7 ms·

Seriously, if you've ever worked at a large company in SV, you should know that the "lavish parties" thing was a completely envy-driven red herring. If you do

Seriously, if you've ever worked at a large company in SV, you should know that the "lavish parties" thing was a completely envy-driven red herring. If you do the math you realize that the holiday party cost a few hundred bucks per attending employee. Compared to other large SV companies - that are not under fire in the press - this was a cheap holiday party.

eitally 11y ago
I dunno. Can you show examples of more lavish holiday parties? For one, there aren't that many SV companies of similar size. Secondly, a lot of the ones of similar size aren't WWW/software companies, and they have a lot slimmer margins anyway.
- phamilton 11y ago
  Tubemogul threw a ridiculous party in 2014. My neighbor was the event planner. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost per employee was way higher than Yahoo's.
jqm 11y ago
A few hundred bucks per attending employee for a Christmas party is a lot by most working people's standards... probably like 12x + what their company would spend.
- henrikschroder 11y ago
  Yes, by most people's standards, which is why the piece is working, it creates envy in a lot of people. Same with the "free food" spiel. But Yahoo is competing for Silicon Valley software engineers, and perks are very common, so if you don't have free food, free snacks, office parties, events, and other benefits, you'll have to pay your employees a lot more. Perks are incredibly cheap for the company, because people value them much more than they would the corresponding pay raise. So if you don't understand this, it looks bad that company "wastes" millions on perks, because you don't see the many more millions it saves on salary.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Perks are incredibly cheap for the company, because people value them much more than they would the corresponding pay raise. This is so obviously true that it's a cynicism generator on HN, with people routinely commenting about how Google's free food is a kind of scam. But what's true and what rings true depends on the prevailing narrative, and the prevailing narrative about Mayer and Yahoo is that she's fiddling while Rome burns.
  - jqm 11y ago
    I see your point, but to be honest I'd probably pay not to have to attend Christmas parties at many places I've worked at. I suspect I'm not alone in feeling like this. Point being I don't know that this is really much of a perk......
    - cballard 11y ago
      Company Christmas party = another night that I can't spend with my girlfriend, lifting or climbing at the gym, reading, working on open source... and anything else that isn't hanging out with increasingly intoxicated people.
      - vacri 11y ago
        One night a year is onerous? For an event that it seems your coworkers enjoy?
        cballard 11y ago
        We spent, I'd say, over $1500 for our party at a company of 15. Yes, I would prefer a $100 bonus. The amount might decrease to the point that it's useless at larger companies due to economies of scale...
        paulcole 11y ago
        I think a more interesting question is: Would you rather get $100 or allow the other members of your team to attend a party they'd enjoy?
anotherhacker 11y ago
Lavish parties send the wrong message to employees. If I were CEO I'd say: "No more parties. We're going to use the to retrain employees (instead of firing them) and avoid layoffs." Mayer is turing out to be a terrible CEO. This article describes the various multi-million dollar parties. http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-blows-millions-on-parties-and-sponsorships-says-eric-jackson-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-blows...
- Someone1234 11y ago
  That article is really damning. Makes it seem like she is going to cash out as Yahoo! goes down in flames around her. All she needs to do right now is keep it alive long enough to cash out all of her stock... Someone remind me again why corporations pay their CEOs over 100m/year? And tell me about value, that's a huge chunk of change for someone in Yahoo!'s position, they could use that money to keep employees working.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    First, I don't think Mayer makes over 100MM per year, or anything close to that. Second, CEOs get paid lots of money because the market punishes firms that aren't growing and have no-name CEOs, and the cost of a name-brand CEO is probably more than cancelled out by avoiding that penalty. By the time Mayer was recruited, the market consensus was that Yahoo needed a turnaround CEO. There are no cheap turnaround CEOs for companies managing 4-5B in annual revenue. Mayer's entire yearly salary is a rounding error compared to the total headcount cost of operating Yahoo, which is widely believed to be both tremendously overstaffed and larded with third-party contractor contracts. Further, ask yourself: what exactly does it accomplish for Mayer to forego a salary in order to keep 1% (check my math, I might be way off) of Yahoo's workforce employed if that workforce isn't doing anything to improve Yahoo's outlook? Yahoo isn't a charity: everything it's employees do ostensibly have to have some hope of providing a return on investment.
    - anotherhacker 11y ago
      The figure is based upon stock options and bonuses. It's here in this picture: http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/566edfb272f2c150028b55be-796-624/screen%20shot%202015-12-14%20at%2010.25.37%20am.png http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/566edfb272f2c150028...
prostoalex 11y ago
+1 to this. You'd have a hard time arguing against a year-end party. If the company is not doing well, it's a morale booster. If the company is doing well, then hey, why not have a party?
fma 11y ago
I don't work for a large company in SV, but do work for a large company of a market cap of almost 50 billion (larger than Yahoo). We had record profits last quarter. Our market is growing. And we don't get jack squat for perks. We come in, work, go home. No holiday parties. Not even free coffee. I used to complain...actually still do. But, that's the expectation now. Hope it improves, but not holding my breath. On the other hand my salary is 10% more than my previous company which had free snacks, Christmas gifts, etc.
- carlosonunez 11y ago
  I worked at companies with all of the perks, and I've worked at companies with almost none. While I'd much rather prefer higher cash compensation over workplace perks, I'd be more likely to stay longer at a place that had a few creature comforts.
  - fma 11y ago
    Yes I agree...it increases morale and team building. I actually wouldn't mind if the company took $500 out of my paycheck and have a 'fun' fund for perks. But I would imagine not all my coworkers share the same view. Also I think some is up to our local managers. For example we just had a 5 day architecture design workshop...people from different parts of the US flew in to participate. So that's flight, hotel, rental car, meals, etc. However we only got breakfast one day, and no lunch. To me it makes sense to provide food to get people to come in early and have light discussions over food. Make more use of everyone's time.

