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

Buffer Layoffs

open.buffer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 429 posts

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#411

Post by swamp40 »

sulam wrote: post #357

Two things jumped out at me. 1) They planned to spend 1/3 of their remaining cash on flying people around the world to meet f2f. Whoah! They need a CFO with some real power, because that is absurd. 2) Speaking of needing a CFO, one of the first things a CFO will probably point out to them is that their cash target is off by 100%. They're targeting hitting 50% of today's ARR sometime next year, yet they plan to grow A…

Maybe if they had cancelled their previous 7 "retreats", they wouldn't be in this predicament...

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#412

Post by freestockoption »

"We had just come out of a long experiment with self-management"

Why do startups do these huge management experiments? My company did the flat thing too and they spent a few months trying to get people to understand it. Probably burning up 5hr/wk for each person. Until they almost ran out of money. By then people were really confused. I think it almost killed the company due to the politics and red tape it created (strange, it was supposed to eliminate it).

My opinion is that it's hard enough to run a startup, let alone trying to invent a new management methodology. Best to go with what people already know. It may not be perfect, but at least there's some prior experience with it.

Just like how most would advise using the programming language and platform you know to build your initial product, rather than trying to to learn something that you think might be better.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#413

Post by philgo20 »

sulam wrote: post #357

Two things jumped out at me. 1) They planned to spend 1/3 of their remaining cash on flying people around the world to meet f2f. Whoah! They need a CFO with some real power, because that is absurd. 2) Speaking of needing a CFO, one of the first things a CFO will probably point out to them is that their cash target is off by 100%. They're targeting hitting 50% of today's ARR sometime next year, yet they plan to grow A…

Same reaction. They might be super transparent and everyone (in the comments at the bottom of the post) are in awe of it, but these numbers just make no sense.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#414

Post by rhizome »

btilly wrote: post #405
rhizome wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, and I think they cause more problems than they solve.

I agree, but why? My take is that the advice in those books is great advice for those seeking to gain and hold power in organizations. All else being equal, you should want the person running your organization to have mastered those ideas and be able to apply them productively for your organization. That said, having an organization full of people who want to gain and hold power is a very, very bad thing. While you w…

you are going to see an anti-pattern where a bunch of people who have no business trying to play Machiavellian games, attempt to do so.

We aren't going to see it, we already see it every day. The books are poison.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#415

Post by qmr »

abglassman wrote: post #41
bovermyer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, but the founders themselves took a 40% pay cut each for the next year. That says to me that they value their employees enough that they chose that route rather than lay off an additional person. It's a strong gesture.

And the founders each loaned the company $100k out of their own pockets at "the lowest possible interest rate." There's a lot of laudable humility and self-accountability in this post and the actions they've taken.

I read that as weasel word bullshit. The lowest possible rate would be 0.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#417

Post by blablablame »

rco8786 wrote: post #399
aianus wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference? Equity in a public company is cash. You can even lock in what your RSUs will be worth when they vest with some options contracts.

Because it's apples to oranges. You take a larger chunk of illiquid stocks/options at a private company in exchange for the risk that it won't go public one day. That's an active tradeoff people are making whether they know it or not, so you can't compare salaries at a private company and illiquid equity to salaries + liquid equity at a public company.

So if I enter a casino with 100 bucks set on betting on number 23, it means I actually own 1000 bucks? (or whatever that gives you?) Giving stock on a public company you can sell the moment that vests is valuable. Owning stock on a private company that you can't sell, can't probably cash in unless they IPO, etc is not.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#418

Post by blablablame »

balls187 wrote: post #226
elif wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no experience with SF, but when talking about trans-atlantic flights, business class is less of a luxury than normal. If you are tall, overweight, etc. sitting in a small seat for 10 hours can cause all kinds of joint, spine, and circulatory issues.

Interesting. I am very overweight, and I never have an issue flying coach on transatlantic flights. I've found most flights from US to Europe typically have more legroom, than domestic counterparts. Typically I will pay for the 1st class upgrade for domestic flights, but fly coach.

I'm 5'6 and normal weight, I did a standard flight from EU->San Francisco and on the return when checking in I bought pretty much any update that was available to give me more leg room/space. I swear I will never do another 5+ hour flight that isnt at least business class. I had back pain for a month. My feet were swollen for a whole week that my shoes didn't confortably fit, etc that I will easily lose a paying gig over doing a flight like that ever again.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#419

Post by scottmmjackson »

x0x0 wrote: post #120
rdoherty wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree 100%. I've worked for multiple companies that say "we're a family", then lay off people with no warning or remorse. Businesses are not families.

They're families when it benefits the business. And businesses are cutthroat capitalists when it benefits them. All that family nonsense is just to talk employees out of looking after their own interests. Your relationship with your employer is inherently antagonistic, and anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you some BS. That doesn't mean you can't work well together, but sometimes your interests align with the…

This is one of those situations where having worked a retail job in your life can really impart some wisdom into you. Retailers often give their minimum-wage grunts this song and dance about "family" and "performance tiers" and all that- and the grunts will tell you that it takes a couple years for some people to internalize that it's all a scam to make you work harder for minimum wage.

Your employer will not take care of you. It is your job as an employee to make sure they meet you halfway.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#420

Post by robhunter »

jea wrote: post #166
OliverJones wrote: post #136

> Leo and I are committing $100k each in the form of a loan at the lowest possible interest rate, with repayment only when Buffer reaches a healthy financial position. Savings: $200,000. Oops. This isn't savings. It's high-priority debt. Investors really want to invest in the future of the company, not the past. If these guys want to serve their company, they'll (a) write this off their personal books, considering it…

People who know about tax law apparently.

I was wondering about that - they already took out $1M each in the last fundraising round at all - why draw a $200K+ salary and give half of it to taxes when you've already got plenty in the bank?
Post reply on HN