108 ms·
Robinhood lays off 23% of staff
- tempsy 4y ago
- papito 4y ago".. ambitious staffing trajectory". Read: We were spending money on new hires like a drunken socialist sailor to show "growth" to keep the bubble going and sucking in even more VC money. My bad. Tired - burn rate, wired - hiring rate.
- hmryehbut 4y ago[dead]
- metadat 4y agoUn-paywalled: https://archive.ph/wsimy https://archive.ph/wsimy
- 88840-8855 4y agoWhat they write: "As CEO, I approved and took responsibility for our ambitious staffing trajectory – this is on me. " What he totally forgot to mention: "I also take a pay cut to reduce the opex burden on the company and to retain as many FTE as possible"
- civilized 4y agoswinging the ax I take full responsibility for this
- function_seven 4y agoThis axe is heavy, and the destruction wrought by it saddens me. I need to be compensated for this.
- analyst74 4y ago"One who passes the sentence should swing the sword" If it's good enough for a lord, must be good for the CEO.
- newfonewhodis 4y ago"Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make"
- bombcar 4y agoZAPP: Men, you're lucky men. Soon you'll all be fighting for your planet. Many of you will be dying for your planet. A few of you will be forced through a fine mesh screen for your planet. They will be the luckiest of all. Lord Farquad and Zapp B would make great CEOs.
- timack 4y ago"Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make," - Lord Farquaad
- ChuckNorris89 4y agoSilicon Valley (the satire TV show) already covered this exact scenario. Mike Judge is a brilliant writer. https://youtu.be/u48vYSLvKNQ?t=17 https://youtu.be/u48vYSLvKNQ?t=17
- lxe 4y agoAmazingly on-point. The entire show, at least the first few seasons, is still a mirror of reality in SV.
- renewiltord 4y agoHis salary is like $300k and the stock options he was granted as the pandemic growth hit break even at some $300/share (it's $9/share right now).
- jeffbee 4y agoIn the past year he sold $55 million of shares. Let's don't be too credulous about cries of poverty.
- renewiltord 4y agoSure but that's not opex (the context of this thread). That's stuff he has by virtue of founding the company.
- saalweachter 4y agoEh, does he deserve $55M for founding a f(l)ailing company? If he wasn't a founder, would you say "No, never mind the $55M he pulled out of the company last year, last year everything was fine. The massive cash shortfall the company is experiencing today has nothing to do with those $55M that are no longer in the company's coffers."?
- renewiltord 4y agoMate, ultimately the point is that if you sell $55 m of your stock in a company you're not taking money out of the company. That stuff ceased to be owned by the company when those shares (or derivatives that control them) were granted (way before this point).
- ok_dad 4y agoI think ultimately the point is that this guy who fucking sucks at running a company made $55mm, and several hundred people just lost their jobs due to his ineptitude. Seems pretty cut and dried to me that he's a pile of shit; if he really cared about his employees he would truly take responsibility and reinvest some of his money in the company.
- redredrobot 4y agoAre you complaining that when they cut their pay from 400k to 32k that wasn’t enough? Or are you complaining that they didn’t cut their 32k salaries down further?
- robertlagrant 4y agoWhich people did that?
- HWR_14 4y agoI mean, if you think "salaries" doesn't include 800MM in bonuses (the number that's been thrown around), then you're speaking differently than others in the thread.
- CodeSgt 4y ago“While employees from all functions will be impacted, the changes are particularly concentrated in our operations, marketing, and program management functions.”
- rossdavidh 4y ago"Last year, we staffed many of our operations functions under the assumption that the heightened retail engagement we had been seeing with the stock and crypto markets in the COVID era would persist into 2022..." We are now at the point when we will find out which of the changes to behavior (financial and otherwise) that came about with the onset of the covid-19 pandemic are going to be lasting, and which are not. I do not claim to be able to predict which ones (if any) will last, but I can confidently say that Robinhood is not the only one to have been surprised by changes which they thought would "stick", going back to pre-covid norms.
- civilized 4y agoIt should have been obvious to anyone that people would do less day trading once they had anything better to do.
- ghaff 4y agoAnd once even throwing darts to pick stocks stopped producing big gains. The same thing basically happened in the run-up to dot-bomb. It was really easy to make book with day-trading in 1999 or so. See also crypto.
