3 ms·
I've worked on many cost cutting projects in the past, in consulting and private equity where cost-cutting was the norm. These statements very easy to say in re
by ksj2114 6y ago
I've worked on many cost cutting projects in the past, in consulting and private equity where cost-cutting was the norm. These statements very easy to say in retrospect.
Many studies show that private equity owned companies, which typically run businesses the leanest, actually perform better.
- download13 6y agostfu parasite
- dang 6y agoIf you post like this again we will ban you. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- chucksmash 6y agoFor which measure of better?
- burkaman 6y agoCan you link to any of those studies?
- ksj2114 6y agoThis is one of the most comprehensive studies: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_2019122.pdf https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_2019122.p...
- burkaman 6y agoYeah, that's the only one I could find. I definitely don't have the background to understand the whole paper, but it doesn't seem to paint a very positive picture. If you cut employment by 13% and grow labor productivity (output per employee) by 8%, aren't you worse off? At best, you're producing the same amount while benefiting society less and the owners more. Also: >Public-to-private buyouts involve greater leverage and bankruptcy risk but few advantages in financial returns, at least in recent decades. Private-to-private buyouts appear more likely to create value by relaxing financial constraints and improving management practices. Public-to-private buyouts are generally the ones people get angry about, and it seems that they're economically bad in addition to the social consequences. I don't think people generally object to one private equity firm buying from another.