Re:Tech Layoffs Are Feeding a New Startup Surge
by onlyrealcuzzo on Thursday February 23, 2023 @01:40PM
(#34914588)
> Seems like just freezing hiring for a year or two would save you more money in the long run rather than having to rehire and rebuild all this expertise.
It took Google 6 years from 2012 to double headcount.
In that time, revenue went from $50B to $136B (almost triple). Profit from $10.7B to $30.7B (triple).
In 4 years from 2018 to 2022, Google more than doubled headcount.
In that time, revenue went from $136B to $279B (barely double). Profit from $30.7B to $50.9B (only up 65%).
Almost all these companies have similar stories.
They're still good companies. They just hired way too many people thinking that the pandemic trend would continue for a long period of time - rather than revert to the mean.
If Google continue to grow at it's more long-term average rate - without the layoffs, you're looking at being overstaffed for years.
Re:Tech Layoffs Are Feeding a New Startup Surge
by Salgat on Thursday February 23, 2023 @02:07PM
(#34914917)
Because the recruiting process can cost over a year's salary, and that's ignoring the time it takes to get up to the same productivity as other employees once they start.
It took Google 6 years from 2012 to double headcount.
In that time, revenue went from $50B to $136B (almost triple). Profit from $10.7B to $30.7B (triple).
In 4 years from 2018 to 2022, Google more than doubled headcount.
In that time, revenue went from $136B to $279B (barely double). Profit from $30.7B to $50.9B (only up 65%).
Almost all these companies have similar stories.
They're still good companies. They just hired way too many people thinking that the pandemic trend would continue for a long period of time - rather than revert to the mean.
If Google continue to grow at it's more long-term average rate - without the layoffs, you're looking at being overstaffed for years.
Why?