eitally 11y ago

I dunno. Can you show examples of more lavish holiday parties? For one, there aren't that many SV companies of similar size. Secondly, a lot of the ones of similar size aren't WWW/software companies, and they have a lot slimmer margins anyway.

phamilton 11y ago
Tubemogul threw a ridiculous party in 2014. My neighbor was the event planner. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost per employee was way higher than Yahoo's.

jqm 11y ago

A few hundred bucks per attending employee for a Christmas party is a lot by most working people's standards... probably like 12x + what their company would spend.

henrikschroder 11y ago
Yes, by most people's standards, which is why the piece is working, it creates envy in a lot of people. Same with the "free food" spiel. But Yahoo is competing for Silicon Valley software engineers, and perks are very common, so if you don't have free food, free snacks, office parties, events, and other benefits, you'll have to pay your employees a lot more. Perks are incredibly cheap for the company, because people value them much more than they would the corresponding pay raise. So if you don't understand this, it looks bad that company "wastes" millions on perks, because you don't see the many more millions it saves on salary.
- tptacek 11y ago
  Perks are incredibly cheap for the company, because people value them much more than they would the corresponding pay raise. This is so obviously true that it's a cynicism generator on HN, with people routinely commenting about how Google's free food is a kind of scam. But what's true and what rings true depends on the prevailing narrative, and the prevailing narrative about Mayer and Yahoo is that she's fiddling while Rome burns.
- jqm 11y ago
  I see your point, but to be honest I'd probably pay not to have to attend Christmas parties at many places I've worked at. I suspect I'm not alone in feeling like this. Point being I don't know that this is really much of a perk......
  - cballard 11y ago
    Company Christmas party = another night that I can't spend with my girlfriend, lifting or climbing at the gym, reading, working on open source... and anything else that isn't hanging out with increasingly intoxicated people.
    - vacri 11y ago
      One night a year is onerous? For an event that it seems your coworkers enjoy?
      - cballard 11y ago
        We spent, I'd say, over $1500 for our party at a company of 15. Yes, I would prefer a $100 bonus. The amount might decrease to the point that it's useless at larger companies due to economies of scale...
        paulcole 11y ago
        I think a more interesting question is: Would you rather get $100 or allow the other members of your team to attend a party they'd enjoy?

anotherhacker 11y ago

Lavish parties send the wrong message to employees. If I were CEO I'd say: "No more parties. We're going to use the to retrain employees (instead of firing them) and avoid layoffs." Mayer is turing out to be a terrible CEO. This article describes the various multi-million dollar parties. http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-blows-millions-on-parties-and-sponsorships-says-eric-jackson-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-blows...

Someone1234 11y ago
That article is really damning. Makes it seem like she is going to cash out as Yahoo! goes down in flames around her. All she needs to do right now is keep it alive long enough to cash out all of her stock... Someone remind me again why corporations pay their CEOs over 100m/year? And tell me about value, that's a huge chunk of change for someone in Yahoo!'s position, they could use that money to keep employees working.
- tptacek 11y ago
  First, I don't think Mayer makes over 100MM per year, or anything close to that. Second, CEOs get paid lots of money because the market punishes firms that aren't growing and have no-name CEOs, and the cost of a name-brand CEO is probably more than cancelled out by avoiding that penalty. By the time Mayer was recruited, the market consensus was that Yahoo needed a turnaround CEO. There are no cheap turnaround CEOs for companies managing 4-5B in annual revenue. Mayer's entire yearly salary is a rounding error compared to the total headcount cost of operating Yahoo, which is widely believed to be both tremendously overstaffed and larded with third-party contractor contracts. Further, ask yourself: what exactly does it accomplish for Mayer to forego a salary in order to keep 1% (check my math, I might be way off) of Yahoo's workforce employed if that workforce isn't doing anything to improve Yahoo's outlook? Yahoo isn't a charity: everything it's employees do ostensibly have to have some hope of providing a return on investment.
  - anotherhacker 11y ago
    The figure is based upon stock options and bonuses. It's here in this picture: http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/566edfb272f2c150028b55be-796-624/screen%20shot%202015-12-14%20at%2010.25.37%20am.png http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/566edfb272f2c150028...

prostoalex 11y ago

+1 to this. You'd have a hard time arguing against a year-end party. If the company is not doing well, it's a morale booster. If the company is doing well, then hey, why not have a party?

fma 11y ago

I don't work for a large company in SV, but do work for a large company of a market cap of almost 50 billion (larger than Yahoo). We had record profits last quarter. Our market is growing. And we don't get jack squat for perks. We come in, work, go home. No holiday parties. Not even free coffee. I used to complain...actually still do. But, that's the expectation now. Hope it improves, but not holding my breath. On the other hand my salary is 10% more than my previous company which had free snacks, Christmas gifts, etc.

carlosonunez 11y ago
I worked at companies with all of the perks, and I've worked at companies with almost none. While I'd much rather prefer higher cash compensation over workplace perks, I'd be more likely to stay longer at a place that had a few creature comforts.
- fma 11y ago
  Yes I agree...it increases morale and team building. I actually wouldn't mind if the company took $500 out of my paycheck and have a 'fun' fund for perks. But I would imagine not all my coworkers share the same view. Also I think some is up to our local managers. For example we just had a 5 day architecture design workshop...people from different parts of the US flew in to participate. So that's flight, hotel, rental car, meals, etc. However we only got breakfast one day, and no lunch. To me it makes sense to provide food to get people to come in early and have light discussions over food. Make more use of everyone's time.