- spaceman_2020 4y agoOr when making money became harder. Amazing the number of people I personally know who took 1 year of day trading to be the “norm” and made big life decisions based on their results. From quitting good jobs to buying houses they can’t afford, all because they made big money in 2021 and thought they could keep repeating it every year.
- georgeecollins 4y agoThis happened in 1998-1999 too. People got online trading accounts, did great and then decided to try to invest for a living. You should not take investment advice from people who have been doing it less than a decade. It takes time to sort out the lucky from the smart.
- danwee 4y ago> As CEO, I approved and took responsibility for our ambitious staffing trajectory—this is on me So, find a decent replacement for CEO.
- radicaldreamer 4y agoIt's just a turn of phrase... usually "it's on me" just means I've acknowledged what you might be thinking and I'm going to continue doing whatever I want.
- yodsanklai 4y ago... and at the same time trying to show they're a great because capable of acknowledging errors.
- bdcravens 4y agoHe's basically saying, RH over-hired, and now is correcting that mistake. With that view, a competent CEO wouldn't have hired those people to begin with. If you use that self-admission as a reason to fire him, the excess labor still loses its job.
- llaolleh 4y agoThat's a lot of staff - it means 1/5th of your coworkers got laid off... I'm very bearish on Robinhood - I don't know if they have enough of a moat to defend themselves from other free stock trading apps. People have forgiven so many outages. The Gamestop saga was the straw that broke the camel's back for many.
- Bluecobra 4y agoNot to mention they are screwed if congress passes legislation to ban selling order flow to firms like Citidel.
- adrr 4y agoAll the discount brokers will go back to charging $5 trade. Will be a big loss for retail investors.
- umeshunni 4y ago> Will be a big loss for retail investors You mean it will be a big loss for retail traders
- adrr 4y agoIf you’re investing monthly or dollar cost averaging into a position. Those $5 per trade add up.
- francoisdevlin 4y agoCareful, you might turn into a Boggle-head if you follow that logic too far...
- dehrmann 4y agoFidelity doesn't get paid for order flow, and it has $0 trades.
- paxys 4y ago> As CEO, I approved and took responsibility for our ambitious staffing trajectory—this is on me Reminder that Vlad Tenev received $800M in compensation in 2021. In the same year the company made terrible bets on crypto and banking, took an irreversible reputation hit among its core user base because of the GME fiasco, had multiple user data breaches, was subject to several investigations and was fined hundreds of millions by the SEC and other regulatory bodies, and saw its share price drop by 90%. At this point "taking responsibility" would mean resigning and letting someone more competent fix his messes.
- sn_master 4y agohow much of that $800M was in stock vs cash?
- arcticbull 4y agoThe only thing that matters is how much he sold vs held. Cash is cash no matter how derived.
- mikeyouse 4y agoHe's sold ~$55M worth: https://finance.yahoo.com/screener/insider/TENEV%20VLADIMIR https://finance.yahoo.com/screener/insider/TENEV%20VLADIMIR
- adrr 4y agoIt's all stock from a 2019 agreement that vested on a liquidty event. His cash comp is $250k for that year.
- pcurve 4y agoYep, talk is cheap. Of course he's responsible, whether he admits it or not. If not willing to step down, then give up pay.
- Spivak 4y agoGood lord, if I resigned every time I caused a production issue my resume length would triple. You are allowed to admit you made a mistake without publicly self flagellating. This is some straight puritanical shit.
- yuan43 4y agoWhy not cut pay across the board? I know this is not the cultural norm, but I am curious how long this norm can persist. Without the ability to cut pay, layoffs are the only option for companies burning cash and losing altitude. That locks pay increases at the same inflated point that the bubble supported but which reality does not. To go one step further, is there a single advanced economy in which pay cuts, rather than layoffs, are the norm?
- this_user 4y agoBecause then you'd still have more people than you need, except now everyone is poorly motivated, and your best people will just leave. Germany does actually have a model called "Kurzarbeit" (literally "short work") to reduce hours across the board while some of the wage losses are being offset by payment from the unemployment insurance system. The idea is to avoid layoffs during times of recession etc. which would allow the companies to bounce back more quickly once the situation has picked up again.
