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

Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

blog.dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#701

Post by JohnMakin »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #690
JohnMakin wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but we can all agree that stock/$ is pretty fungible and can be exchanged for goods and services in pretty much the same way. So effectively, it is apples to apples.

Stock/cash is not fungible for the company itself. Using shareholders as an ATM is a surefire way to tank a stock, and companies tend to use it as an absolute last resort.

We aren’t talking in the context of the company though. The gp comment said it’s not an apples to apples comparison to say a CEO makes 100x an employee because CEO’s compensation is stock.

If the CEO’s stock compensation has a monetary value of $100 and the employees salary is $1, it absolutely is fair to say the CEO is compensated 100x the employee, regardless of it is stock or cash. The CEO can borrow against this and use it as effectively cash, if they are unable or do not want to exercise the options. This is such an insanely common practice and absurdly pedantic argument that I wonder why we’re even having it. Does the distinction matter? Of course it does not.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#702

Post by bravetraveler »

bink wrote: post #694
bravetraveler wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing goods/services. Perhaps the qualifier "being publicly traded" will help

I think the question is more for investors. If the company isn't growing and isn't paying a dividend, why would I buy shares?

I bring attention the qualifier; if it's not performing and likely won't be, why is it traded?

A company that is relatively stable and holds no grand world-domination-to-feed-shareholder plans is still nice

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#703

Post by xeromal »

jrs235 wrote: post #699
xeromal wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make a decent salary as a programmer (150k) but my house only cost 250k and my mortgage is about 1400. How I see it, if I have to flip burgers to keep my house, I can pull it off. I can't imagine have a mortgage that's 10gs a month.

>if I have to flip burgers to keep my house Sadly it seems it's unlikely they'll hire you even though they might need the help that bad because they're afraid of paying to train you and then you leaving once something better, and in your line of work, comes along.

I mean I just meant a low paying job. During COVID which even have more oversupply, I was bored and I was drive around doing doordash and other delivery services even though I had my tech job. There is always a surefire way of making one or two thousand a month here in the states if you're properly motivated.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#704

Post by John_Cena »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #633
mrthrowaway999 wrote: post #583

I'm sad to see so much venom in these comments. HN of old would have tried to delve into the details and find something to learn from this.

This literally happens every single time there is a big layoff announcement on HN; at this point it's completely predictable. People love these stories as a place to vent (not that I necessarily blame them), but I do find that these kind of stories always attract the lowest quality comments. E.g. "Why hasn't the CEO committed harakiri!" Which is always a bit sad to me because I think the biggest mistake (especially i…

Ahem The CEO's breath smelled of genitals

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#705

Post by bruckie »

tschellenbach wrote: post #551

The same forces that enable high tech salaries, also make layoffs more likely. - The market for talent is competitive. So companies bid up to the absolute max they can - The market for managers is also competitive. Creating dynamics that lead to larger teams and raises for team members - Companies allow things like remote work, which is a perk, but also has a lot of abuse in terms of how much work gets done The end r…

> Your manager doesn't get upset when you leave, bit weird how people feel so differently when they get fired.

When you leave, your manager loses 1/N of team productivity. When you get fired, you lose 100% of your income.

I bet the manager would be more upset if the entire team quit. But even then, they'd still have their job—for a while, at least.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#706

Post by duped »

mulmen wrote: post #531
DrillShopper wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do those metrics count "number of people laid off" explicitly? We know they do implicitly because laying off people makes the company more profitable, but is there any penalty for killing jobs? If not, shouldn't there be?

The purpose of a corporation is to make money, not jobs.

We live in a society where there are more metrics than money. The entire notion of corporate amorality is a thin veil that people use to hide their own unethical and immoral behavior.

That's why I made the comment that layoffs are the trolley problem. It's an ethical question and companies don't always make the ethical choice, for example choosing profit over jobs in a downturn.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#707

Post by switch007 »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #466

Remember how there used to be a blog (or maybe it was a Tumblr, I forget) that documented every "Our incredible journey" post that inevitably announced the start-up's closure? I think we need another one for "An update from ", as this has seemingly become the standard subject to use when you're announcing layoffs or data breaches. I saw an identical headline earlier today from Sony announcing a studio closure: https:…

Nailed it. We got "An update on..." when they cancelled our Christmas parties.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#708

Post by John_Cena »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #203
insane_dreamer wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what's better than a great severance plan? Keeping your job.

Not necessarily. If you're actually good at your job, you typically end up with an even better job: https://hbr.org/2018/10/research-when-getting-fired-is-good-...

Yeah I end up with like twice the salary, but the job search is always the worst parts of my life.

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#709

Post by rsanek »

gretch wrote: post #602
sosodev wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously the win is not laying people off. It's no secret that tech companies have not been hiring for sustainability and that sucks.

"It's no secret that tech companies have not been hiring for sustainability and that sucks." Does it suck? It means that someone got a job where they didn't really have to do that much and got paid anyway. An alternative is where that job was never offered. And then we're complaining that there's no jobs. Also, no, the solution is not to "just hire the perfect amount". Sure if we could just do anything perfectly ever…

> where they didn't really have to do that much

Source?

Re: Dropbox announces 20% global workforce reduction

#710

Post by Seattle3503 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #586
elric wrote: post #90

I'm always a bit confused by profitable companies with (presumably) large reserves laying off lots of people. I get that they want to remain profitable. But sure 500ish people could be put to some use? A new product, a new market, a spinoff. Whatever? Are you telling me that no one in such a big, wealthy company of clever engineers has any use for a bunch of talented people?

Interestingly enough, I once worked at a company that saw how huge amounts of money could be made taking the exact opposite approach. This all came about because this company had built a couple of hugely successful, and profitable, enterprise software products. So this company then decided to plow a ton of money into building out other products. The company was also pretty famous for having a high employee bar, and t…

My guess is Oracle.
Post reply on HN