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

Layoffs at Block

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Layoffs at Block

#861

Post by shimman »

kortilla wrote: post #707
grey-area wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from the bit where he lays 4000 people off, but himself is untouched. Oh and the bit where he claims AI efficiencies are the reason. If I had to do this to a company I’d built I’d fire myself too. It’s an admission of a massive failure of leadership.

Companies grow and shrink. That’s not “a massive failure”.

You're right, it's worse. It's hurting people's lives, maybe it should be considered a crime in America due to how intertwined having a job is with also having access to healthcare, social services, government services, the ability to eat, the ability to have a place to sleep; it all seems extremely dramatic in this context.

All the more reason to tax tech companies more to provide better welfare for the nation because we all know these business magnates are too greedy to care about other humans that aren't them.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#862

Post by [deleted] »

no_wizard wrote: post #514
csallen wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make bad enough decisions, your customers leave, your company dies, and/or you are fired by the board. CEOs get fired all the time, and companies die all the time. It's part of life, and so are layoffs. There's no need for some sort of additional punitive actions to be taken. If you control a company, you have the right to do layoffs, and if you're an employee, you take that risk of being laid off because you…

It’s fine if someone doesn’t believe that executives should not be held to additional high consequence standard, but you’re boiling down this argument without addressing the central element at play which is viability and wealth gap. Now, you can absolutely hold a different position here, that’s okay, I’m fine with that, but at least address it head on. Consider the fact that those getting laid off have disproportiona…

[deleted]

Re: Layoffs at Block

#863

Post by btarmstrong »

Having spent years in fintech partnerships (Kabbage-Amex, Lendio), the pattern Block is going through is familiar — the post-ZIRP reckoning where sprawling product bets get consolidated back to core revenue drivers. I'll also be interested to see whether their Bitcoin/decentralized payments thesis survives the cost-cutting or gets put on the "block" as well (bad Dad jokes). Tpypicall, from what I've seen, the companies that come out stronger from these cycles are the ones that cut to focus/customer value, not just cut to save.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#865

Post by vharuck »

bananamogul wrote: post #131
KittenInABox wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the idea that X doesn't owe you Y is fundamentally at odds with the fact that humans are a cooperative species and survive the best when they are cooperating. A choir can hold a note together because individuals can stop singing to breathe, safely covered by peers who will take their turn to breathe later. What is the point of organizing socially if not for the benefit of all society members? I know we ha…

"humans are a cooperative species" Humans are violent, self-centered tribalists. What species are you referring to? Not homo sapiens.

I don't live in a cave, so humans probably cooperated at least a few times over our history.

(This is also my go-to argument against zero sum economics)

Re: Layoffs at Block

#866

Post by singpolyma3 »

poszlem wrote: post #856
singpolyma3 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong? A company doesn't owe anyone a job. Either they need the employee or they don't.

You can believe that only if you don't care about getting a revolution in your country or extreme populist movements gaining traction. When large numbers of people feel economically disposable, the issue stops being about an individual firm’s right to hire and fire and starts becoming a systemic stability problem. But if you are okay with getting some heads chopped off with a guillotine from time to time, feel free t…

If firms laying off employs they have no use for causing a stability problem then you do indeed have a systemic stability problem which need much deeper fixes than any one firm can provide.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#867

Post by listeria »

askonomm wrote: post #723
121789 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

spain has the highest unemployment rate in the EU. maybe you are ignoring important tradeoffs and are a little too confident about your own opinion on what it means to "manage your company just fine"

Nope, that's Finland now. Spain is nr 2.

But the definition of economically active differs between the two: Finland includes people from ages 15-89, while in Spain you need to be 16 or older. And judging from what I read the rise in unemployment in Finland is attributed to more people entering the workforce.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#868

Post by beAbU »

tombert wrote: post #270
daxfohl wrote: post #48

We'll see how much the AI aspect is true by whether they're thinning out teams equally, or just axing whole initiatives. My impression of Block was that it was mostly a one-trick pony (okay, two if you include CashApp) with a bunch of side initiatives that never seemed to pan out, so I'm expecting it to be more of the latter, with this being more of an admission that they're now in "maintenance mode". Either way, I t…

I'm convinced that these "AI Layoffs" are these companies trying to save face from the absurd overhiring that they did in 2022 and 2023 because apparently they thought that these no-interest loans/free money would just last forever. No one really "knows" how to grow businesses so the easiest way to spend a lot of money quickly is hiring lots of people, whether or not they are "necessary". Then this free money dries u…

My take is that if AI really improved productivity, then that makes labour effectively cheaper. Usually, when labour is cheap, then you buy lots and lots of it so that you can get a lot of things done.

I think it's called the Law of Demand?

Companies over-hired during COVID because the money was free thus making the labour cheap. Why are they not over-hiring now, during a time when workforce productivity is supposed to be at an all-time high?

Instead we are seeing layoffs, blaming AI, because the free-money chickens have come home to roost. These CEOs want to save face and not admit they were short-sighted during COVID.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#869

Post by megamix »

Yes 10k? Insane we have companies larger than counties. This all depends on how many they needed to hire in the first place. Also, I don't this reflects the AI transition at all.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#870

Post by mancerayder »

dzonga wrote: post #850

Straight from the horses mouth: >> yes we over-hired during covid because i incorrectly built 2 separate company structures (square & cash app) rather than 1, which we corrected mid 2024. but this misses all the complexity we took on through lending, banking, and BNPL. and that we’re now targeting $2M+ gross profit per person, 4x our pre-covid efficiency, which stayed flat at ~$500k from 2019 until 2024. we have and…

It doesn't matter if the main reason is they over-hired. Financial services is going to eat it up, there are eyes going wide all over the place in the C-suites, I am certain. Companies/Funds that own other companies see an opportunity to reduce input costs (human costs). Even if over-hiring and AI are both explained reasons, the second one is going to win out as it's a narrative that lines up with what their goal is, to reduce costs.

Now the question is will that sustain? Are 50% of us doomed? Is it temporary, and a reversal will take place? Will it start and sputter?

Post reply on HN