4 ms·
Maybe some investors are ok with an organization in a company losing $10M yearly but it doesn't really strike me as toxic for them not to be ok with this.
by eatonphil 5y ago
Maybe some investors are ok with an organization in a company losing $10M yearly but it doesn't really strike me as toxic for them not to be ok with this.
- droopyEyelids 5y agoEvery time I change the oil in my car it loses me money, but it's important to the overall function of the car.
- eatonphil 5y agoA CEO of a public company is responsible for selling investors on what he/she is doing. If News is fundamental to the company or to his vision then he is responsible for explaining that or selling that vision. If investors don't believe in it I don't blame them per se I'd just say the company either shouldn't be public or they should have a CEO that can reasonably explain to investors why they should care that News exists.
- Apocryphon 5y agoTale as old as time https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30768059 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30768059
- manicdee 5y agoIt’s much harder to go private than it is to go public. Blaming the CEO is a short sighted perspective.
- eatonphil 5y agoPublic companies can't choose their investors. They can choose their CEO.
- naoqj 5y agobuzzfeed news is not important or even relevant to the overall function of buzzfeed.
- randomsilence 5y ago>Buzzfeed said quarterly revenue grew 18% year over year to $146 million. Profit rose to $41.6 million It's not the organization, just the division. News is responsible for the very good image that Buzzfeed has. Why do they give it up when they can finance it?
- eatonphil 5y agoYeah by organization I meant "org" not the entire company.
- klyrs 5y agoSure. Just like TI, HP, and many others killed off their R&D departments because they didn't make direct profits, only ate money and produced ideas that other departments would monetize. Penny wise, pound foolish. Fuck the future, I want my money now.
- eatonphil 5y agoUnless you're indicting the entire Western economic system (which is fair but also not something I'm going to argue about), blaming investors is nonsense. Corporate officers are responsible for having and selling a vision. If these companies got rid of the R&D departments, management owns that, not investors.
- manicdee 5y agoInvestors are the ones making the decision for higher profits in the short term over long term viability of the company. It is absolutely in the investors, usually profit hungry corporate investors like superannuation or the local equivalent. Foresight isn’t profitable. Sustainability isn’t profitable. They want next years bonus cheques not a healthy retirement fund.
- klyrs 5y ago> blaming investors is nonsense. Pardon my French, but this is bullshit. Activist investors pressuring buzzfeed are directly responsible for their actions. At best, they looked at the orgs under the umbrella and decided that the best move is to axe BFN. Experience tells me that either they're focused on short term profits, or silencing journalists they dislike. And, yes, this is partly an indictment of the entire western economic system. Rapacious focus on short term profits will be our downfall. This is merely one example of many.
- icedistilled 5y agoIT is a "cost center." Cut it all?
- lupire 5y agoMaybe the problem is having investors instead of patrons. This is what people mean when they say capitalism won't solve all our problems.