Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

news.ycombinator.com

291–300 of 522 posts

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really doesn't have to "be what it is". We can strive for actual change. But everyone's still too cushy for that, it seems.

But what actual change do you want when the very founders of these companies like Vimeo, multi-multi-millionaires decide to sell their life's work, customers and workers very well knowing what the fate's gonna be, just to be even more wealthier?

To summarize what I put in another response: I personally care less about holding the multi millionaire into account (though I wouldn't mind it at all) and more about making sure employees over such deals aren't lied to and then have lives upended at the drop of a hat. Workers and customers do not in fact "know what the fate's gonna be" and that's the problem to address.

I won't repeat the same usual solutions again, but I'll mention one thing that already exists: the WARN act. The spirit of this is good, to give employees a 3 month buffer of when their job is ending. But it's clearly abused at worst, and not enforced at best. It's not as good as other countries' worker rights, but ot exists today to be looked at. In addition, severance can help to. This is standard, but even the "generous packages" in the US tend to be on the lower end of what other countries need to do.

Basically, it shouldn't be a drop dead easy decision for a company to mass layoff and have the workers surprised at the facs. It needs to both be slowed down and give immediate short term costs. That's a start of "kinda actual change" to strive for.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

While you may be correct in the sense that, in a public acquisition statement, people should be inferring enormous context and not taking anything said at face value. It's simultaneously true that this is the farthest thing from effective, honest, and clear communication. Reading between the lines here is required precisely because we all know that any acquisition statements made are, at best heavily coded, if not co…

Yeah I agree, I don't think anyone is a fan of this fluff

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hourly rates are inherently risky for clients - you're asking them to part with money with no guaranteed outcome, so there's a natural ceiling where the financial risk becomes untenable regardless of your expertise and reputation. Clients don't buy hours though, they buy solutions. They have problems costing them money or preventing revenue and they'll pay a percentage of that value to solve it. When you price based…

OK so in this case how do you set the price? Based on the final solution to be delivered? Can you give one (or a few) concrete examples by any chance? I am not sure if I fully understood what you meant exactly with your (detailed) reply.

"You make $100, you pay me $20, I make pho you"

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economics are different because the industries are fundamentally different. Software is never "finished" the way a building is finished. More features can always be added to software. If those new features create new product lines and attract new revenue, then the software engineers' salaries are more than paying for themselves. But, this obviously carries risk, that the new thing you develop won't be worth as mu…

I'm not really sure this argument makes sense. Plenty of software I've built is finished, it does the thing I need it to do and I haven't touched it in years. Adding features just because is not a useful way to spend anyone's time, doubly so in a business context.

> Adding features just because is not a useful way to spend anyone's time, doubly so in a business context.

You could make this statement about anything. "Building a new hospital wing just because is not a useful way to spend anyone's time", "Adding an extra drive-thru lane just because is not a useful way to spend anyone's time". The point is that it's not "just because", it's because you believe it can grow your revenue.

On the other hand, if you don't believe that, then don't invest. Nobody's saying you have to. If you think my comment is saying that, you've misread it.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ZIRP was the era of where any tech startup was seen as a good investment no matter how stupid. Take any stupid business that doesn't work, say you do it with tech, get millions thrown at you. Then it was blockchain - same story, conventional business that doesn't work, but with blockchain - boom, instant money. Now the same with AI. > you beg people with experience in software to believe you're trending up Considerin…

> "except if you're selling AI - then it's ok to sell inference at a major loss and figure out monetization later" So the dynamic you attributed to ZIRP is alive and well, just wearing different clothes. Your original framework was "ZIRP allowed this, now real capitalism is correcting it." Now it's "this is permanent, it just rotates themes." These are different arguments. > "Investing in a Ponzi can still be profita…

I'm making the argument that past bubbles like ZIRP, blockchain and now AI have given many engineers the illusion that "engineering" the same product forever is a sustainable endeavor.

