It's a market cap of around 2 million per employee at the $30b valuation they've been at the past year. Of course, higher is 'better' as in more efficient. Her

It's a market cap of around 2 million per employee at the $30b valuation they've been at the past year. Of course, higher is 'better' as in more efficient. Here's some context: https://craft.co/reports/s-p-500-market-value-per-employee-perspective https://craft.co/reports/s-p-500-market-value-per-employee-p... To be fair, I do agree, it's higher than I think is right. It's absolutely not abnormal, IT companies are at 2.4m on average, and companies like Facebook (19m) or Netflix (11m), Apple (5.5m) or Microsoft (4m) are much higher. But I also think we quickly get into apples/oranges comparisons, and it's hard to really make fair comparisons. For one, Airbnb has a very strong non-IT component, and 100% of its revenue comes from real-world transactions with very strong human behavioural elements of non-employees, i.e. complete strangers, that need to be managed. Selling a phone to a customer is pretty straightforward. Connecting a stranger to let another stranger into their home and treat it well, is a transaction with much more friction. Second, it's not at all clear how employees are counted. Foxcon employs a million people and manufactures the majority of Apple's revenue. If Apple bought all its shares and let it operate independently, its valuation would not change radically (if it was purchased at market value), yet its market cap per employee would drop by huge amounts. Employee figures alone don't say much. If anything they're a reflection of the company's (supply chain) structure. If Airbnb outsourced all its customer service, you'd see far fewer employees, but a far larger outsourcing bill. One or the other isn't necessarily better. Context matters, without it 14 thousand is a pretty meaningless number. But again, on average, 2m is not a weird number, its very normal, quite average.