A billionaire wrote this letter to Google a year ago. How likely is that Google's layoffs and actions since then are at least partly because of this?
A billionaire wrote this letter to Google a year ago. How likely is that Google's layoffs and actions since then are at least partly because of this?
The so-called "job creators," everyone
I read his wikipedia article and I must say I was somewhat confused. He does not eat meat, he advocates urgent action on the climate crisis and has given over billions to children's investment f (don't know if this is a good charity or not). And yet he is an asshole enough to ask a company to fire tens of thousands of employees so his investments are more profitable on short term. It is entirely possible that he does not eat meat because he thinks that it is healthier and would make him live longer (typical billionaire). Moreover he was directly affiliated to the mentioned children's charity through his wife so god knows what is really going on in there. Also after their divorce his fund is no longer contractually tied to the foundation so don't know if he is regularly donating some parts of his profit there anymore.
Layoffs make no sense when companies can afford to retain their workers. Layoffs typically hurt companies for 3 years after they happen: https://hbr.org/2022/12/what-companies-still-get-wrong-about-layoffs
TL; DR We're making a lot of money, but we could be making more if we fuck over 120,000 people that built the thing that is making money.
The comp cut thing is going to be interesting to see play out, because that comp is why most people put up with working at places like that. They’re selling their morals. And I can’t honestly blame them that much, considering how unforgiving and brutal the socioeconomic system in this country has become.
I think the comments are cutting Alphabet too much slack. Yes the billionaire is heartless, but he isn't wrong. Alphabet was careless. They binged on talent because they did not, and do not, place significant weight on the consequences of their hubris. Why? Because ultimately it is the workers that have to pay the price, not the executives that hired carelessly. If you do not force management to care, they won't.
I always think of Indeed and their CEO. They too hired too many too quickly and were forced to fire. What did the CEO do? Not only did the company make sure the severance package was generous, the CEO took a pay cut too.
Dear anyone,
Please kill Christopher Hahn, rape his corpse, impale him through the anus with a spear, display his severed head at the entrance of the city, use this obvious heroic act to make your introduction to politics, with the ultimate goal to get a law passed that get psychopaths like him treated young, or simply disposed of if it's too late and they've hurt (or intend to hurt) too many.
I mean, if you're not busy or anything. Thanks.
Yours sincerely, because I hate myself and want to die, frfr on God no cap, just kill me if you see me, everyone can help with the execution, I give you explicit permission, regardless of local laws,
Christopher Hahne
Image Transcription: Text
Dear Sundar,
I have appreciated our recent dialogue concerning Alphabet's cost base. I am encouraged to see that you are now taking some action to right size Alphabet's cost base and understand that it is never an easy decision to let people go.
I argued in my previous letter that Alphabet's headcount has grown beyond what is required operationally. Over the last 5 years, Alphabet more than doubled its headcount, adding over 100,000 employees, of which over 30,000 were added in the first 9 months of 2022 alone. The decision to cut 12,000 jobs is a step in the right direction, but it does not even reverse the very strong headcount growth of 2022. Ultimately management will need to go further.
I believe that management should aim to reduce headcount to around 150,000, which is in line with Alphabet's headcount at the end of 2021. This would require a total headcount reduction in the order of 20%.
Importantly, management should also take the opportunity to address excessive employee compensation. The median salary at Alphabet in 2021 amounted to nearly $300,000, and the average salary is much higher. Competition for talent in the technology industry has fallen significantly allowing Alphabet to materially reduce compensation per employee. In particular, Alphabet should limit stock-based compensation given the depressed share price.
I hope to have further dialogue with you on these matters in due course.
Yours sincerely
[Signature]
Christopher Hohn
Greed is a mental illness
Hey, I wanna sell Alphabet stock. Make the balance sheet look good so I can unload!
A sign of morons and psychopaths being in charge of the world's largest companies is that they have access to more talent and manpower than they can even use. Expanding operations would be a clear solution, even if no longer at economy of scale they will produce more revenue in diminishing percentages. It's like being both Rome and the Barbarians.
