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

Plaid Layoffs

plaid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 345 posts

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#271

Post by cowgoesmoo »

andersonmvd wrote: post #71

> Macroeconomic conditions have changed substantially this year. Despite being well-diversified across every category of financial services, we are seeing customers across the industry experiencing slower-than-expected growth. sry for the stupid question, but does anyone have a good breakdown/video/article/explanation on the market change? I have some idea, but I'm not a pro.

I highly recommend this video for a deeper understanding of macroeconomic trends and the role of central banks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHe0bXAIuk0

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#273

Post by disambiguation »

jamiequint wrote: post #250
ShamelessC wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a straw man, you’re just debating the least charitable interpretation. It is true that VC-backed tech startups hire in large batches if they can ”afford to”. This “adds value” (for a potential acquisition or IPO) by attaining the intellectual property and time of said hired employees in writing. One or two of them are “good enough” to nail new record growth. Some survive by way of credentials, as their @stan…

"founder model of get as big as you can, as fast as you can, by hiring as many as you can, so that the valuations keep getting bigger and bigger so you can cash out" I'm pretty sure I just directly interpreted what they said.

> This is a strawman. Nobody operates this way. You don't raise more money by hiring more people. In some markets you raise more by making more revenue..

heacount has been used as a proxy for revenue for a long time, though recessions often force companies to return to fundamentals.

that being said this is a game where the rules are largely made up (i.e what weird signals are VC's in the mood for?) so treating either or as absolute and constant at all times is as much of a fallacy as the strawman.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#275

Post by playoff_burner »

aperson_hello wrote: post #53
monero-xmr wrote: post #19

Dear Floofernistas, This is the hardest thing I have ever done. The market changed - I thought we would make more money, now I think we will make less money. Therefore we have discovered that we don't need all of you. If you aren't needed, here is some money. I hope this is enough money that the internet isn't too mad at me. Remaining Floofernistas, please be kind to the ex-Floofernistas, and help them. Again, I am s…

What's the better response here? (Other than not over-hiring in the first place).

For this specific case, not much. They've been soft-signalling this for at least weeks. H-1B holders have termination date + 2 months to find a new job (both in terms of 4 months severance & in terms of immigration law), so they're good til April. The rest of us have 4 months of income (2 months of pay + 2 months lump sum) so we're also good til April even if we have $0 in rainy day funds. The revenue/cost problem highlighted in the email has been widespread company knowledge since at least July, and sincere efforts were made out in the open to cut costs elsewhere so as not to incur this problem.

These layoffs have been signalled for at least weeks, and the signal's been clear enough that it's most of our internal Blind discussion.

I suspect the backlash on this thread is more ideological than anything. "Plaids" is not something I would even take notice of, let alone issue with, because this company has a genuine, strong, caring culture. Even the layoffs came with a personal touch with a barrage of 1:1's and offers to help. Insofar as the layoffs could not have been avoided without dampening the company's position in a competitive space, I do not understand why people are getting so mad on my and others' behalf. It was either this or a SaaS startups not being able to put SaaS margins and getting eaten by its competitors as it tries to figure out growth.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#277

Post by mynameisvlad »

nunez wrote: post #239
mynameisvlad wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is having one of the worst days of his/her life Oh no, how sad. Pretty sure the people being laid off are having far worse days than the person who gasp had to write a letter.

i mean sure, yeah, they're maybe cash-rich, but firing people still sucks unless you're inhuman. knowingly upending hundreds of lives and families who are less financially secure during a not-recession-recession and a slow hiring market must be emotionally difficult to deal with.

Seriously? What even is this take?

It's nowhere *near* as emotionally difficult as... You know... Being the person who's life got upended.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#278

Post by dimmke »

tacticalturtle wrote: post #254
bink wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiousity, why do you have Plaid? They were pretty aggressively recruiting over the past year and while I didn't respond I was tempted to at least look into them.

Not OP, but the idea of trusting Plaid to safely store the username and password to my bank account (ie, one of the most sensitive online accounts that I have) seems too risky to tolerate. I also suspect it’s a violation of my bank’s terms of service, and in event of a data breach I’d be out of luck

Basically this, and the fact that so many other fintech companies try to act like the only possible option is to use Plaid (seriously, a lot of them will only let you connect accounts via Plaid.)

It's already a service I don't trust, and the attempt of other companies to force me to use it has made me dislike it even more.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#279

Post by RC_ITR »

nunez wrote: post #235
RC_ITR wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think this is a sign that plaid is anywhere near their last valuation of $13bn, then I have news for you. The real problem is inequality. Zach is facing consequences, but the drop from $1bn to $100mn (a 10x decline in wealth) is so much less impactful than $250k to $25k (illustrative of what an employee is more likely facing).

maybe for you, but if this person was living on a >$100mn lifestyle, then that 10x decline will actually hurt them!

You are wholly incorrect.

Needs are a hierarchy and the impacts along that hierarchy are non-linear.

The billionaire may complain more and often do.

Re: Plaid Layoffs

#280

Post by ShamelessC »

jamiequint wrote: post #250
ShamelessC wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a straw man, you’re just debating the least charitable interpretation. It is true that VC-backed tech startups hire in large batches if they can ”afford to”. This “adds value” (for a potential acquisition or IPO) by attaining the intellectual property and time of said hired employees in writing. One or two of them are “good enough” to nail new record growth. Some survive by way of credentials, as their @stan…

"founder model of get as big as you can, as fast as you can, by hiring as many as you can, so that the valuations keep getting bigger and bigger so you can cash out" I'm pretty sure I just directly interpreted what they said.

Okay, well you win (?) but you realize this modification is essentially the same, stupid idea of excessive hiring of incredibly expensive engineers, burning lots of good will between effected developers when (planned, frankly) layoffs occur.
Post reply on HN