Turns out that's not the case and with each bubble popping more and more people get a rude awakening. Some are able to jump on another bubble and keep the gravy train going, but might be left in the dust in the next one and so on.

If anyone was conned, it's primarily the younger engineers who started their career in those bubbles, were never exposed to the financial realities or even forced to think about it, and now get a very unpleasant wake up call.

You may disagree with my argument - but in that case I suggest taking a short position on Bending Spoons & their competitors who appear to be making the same argument and putting their money where their mouth is.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These are already people with specialized needs that the main market leader (Youtube) cannot fulfill. Isn't this just a bigger reason why these people won't leave? Assuming the acquirer isn't dumb enough to remove the core benefit that comes from their highest paying customers, they will keep providing those, and those customers won't churn. And I think this is a safe assumption, considering it's the primary goal a…

My TLDR response here would be this: Vimeo isn't Evernote and people are paying a lot more to expect more. The nature of this means that smaller bits of "product rot" will push them away faster than what a consumer would tolerate. These are already people who needed to deliberately avoid Youtube, so they aren't afraid to migrate again if needed. There's also a lot more competition with Vimeo than there is with YouTub…

Totally reasonable take, thanks for going in depth.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#297
post #190
post #172

From the previous press about the aquisition: BendingSpoon CEO: "At Bending Spoons, we acquire companies with the expectation of owning and operating them indefinitely, and we look forward to realizing Vimeo’s full potential as we reach new heights together" Vimeo CEO: "We are excited about this partnership, which we believe will unlock even greater focus for our team and customers as we continue to strive towards ou…

After reading through the other comments about bending spoons and reading yours again: the bending spoons CEO is technically telling the truth! They intend to run the acquired companies forever. After cutting most of the staff, but he didn’t say that part of course.

The Vimeo CEO is also right -- this action technically unlocks greater focus for their team!

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will be hiring up but not the same people. Bending Spoons tends to replace high silicon valley wages with high Italy wages which is a considerable saving.

This is why I can't take any anti-immigration sentiments seriously in this country. An american founded company runs a business for 20 years, sells it off overseas, and the new owners kick all Americans out of the equation. Response from America: "well that's just business, I guess". It was never about preserving American labor.

If the company was profitable they wouldn't have needed to sell. It was always living on borrowed time. If a US owner bought it they'd have done exactly the same thing (layoffs) albeit possibly with new jobs in a different state than country.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of customers is, effectively, infinite though. YouTube continues to be engineered and continues to grow. It could have, realistically, been finished over a decade ago. But they repeated branch out into new markets with new features, and that seems to work from them.

The new features are an order of magnitude less complexity to build than the main feature - hosting video at scale, which is complete and just requires maintenance.

> hosting video at scale,

I'm going on a limb here and saying that the scale that YouTube was running on back in 2010-2015 is not the same scale as now, and if they had left their whole infrastructure unchanged, a "finished product", so to speak, the site would have been feeling dated and would have eventually been killed off.

Re: Tell HN: Bending Spoons laid off almost everybody at Vimeo yesterday

#300

I am surprised so many people don't understand the business model of Bending Spoons or are bewildered by it. In conventional infrastructure and product development you need engineering staff to build the product; once the product is built you need very little engineering. If you build a house you don't keep the builders on payroll once it's built to keep "building" it - you may need maintenance staff but that's it -…

The economics are different because the industries are fundamentally different. Software is never "finished" the way a building is finished. More features can always be added to software. If those new features create new product lines and attract new revenue, then the software engineers' salaries are more than paying for themselves. But, this obviously carries risk, that the new thing you develop won't be worth as mu…

It is absolutely true that software can be finished, it's just that software appears to be dead if it hasn't had any work done on it for years. You don't need to keep adding features and changing the software ad infinitum.

Just like with your building analogy and with other car analogies presented here, software does need some maintanence every now and again to keep it up to date - with security fixes, compiling to a newer platform, integrating fixes from dependencies, etc. And yes while buildings may be finished they stil require regular maintance if they are used.

Post reply on HN