability", and I was a child in 2008. We haven't done any layoffs yet, but it's definitely possible. Any advice for someone in my position with no recession experience?

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#134

Post by philipwhiuk »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #132
mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

I don't know about Confluent, but I can tell you that sales (and therefore revenue) have seen significant drops in most industries. This is wholly expected in a rising rate environment. When sales drop, revenue also falls. When revenue falls, models get re-evaluated and numbers get re-calculated. Reducing expenses becomes a priority. When reducing expenses becomes a priority, SaaS contracts get evaluated very closely…

On a macro-economic level though this is a negative doom loop.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#135

Post by iafiaf »

I am not joining this pity-party.

Companies hire tech workers to stifle their competition; whilst keeping their workers 'sedated' on fake projects (i.e. projects that are paraded as important, but the 'inner-circle' knows well its just to keep the nerds happy). During tough times, its not unreasonable for a company to trim their fat. Personally, tech and academia has been bloated for over a decade now. So no foul here.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#136

Post by kdazzle »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #127
hallarempt wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They never are. A recent study investigated this and neither stock price nor productivity nor profitability improved. All mass layoffs do is crater employee morale. And yes, it's a "others are jumping into the lake with their clothes on, let's get our brooks brothers shirts wet, too" thing without any rational cogitation involved..

What should a business do that has more people on payroll than their revenues can support?

Hiring freeze, for one. Then anyone that leaves won’t be replaced and headcount will (presumably) go down trauma free.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#137

Post by willcipriano »

andsoitis wrote: post #40
tgv wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a pretty one-dimensional view of a company's goal. Well, many have, especially the higher-ups in the US, of course, making those vision statements more of a joke than they ever were. But for some, companies have a responsibility towards their employees, customers and environment as well. In your hyper-financialized viewpoint, the CEO's job should be to make as much money for him/herself as possible.

> In your hyper-financialized viewpoint, the CEO's job should be to make as much money for him/herself as possible. No, the CEO is meant to optimize not for themselves, but for the owners of the company. If the CEO didn't do that, the board should fire them.

But what if the board are optimizing for themselves as well?

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#138

Post by britzkopf »

CydeWeys wrote: post #126
ajkjk wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it inconceivable that layoffs are the right choice for a business?

Some businesses, sure. Some of the big tech companies that are doing layoffs though (like Google) are just fine financially, and are losing two decades' worth of employee morale and goodwill for a temporary stock bump that is already dissipating. Memegen is a firestorm, and everyone is now talking about the importance of being on safe projects and staying away from experimental/unproven ones. That's going to hurt Goo…

What is memegen?

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#139

Post by giaour »

mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

I'm sure there is a "monkey see, monkey do" peer pressure aspect to the current wave of layoffs, but don't forget that hedge funds and activist investors have been actively lobbying for these job cuts: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/hedge-fund-billionaire-goo...

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#140

Post by bombcar »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #127
hallarempt wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They never are. A recent study investigated this and neither stock price nor productivity nor profitability improved. All mass layoffs do is crater employee morale. And yes, it's a "others are jumping into the lake with their clothes on, let's get our brooks brothers shirts wet, too" thing without any rational cogitation involved..

What should a business do that has more people on payroll than their revenues can support?

I think the argument is that you shouldn't get into the position where mass layoffs are the solution, just like you shouldn't get into the position where gastric bypass surgery is your only option.

Something like each team is maintaining themselves at a proper rate, laying off inside the team as necessary. But even then you will at times have to fire entire teams, but those aren't really a "mass layoff" so much as "we're not doing X anymore".

Post reply on HN