• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Tech Thread

MindzEye said:
But layoffs due to corporate restructure (common after buying a company), and a 70% reduction in staff simply aren't the same thing. Stop conflating them if you want me to stop pointing out the obvious. One is standard fair, the other isn't.
Click to expand...

I mean…you act like I havent explained it each time when I have….it occurred after a time of big hiring, followed by a crash that resulted in massive firings across the tech sector…oh, and he’d overpaid for the stock at the exact worst moment as it tanked almost immediately.

There were many variables that weren’t standard fair that resulted in even higher layoffs…but we know that big layoffs are to be expected, and we know other variables that factored in to crank that up even more,
 
Last edited:
You've explained it numerous times, thank you. You're just wrong is all.

10-20% spaced over a course of 6-12 months would be "standard fair". Nothing about what Elon did was standard and the reasons were largely self owns from after he took over, not before. Twitter had balanced their books and had almost 2 billion in cash when Elon took over and 2022 payroll was 630 million. That in itself is not a crisis, that's plenty of runway to figure out what you're doing.

70% reduction was Elon not having a fucking clue and thinking all the shit that was keeping Twitter functioning was what was actually wrong with the company...and just punting on all of it without taking any time at all to learn the business (which he pretty clearly still struggles with understanding to this day).

The crisis was Elon's bullshit cratering revenue.
 
Montana said:
it all played a part…he came in at a price well above market, and the stock had collapsed by the time it was going through.
Click to expand...

It was a fucking meme offer in the first place. 54.20

Montana said:
x% of the layoffs were unquestionably a result of the market, just like it was across tech
Click to expand...

Sure, pretty standard layoffs happened across the industry. Meta laid off ~20% of it's workforce (though a fair chunk of that was from Zuckerbergs fuck up with the metaverse push). Shopify cut 15%, Amazon 8%, Roku 6%, Salesforce 10%, Microsoft 5%, etc, etc.

Standard fare.

70%? No, no. Just stop.

Montana said:
.but the reality is cuts come with almost any big purchase/merger, the tech market as a whole had big cuts coming across the board as the marker went down and pandemic hiring gains were cleaved, and his were amplified by overpaying on the pre-deal market price as it was….add in he had a $300m bill coming end of quarter, and its not mind blowing he made the level of cuts he did.
Click to expand...

This is silly mate, just stop. 70% is the type of cuts a company dying on the vine makes when their books are existentially threatening and they're circling bankruptcy. Twitter was cash flow neutral, with a good balance sheet that was slowly tracking north & 2 billion in the bank.
Montana said:
agreed,…but I think many of the things he implemented/changed played a bigger part in that. His ideas for twitter suck balls,
Click to expand...

Eh, the layoffs had direct impact on the flight of the advertisers. A ton of stories came out at the time basically saying that the lack of content moderation (he laid off almost the entire team) scared brands, and the sales reps Twitter used to manage ad accounts had also been laid off, so there was no one to manage upset ad execs.
 
MindzEye said:
Sure, pretty standard layoffs happened across the industry. Meta laid off ~20% of it's workforce (though a fair chunk of that was from Zuckerbergs fuck up with the metaverse push). Shopify cut 15%, Amazon 8%, Roku 6%, Salesforce 10%, Microsoft 5%, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

yep, and as I said that’s a % of his cuts. Which you’re agreeing it was.
MindzEye said:
Standard fare.

70%? No, no. Just stop.
Click to expand...

again this is an imaginary argument you’re having with yourself for some weird reason. No one ever said 70% was common….

I said big cuts are common, throwing babies out with the bath water in said cuts is common, and making hires after to help rectify those errors is common.

that’s the whole thing I agreed with in the initial post that put zeke on tilt….but it’s just a fairly standard truism of these kinds of deals,
MindzEye said:
This is silly mate, just stop. 70% is the type of cuts a company dying on the vine makes when their books are existentially threatening and they're circling bankruptcy.
Click to expand...

again, imaginary argument youre having with yourself.

MindzEye said:
Twitter was cash flow neutral, with a good balance sheet
Click to expand...

i was of the understanding they had a loss of $344m the quarter prior to acquisition, with $300m interest payments per quarter being added on top.


MindzEye said:
that was slowly tracking north & 2 billion in the bank.
Click to expand...

i hadn’t/haven’t seen this. So thatll be valuable insight to read up on….


MindzEye said:
Eh, the layoffs had direct impact on the flight of the advertisers.
Click to expand...

eh, a ton of advertisers where leaving the tech sector in general as everyone was cutting….and Elon’s actions made it much easier.
MindzEye said:
A ton of stories came out at the time basically saying that the lack of content moderation (he laid off almost the entire team) scared brands, and the sales reps Twitter used to manage ad accounts had also been laid off, so there was no one to manage upset ad execs.
Click to expand...

yeah this I agree with, definitely played a role….but we’re also not naive enough to think companies wanting to cut their own costs/ad spending after a downturn, won’t jump on the most beneficial PR spin…..the amount of ad revenue lost tho, everything played into it.

So basically anything anyone mentions I’d agree is plausible, it was a bloodbath.

6091383B-FECA-4C20-87D2-3C45C0B22E07.jpeg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top