Live data from Hacker News

Restructuring Announcement

automattic.com

211–220 of 249 posts

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#211
I used to be a big admirer of Matt and Automattic, but after this whole WP Engine episode I've lost respect. I shut down my old wordpress blog, still working on importing the posts as org-mode files onto my new site, I no longer recommend WP to non-techies that ask me how to build a website.

I hope WordPress (and Automattic) turn the ship around but its not looking good at this point.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#213
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we don't talk about what we feel is ideal, we can never strive to achieve it. Its really important to discuss idealism for that reason alone

Good luck with changing human nature, i.e. persuading managers to voluntarily act against their own self-interest. That’s just not how people work. What you say is true in some cases, but not in all cases.

Can't even try if we don't talk about it. The issue with line of 'clear thinking' is it leaves no room for change.

If enough people take talk into action, we could reasonably see a change in behavior. It may come from sources than we don't expect, but it can happen all the same and we only have a chance at getting there if we are wiling to talk about what is ideal and raising that awareness. Its an important piece of that puzzle

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#214
post #6
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the elephant in the room with us now? (Mind filling in?)

The legal threats against WPEngine and their customers, the lawsuits between WP/Automatic/WPF and WPEngine, the banning of several contributors, the takeover of WP Plugins on WP.org, the shenanigans with several check boxes on the login pages of WP.org.

While it wasn't as damaging from a legal or (business) reputational perspective, he also peeked into the Tumblr database in order to doxx people who were making fun of him, which doesn't say great things about his stability or fitness to run a company.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#215
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the people running the business should fire themselves first? You were questioning whether they should , not whether they will. That's what people are responding to. They understand perfectly well who will get fired first.

I was questioning the idealism actually. There’s not much to be achieved by wishing the world was a certain way, it’s generally more useful to deal with the world as it is.

What idealism? The person you responded to said they didn't expect things to change unless there were real consequences. Not expecting things to change is the opposite of idealism.

But even if they were idealistic, arguing with people for wishing the world was better is a genuinely odd thing. If you followed your beliefs, wouldn't you understand that telling people not to wish for things is pointless? If you actually dealt with the world as it is, you would not argue with people on the Internet because changing somebody's mind, particularly in the way you are attempting to do it, is just as much wishful thinking as hoping that CEOs will fire themselves.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#216
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the interest rate matter? Unless you have no cash on hand and are operating soley off debt??

> Unless you have no cash on hand and are operating soley off debt?? Bingo

My employer actually has roughly $100B of cash on hand.

The issue is that they're a publicly-traded company, with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. If they're investing in an internal product that will make back 1% of the money invested in it over the next couple years, but they could have been investing in Treasury Bills that make back 4.5%, they are committing financial malpractice and will be sued accordingly.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#217
This comment thread is just hilarious. When a CEO of a VC-backed startup that you admire does things you disagree with, you find ways to justify their actions. When a CEO that is running an actually successful business and wishes to defend that business legally, you trash him. Be better.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#218
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue was interest rates. Money was free in Feb 2022; the interest rate was literally 0%, and so any cash-generating investment at all is profitable. Fed started raising rates in Apr 2022, at which point leaders started freaking out because they know what higher rates mean, and by Jun 2022 the Fed was raising them in 0.75% increments, which was unheard of in modern economics. By Jan 2023 the rate was 4.5%, which…

> The issue was interest rates. Money was free in Feb 2022; the interest rate was literally 0%, and so any cash-generating investment at all is profitable. Fed started raising rates in Apr 2022, at which point leaders started freaking out because they know what higher rates mean, and by Jun 2022 the Fed was raising them in 0.75% increments, which was unheard of in modern economics. By Jan 2023 the rate was 4.5%, whic…

Because they are publicly traded and subject to lots and lots of checks on corporate governance. The CEO actually didn't want to lay people off (and did a shit-poor job of it when he did). He was getting pressure from the board, who in turn was getting pressure from a lot of activist hedge funds.

Small-fry who operate secretly are able to take the long view and enrich themselves off the masses' stupidity. CEOs of a multi-trillion-$ company that is ~10% of the retirement portfolio of every American are not. At that level you have to go with the market consensus, because you will be ousted and deemed not a fit steward of the enterprise that you are entrusted with otherwise.

Re: Restructuring Announcement

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The business world changes direction faster than companies can adapt. That was my biggest lesson as an entrepreneur: entrepreneurs don't really pivot into product-market fit, the market pivots into them . The reason capitalism works is because there's this huge sea of dream-chasers out there, most of whom will go bankrupt, so that when the market's needs change there is somebody out there to service them, and everybo…

>The market's needs change faster than senior executives can adapt: if they always produced what the market was actually clamoring for, the company would run around like a chicken with its head cut off (this actually happens when the CEO panics, and a key CEO skill, and part of the reason they're paid so much, is the ability to ignore every piece of market data saying "You're not hot anymore. Nobody wants you, and th…

It's kinda their job to not listen. CEOs get bombarded with thousands of pieces of information each week. If they shifted the company direction each time, the company would get nothing wrong. In the immortal words of Ribbonfarm, "CEOs don't steer":

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/11/09/ceos-dont-steer/

A good CEO will let in just the little bit of information that saves the company - this was Andy Grove's pivot to focus on microprocessors over memory chips, or Steve Jobs's turnaround of Apple. You didn't have a good CEO, and got your average mediocre CEO that sets a strategic direction and sticks with it regardless of what the market says.

I'm curious though, if you knew your employer was going under, why not jump ship to the competitor that actually did understand what customers wanted? Employees are economic agents too, and oftentimes competitors are more than happy to hire out of their competition.

Post reply on HN