- yuan43 4y ago> ... your best people will just leave. Where is the evidence for this? I get that it seems like what would happen, but where are the cases proving that's what happened? Especially in an economy shedding jobs, there may not be many other places to go. Also, studies seem to find that money doesn't motivate people to perform at a higher level. https://hbr.org/2013/04/does-money-really-affect-motiv https://hbr.org/2013/04/does-money-really-affect-motiv
- nrmitchi 4y agoThe best people (the ones you really don’t want to lose) will always find a place to go.
- xpe 4y agoThis is somewhat of a tautology. How do you think of "best"? There are many senses: (a) People that do well in a particular organizational context? (b) People with a certain set of skills? In the software industry, these do change pretty dramatically from time to time. For example, the FAANG style of interviews disrupted what came before. And of course, there is considerable variation between FAANG style hiring and others. I bring all this up not just to be pedantic... (Is there anything wrong with being pedantic? We should do a proper study to find out, but I digress...) ... because I'm curious if and how the industry is changing. Many software developers got comfortable with being in the driver's seat and being fawned over. This has changed a lot, it seems to me, in the last 3 to 6 months. Where does this leave us?
- smm11 4y agoGood. Problem is, fewer of those vultures means even bigger one survive. Just can't win.
- datalopers 4y agoBiggest mark of utter management failure is making too small a layoff in April (9%) and needing to do another round today. Combined that’s a 30% headcount reduction since Q1-2022
- xpe 4y agoPlease say more. Is the idea to get the blood-letting over with all at once?
- johnbellone 4y agoYes, it’s much better to cut fast and deep one time.
- xpe 4y agoAll other things equal, sure. However, proper reasoning while taking into account uncertainty is not so simple. Let's do a thought experiment. Let's say you are the CEO and your estimate for the necessary layoff ranges between 2% and 11%. What to do? One and only one round of X% layoffs? What should X be? Or perhaps start with a round of 5% layoffs. The hope would be that the uncertainty decreases. Time passes. You might not need an additional round. Or if you do, it can be done more accurately.
- CamelCaseName 4y agoWhy? Let the proles panic and leave on their own accord, it will cost you much less in severance.
- x86x87 4y agoThis works short term. Long term people will remember it and you'll have problems attracting anyone to work for you.
- rossdavidh 4y agoYou get very little from your employees in the meantime, the ones you are still paying, as they have a much harder time concentrating, and also don't know that they have any reason to care about the company's future. The first week or two after a layoff is very glum and unproductive.
- ab_testing 4y agoSomehow I feel that all these VC backed firms just add employees for the sake of adding employees. I use Tastyworks - another free online brokerage that it almost at feature parity with Robinhood. They have stocks, options, futures and even some selective crypto. They also make money using PFOF just like Robinhood. However on Linkedin, their employee count is less than 100 (99 to be precise) On the other hand, Robinhood was at almost 4000 employees at the start of the year. I think they still have about 80% more employees than where they need to be.
- niyazpk 4y agoSure, but also, none of my (investing) friends use Tastyworks, and almost all of them are using RH as their primary investing platform! Companies in hyper-growth stages may hire/fire differently than others.
- outworlder 4y ago> as their primary investing platform :%s/investing/speculation/g Very few people use RH as 'investing'. Those will be on boring brokers like Vanguard. I have a Tastyworks account too - the fills are way better than Robinhood's. As expected, since they charge some amount per trade. But that means that the "free" platform will definitely have more users, just because it's supposedly free (even though you pay for it in the fills, and get frontrunning trades)
- kasey_junk 4y agoHow are you quantifying that the fills are better? I worked professionally on this problem a while ago and it was very hard to do even with full depth feeds direct from the exchanges.
- sitzkrieg 4y agoprice and execution time? how much slip or price improvement on limits? or god forbid the casual retail market orders fill vs nbbo and pools at exec
- soneca 4y ago> ”In his message Tuesday, Mr. Tenev said the new round of changes at the company are particularly concentrated in its operations, marketing and program management departments.” People here on HN often say how bad is to be an engineer in a non-tech company. It seems that it’s much worse to be a non-engineer in a tech company.
- atlasunshrugged 4y agoAs a nontechnical person, I can say I don't blame co's for cutting these roles first. Marketing, HR, program management, etc. are great at creating additional layers and busywork that makes it seem like they're absolutely critical to a company functioning. I was mostly in sales/bd and what I did love about the job was that there were pretty objective criteria to look at to see performance- how many partnerships or deals were in the pipeline, how many did you close, what dollar value, what was the csat on closed deals, etc.
