News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by falloutx on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @04:45PM (#13322348)
Its really sad for those 50 employees who had to lose their jobs due to incompetence of Medium's executives and its business model.

Its due to a deeply embedded business philosophy where CEOs and other business people try to create bigger companies, and not necessarily better companies. Sometimes they are able to trigger a mushroom growth, but most of the times they fail. But due to survivor bias, they create a few more wannabe CEOs who again trey to create bigger and not better companies, and the cycle repeats.

Medium currently had a full fledged Sales, Support, HR and even a big ass operations dept. And 2 or 3 offices across United States. Their operations & other business depts were quite big in head count, even rivaling local oracle offices(which usually have about 1000+ employees). I can't necessarily say whether they had inefficiencies in their company structure, but they certainly over hired.

Even disheartening thing is that they might have already dried up most of their cash, and still don't know how to run a business. Executives are currently playing a dangerous game of "Let's see if we can raise more" and "We'll think of something".

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by SerLava on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @07:34PM (#13323624)
>Medium currently had a full fledged Sales, Support, HR and even a big ass operations dept. And 2 or 3 offices across United States. Their operations & other business depts were quite big in head count, even rivaling local oracle offices

Holy shit, sorry if I'm coming in to this discussion late and empty handed but isn't Medium basically a fucking blog?

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by untog on Thursday January 05, 2017 @12:07AM (#13324911)
It's a publishing platform, which sold itself to some smaller publications for use as their public facing site (like The Awl). It intended to make money through advertising. So sales and support is hardly out of the question. But at the size it grew to? No.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by LoSboccacc on Thursday January 05, 2017 @04:59AM (#13325983)
it's exactly that, an easier wordpress as a service with a cool, officially sounding domain name and one fixed theme better than competitors of the time but fading out of fashion fast.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by stevula on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @10:56PM (#13324592)
It's really a blogging platform. I can see why they would need a large sales and customer support department. Whether it was too big, I have no idea.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by ProAm on Thursday January 05, 2017 @12:40PM (#13329330)
It's way to big. This company could be run successfully with ~30-40 people.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by jmknoll on Thursday January 05, 2017 @02:05AM (#13325321)
"So, we are shifting our resources and attention to defining a new model for writers and creators to be rewarded, based on the value they’re creating for people. And toward building a transformational product for curious humans who want to get smarter about the world every day.

It is too soon to say exactly what this will look like. This strategy is more focused but also less proven."

In so many words, "We'll think of something."

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by type0 on Thursday January 05, 2017 @02:39AM (#13325443)
> In so many words, "We'll think of something."

Maybe they would try to get acquihired

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by ascorbic on Thursday January 05, 2017 @07:52AM (#13326711)
Companies that raised $123 million don't get acquihired.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by gph on Thursday January 05, 2017 @08:10AM (#13326798)
Why not? That's a genuine question, not trying to be a smartass. Would a company that raised that much money not be worth its value to be acquired?

Edit: Looks like Instagram had raised 50m before being acquihired. Definitely a much different situation than this one, but it's not outside the realm of possibility that a company which raised 100+ million would be acquihired.

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by demystified on Thursday January 05, 2017 @09:03AM (#13327128)
I would not consider Instagram being "acquihired".

See definition from wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acqui-hiring): "...the process of acquiring a company to recruit its employees, without necessarily showing an interest in its products and services—or their continued operation"

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by ascorbic on Thursday January 05, 2017 @10:22AM (#13327762)
Instagram was sold for $1 billion with just 13 employees. That's certainly not an acquihire.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by ascorbic on Thursday January 05, 2017 @10:21AM (#13327743)
Because acquihires are at much, much lower valuations than that. You'd be relying on the investors agreeing to basically write off their investment.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by bdcravens on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @06:26PM (#13323127)
> Its really sad for those 50 employees who had to lose their jobs due to incompetence of Medium's executives and its business model.

Isn't it worth considering that those 50 employees should have never been hired, but only were due to incompetence of Medium's executives and its business model?

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by brongondwana on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @09:11PM (#13324124)
There's opportunity costs for those employees for having taken that job rather than another option that may have been on the table at the time.

Or having taken on additional responsibilities (loan, started a family, etc) based on having the job.

Getting a job that shouldn't have existed and then losing it again isn't zero sum.

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by eropple on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @11:23PM (#13324722)
Agreed. In my experience, being out of a job six months after starting a new one is a net negative. I can spin a longer break between jobs a lot better than that.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by paulcole on Thursday January 05, 2017 @01:03AM (#13325096)
just leave it off your resume
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by eropple on Thursday January 05, 2017 @01:49AM (#13325271)
Right, but then you're getting into the areas where talking about, say, a 12 month gap (4 months looking, 8 months working, then canned) instead of perhaps a 5 or a 6 month gap. It can be done, but it looks awkward, and it really sucks.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by itsdrewmiller on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @08:08PM (#13323815)
Those aren't mutually exclusive - Medium overhired but it is sad for the people who didn't make that decision but lost their job because of it.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by nkozyra on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @08:08PM (#13323811)
Sure, but it seems excessive to blame them twice ;)
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by dohertyjf on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @11:22PM (#13324717)
> I can't necessarily say whether they had inefficiencies in their company structure, but they certainly over hired.

Yep, we are seeing this time and time again with startups in the Bay Area who went on a landgrab for talent a few years ago and now realize they can't support them as the VC money dried up. I actually wonder if Medium was trying to raise more and they were unable to, therefore they have to do this and are trying to spin it positively.

I respect Ev a lot. He revolutionized blogging and publishing on the web. And I want Medium to do well. And maybe I'm too cynical about the startup and SV world (I moved away from SF in October), but this smells of the same old same old to me.

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by username223 on Thursday January 05, 2017 @05:26AM (#13326073)
> I respect Ev a lot. He revolutionized blogging and publishing on the web.

Serious questions: why and how?

I both write a blog and read blogs. I have never had any desire to move my blog to Medium, and ask myself "is it really worth it?" before clicking on any Medium link.

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by peterarmstrong on Thursday January 05, 2017 @06:07AM (#13326235)
Blogger and Twitter.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by username223 on Thursday January 05, 2017 @10:20AM (#13327733)
Blogger was just another LiveJournal, BlogSpot, or WordPress (StudlyCaps IntEntional). Twitter (i.e. "public SMS") has very little to do with blogging.
Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by intoverflow2 on Thursday January 05, 2017 @11:06AM (#13328209)
>Serious questions: why and how?

Branding

Re:Renewing Medium’s focus by shostack on Wednesday January 04, 2017 @06:40PM (#13323228)
Another concern is the growth and profit expectations that will come with more funding (beyond current expectations) and the lack of leverage they will have if they can raise more.

I'm not sure there are many companies such a scenario has worked out well for, but I'd love to dig into examples if people have any. And working out well can mean different things for investors vs employees vs customers vs free users vs readers. I would expect the interests to become less aligned the more investment they take on without being profitable (see Evernote's recent moves and resulting user backlash).