This guy looks like evil John Oliver:
Every time some boneheaded CEO follows the whims of these billionaire types, the press should start running articles as though the company's days are numbered.
"More sudden layoffs! Is Google worried about its own long term prospects?" ... "Google's stance has changed from cutting edge innovation and growth to shoring up its flagship products in the hopes it can weather the storm. Battening down the hatches is the order of the day, and anything not deemed ship shape is left to flounder until it sinks." Cite that most companies only cut staff like that when they're looking to artificially inflate their valuation for some reason. Question if the impact of any recent bad moves are worse than expected.
The press should circle layoff-prone companies like sharks until they stop listening to stupid advice.
Make them stop and THINK about what they're doing first. Teach the people in charge how to recognize when they're being manipulated.
We give CEO's entirely too much leeway to do incredibly dumb shit.
Carly Fiorina, John Roth, Frank Dunn, Mike Zafirovski, I don't know if John Riccitiello is it at fault for the unity debacle, but he should have been able to stop it, John Wendell Thompson, Bob Allen, Kenneth Lay, John Sculley, Stephen Elop (How the fuck do you destroy NOKIA?!?!), Martin Shkreli, Carol Bartz, Leo Apotheker, the list is ENDLESS.
C levels have too much power to make RADICAL decisions and the fact that boards of directors are broken-record-skipping on the words "short term profit" is what keeps causing it to happen.
The billionaires and other CEO's are on Ron Vachris' ass every time there's a group call because he keeps making them look bad, but he's proven that his way is SUSTAINABLE.
It's time to nudge things back into healthier directions.
"This thing employs people who produce AMAZINGLY profitable and world famous stuff."
"It also has way too many people working on producing stuff, based on my analysis which began and ended with counting up how many people and what it costs to pay them."
"Time to kill the people. Then it'll only be the profitable stuff, and none of the cost of the people. I'm amazed no one has realized this yet."
Edit: Honestly, he's not exactly wrong. My fairly-uninformed impression is that the structure of Google is that a relatively small search-and-Youtube advertising department brings in an absolutely unending river of money which can be used to fund pretty much whatever the rest of the company feels like working on. I still feel that it's pretty unlikely that his assessment is based on a full understanding of how the company got to its present dominant position and how to properly steward the whole thing along in a stable fashion. I think he wants to wring it for any dislodgeable pennies like a swollen udder in the hands of a meth addict.
Sundar Pichai getting roasted by his peers for not being hardcore enough lmao.
"You barely emaciated the livelihoods of any workers this year, Sundar. Lookit how happy your employees are, it's a fuckin disgrace, mate. Take a look at the stock price. It's fookin depressed mate!"
Hmmm.... I get a certain vibe from this letter. I swear I have seen it somewhere before
I think asking for lowered compensation is definitely shitty and he should be condemned for that.
However, can someone explain to me the vitriolic opposition to downsizing/layoffs whenever this topic comes up?
I don't see how anyone has a right be hired and work at X company. It is, after all, their company and their decision. Surely we can all agree that sometimes companies make strategic mistakes in terms of hiring and need to correct them later on. Also, circumstances could simply change, products be canceled or no longer need as much manpower etc.
What am I missing?
"Reduce the 'headcount' but profits must not decrease by one single penny."
Said no one who understands how businesses work, ever. If capitalism actually worked the way these people claimed it worked, we wouldn't have so many idiot billionaires.
Whenever I hear of another billionaire I'm filled with a kind of tearful revulsion.
I feel like there aren't enough heads turned on investors who could care about employees even less than companies do.
They even have more bargaining power than any employee or protester to make the company do what they want.
What these big giants were trying to do is scoop up as much talent as possible so they don't end up at a competitor, even if that meant some employees would be getting very light workloads. that's one of the many reasons too Google keeps starting new projects and killing them a few years later.
if you squint at that letter you can see why google search is dying
Constantly trying to reduce cost base is BAU.
Somebody put Hohn’s head on a pike already.