- peter_mcrae 4y agoI don't disagree on cutting these roles first, but I don't think it's a function of these roles being non-important; rather when a company stops growing these roles have less utility. Less about the role and more about the company priorities which shift when growth stalls. No one is sales is going to advocate for less marketing spend.
- ceeplusplus 4y agoProgram managers have very little utility. Ops should really be automated (i.e. it should be half run by SWEs that automate everything they can), so real ops headcount should stay constant as the company grows as automation is increased. I would hope marketing is data driven on things like CAC, but who knows at a lot of companies. Lots of marketing people are not quantitatively fluent.
- Dma54rhs 4y ago
- 4y ago
- throwawaysleep 4y agoEmployment is a transitory thing. Remember this the next time you spend your life energy fixing something you could get away with letting fail.
- kaushikc 4y agoAs an employee you need to think like a mercenary, ruthless, no loyalty, enrich yourself, get the job done but not at any cost to yourself.
- papito 4y agoYes. Try to be a cold-blooded professional. Do your job without attachment. Your company is not your family. It will end one day, but you will still be going. What you take away is experience, learning from success and mistakes, connections, and most importantly - friendships. The rest is insignificant.
- tclancy 4y agoReddit will be telling me this split is just like a dividend too.
- MrMan 4y agoits worse than any other broker, so there is no reason for it to survive
- rubyist5eva 4y agoIf Vlad Tenev is accepting responsibility he should resign. What a dumpster fire company.
- fleddr 4y agoWe live in such morally bankrupt times. You can just say "you take responsibility" without actually taking responsibility at all. Our expectations have become so low and we've become so complacent that just the statement is enough. In similar vain, "we care about your mental health" as is the common internal email from HR. No actual care is offered though. Giving staff a day off is a tangible example of doing at least something, but obviously no such thing happens. Once again the difference between caring and not caring is zero. "We care about your privacy" except for the 20 years of prior tracking where we didn't. And actually still don't as we annoy and mislead you to keep doing it. A web of lies. Optics, zero substance.
- yomkippur 4y agoCoinbase for instance...
- xyst 4y agoThis is where we balance it out with unions. Unions have historically gotten us everything today that most people think is just SOP. Limited work weeks (40 hrs). Monday thru Friday as business days. Paid vacations. Family and medical leave. Breaks. Paid holidays. Sick leave. It’s a shame there’s been a massive push from corporations pushing anti-union propaganda. We have been complacent. We need unions to make our voice heard. Both in the mega corps and local/state/federal governments.
- fleddr 4y agoI agree, unions and legislation. The devil is in the details but those are the main instruments, if only we were more willing and motivated.
- ianai 4y agoMaybe it’s worth reiterating that the unions and legal frameworks didn’t just happen “because unions.” And unions weren’t always (never were) guiltless entities. It was always a fight. The past is full of incidents to be horrified and emboldened by learning. Edit-there have been long periods where seemingly nothing can possibly change. Then enough backlash is raised against another side (even the status quo) and things change.
- emanresu3 4y ago
- rvz 4y agoThe whole market downturn begun months ago, since November as predicted. [0] That was the exact time to run away. Many other small companies like Robinhood were one of the first to start downsizing quicker, which really doesn't surprise me since all the cheap money is now gone. But the actual winners are the C-level executives, the VCs and any of the long term employees who cashed out. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29508238 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29508238
- xyst 4y agoThat’s a significant RIF
- twblalock 4y agoA lot of Robin Hood's growth in particular was driven by people gambling their stimulus money because they didn't need it to make ends meet, and by the Fed juicing the markets with low rates for far too long, and by the ridiculous meme stock phenomenon. It was a perfect storm of stupidity. Personally I'm glad that some sanity is returning to investing, and we are still a long way from getting back to normal.
- bastardoperator 4y agopeople gambling their stimulus money because they didn't need it to make ends meet How did you quantify this statement?
- tjr225 4y agoThey didn't, but I think most people would guess that is accurate. I know I do. I supported one of their open source infrastructure solutions(that they weren't paying for mind you) when SHTF.
- mepiethree 4y agoIf all we are doing is guessing, I would also guess that people being stuck at home with nothing to do but mess around with Robinhood played a big factor
- JohnBooty 4y ago
- daoist_shaman 4y agoThis is a red flag. Robinhood is struggling for capital, so I wouldn't trust them with my cash investments whatsoever. Not that anyone has trusted them for a while, but yeah.
- gruez 4y ago>Robinhood is struggling for capital, so I wouldn't trust them with my cash whatsoever. Why not? You're protected by SIPC for up to $500k (for securities) and $250k (for cash).
- xyst 4y agoAren’t they selling the order flow of retail traders? Protected or not. I’m not trusting them. “Robinhood” my ass
- gruez 4y ago>Aren’t they selling the order flow of retail traders? ...and getting price improvements. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32325223 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32325223. I don't see the issue here.
- sitzkrieg 4y agoother brokers do too..
- adrr 4y agoWhat's wrong with selling your orders to a market maker? You get a better price.
- CameronNemo 4y agoYou actually want to have to rely on insurance? I would hope that my brokerage can at least stay solvent ffs.
- marcinzm 4y ago>Why not? You're protected by SIPC for up to $500k (for securities) and $250k (for cash). Presumably there's some delay in the recovery process during which you cannot access or trade your assets. Crypto is also explicitly not covered.
- tmpz22 4y ago* unmute microphone * "thats bull shit you took 800m in compensation last year" * get fired without severance * feel really good
- tdeck 4y agoI doubt there's an option to unmute your mic on the company-wide layoff announcement call.
- rootusrootus 4y agoThat's brutal. We just laid off a couple hundred people last week, only five from our department (which is 190 people) but two of them were from one of my teams. Demoralizing, and in the case of that team, absolutely devastating to productivity in the short term. Cutting almost 1 in 4 employees is beyond anything I can imagine. I think I'd feel like I was rearranging deck chairs if I survived the cut and stuck around. I'd be putting out my resume right now.
- taurath 4y agoI’ve gone thru those it a few times - while most all other companies were doing hiring freezes or layoffs as well. It’s times like that that employers really squeeze every last bit out of those “lucky enough” to stay around.
- chadlavi 4y agoThey were still in business?
- stjohnswarts 4y agoRight sizing not layoffs
- throwaway_1928 4y ago
- buscoquadnary 4y agoSo several times I've had the opportunity to join fast growing startups that offered quite a bit more compensation, and equity as well. One of the things that I always took consideration of was the stability of the company vs where I was at. Many of these people made a bet that working for Robinhood would pay off, it didn't that is part of the risk that came with the SV salaries, and the stock. I get that it sucks, but it seems like it is part of the parcel that comes with joining a VC backed startup. Do people really not consider company stability and long term projections when choosing where to work?
- slickrick216 4y agoOracle is also doing layoffs today and would somewhat be in the stable class. It’s just like nature it just is. Think the thing to do is just take Larry Ellisons advice and GTFM.
- moneywoes 4y agoGuide to financial management?
- metadat 4y ago"Get The Fucking Money" An [invented] Larry Ellison quote from "The Dropout", the Elizabeth Holmes Theranos TV mini-series funded by Hulu. https://youtube.com/watch?v=sgd40T05KaQ&t=65 https://youtube.com/watch?v=sgd40T05KaQ&t=65
- slickrick216 4y agoSolid effort
- mavelikara 4y agoPublic companies have shareholders to please quarter-after-quarter. If the markets remain bearish for long, public companies will have to do multiple layoffs as they restructure their operations. Private startups, especially well-capitalized ones, have only their Boards (mostly, founders) to answer to. They can be, counterintuitively, more stable job-wise than many public companies.
- shruubi 4y ago> I approved and took responsibility for our ambitious staffing trajectory—this is on me It's all well and good to say that, but what has he actually done to take responsibility?
- wly_cdgr 4y agoNothing of course
- AviationAtom 4y agoGood riddance. Robinhood has been the shining example of what Fintech should NOT be. It's only benefit was encouraging other brokerages to be more competitive.
- Aalph 4y ago
- adam_arthur 4y agoThe truth is that a majority of tech companies don't need 50%+ of their employees. Google could lay off vast swathes tomorrow and be immensely more profitable without any loss in revenue. The 2010s will be remembered as the golden era for tech employment. The second we start getting industry wide layoffs, the insanely high wage inflation we've seen will kick into reverse much faster than you probably believe possible. Further, tech employees will be the first to suffer in a high inflation environment due to rising discount rate. Yet tech is such a small portion of the labor force that layoffs here basically mean zilch when it comes to the unemployment rate/inflation, and thus there's a long way for it to fall before the Fed adjusts policy
- cwilkes 4y agoHas any tech company that laid off 50% of it’s employees survived? Maybe one or two. That would seem to indicate that the 50% number is too high. Perhaps you see it as 50% as like when people say they only need 10% of the functionality of MS Word so they could drop 90%. Except that 10% is different for everyone.
- humanrebar 4y agoYou say that, but companies that cut tech too deep will probably get crushed under a mountain of technical debt or gradually lose goodwill due to buggy or stale products. Point is, it's possible to ship crap with a small crew. But the cuts won't come uniformly from scoping back or removing low productivity engineers. You'll also see corners cut, upgrades delayed, security flaws ignored, and so on.
- 015a 4y agoObviously there's bias involved, but I really don't see a reality where this isn't the case. I've literally never worked at a company where half the team could be laid off and the product would still function at its current level of functionality for 12 months; let alone adding functionality. If you've worked at a company like this; I imagine there are some; then sure; the lights could be kept on. Hey there Oracle & IBM 2.0. Then again, you (the company) just laid off hundreds of extremely talented engineers with few other marketable skills except "the industry you trained them in", you've been paying them insane salaries, they're just going to turn around and compete with you, except now they've got a clean slate and have learned from all the mistakes that caused them to be necessary in the first place. The well paying, large companies are literally 7 of the 10 largest companies on the S&P. Oh, and by the way, one of those other 3, UHG, they have... 850 job openings with the word "software engineer" in the title; about 15% of all their openings. Johnson & Johnson, they're on there, 300 software engineering openings, out of 3000 total. Berkshire is also on the list, harder to get their count, but you get the point; software is EVERYWHERE. I just... don't get it. I don't get how someone can believe what the grandparent believes. I mean, you can argue a more measured stance, that the outlier 99.9th percentile salaries we've seen in the past four years are probably going to stagnate. Maybe; I'm not convinced of this, but its a reasonable stance. You can argue it'll be harder to get into the industry, as companies want experience and not coding bootcamps; I'd bet on it. But to argue that tech companies don't need 50% of their employees, when they're the plurality of the wealth of the United States' public markets; its comical. Where else did that wealth come from, if not their (tech) employees? If the argument is they're overvalued, maybe, but that's speculation; buy Puts if you believe it, but I'd buy Calls on "you won't". Then again, maybe the grandparent is talking about non-tech roles in tech companies? I can't tell; and moreover, I don't think even they know what they're arguing for.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- LeicaLatte 4y agoIs there at least one player in the crypto space that is too big to fail?
- bboygravity 4y agoWho would've thought that scamming people isn't a good business-model in the long term? RH pretends to be a "broker" and: 1. lets people trade "stocks" that aren't stocks the way people think they are. All (convenient) trades (for its HF clients) get internalized and never ever hit any lit market/exchange. The fact that this is possible is a general issue with the US stock market and lack of meaningful regulation and policing. This is not unique to RH: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg8onYvJW3Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg8onYvJW3Q 2. its entire business model revolves around selling a "front running service" to RH's hedge fund clients, so they can front run RH's users/retailers (who are NOT clients) on every single trade. The front running service is called PFOF and is illegal in a lot of countries, but not in the US. 3. Literally turns off the buy button temporarily when it's convenient for its hedge fund clients to manipulate a stock price to go in their desired direction. This is so mind-blowing that I probably need to provide a source. Here it is one: https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/robinhood-president-sold-his-shares-of-amc-the-day-before-robinhood-turned-off-the-buy-button/ https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/robinhood-president-sold... too bad this is apparently not common knowledge. Let de down-voting by RHs few remaining social media managers begin.
- ohiovr 4y agoWe probably shouldn't worry until Biden redefines a recession to two quarters of negative growth.
- mmmpetrichor 4y agoRobinhood... like robbing from the rich to give to the poor... hold on a minute! What a name for a huge public corporation in the US. They almost had me!
- vic40 4y agoRemember, something. Everyone who says companies could lay off 50% of the stag and keep working great is probably the person who needs to be laid off first.
- hnarn 4y agoAt this point I think the best thing for Robinhood might be to just get bought up by a larger bank and converted into some kind of separate-but-integrated offering with an international focus, competing with companies like Revolut.