52 ms·
DoorDash lays off 1250 employees
- qwertyuiop_ 4y agoThese CEO letters are meaningless. They are written by obscenely paid PR hacks and follow the same template. * This is the most difficult change to COMPANY NAME HERE that I’ve had to announce in our almost n-year history. Today, we are reducing our corporate headcount by approximately n people and saying goodbye to many talented teammates.* * While there is no great way to manage this process, we strive to treat each of you with respect and integrity. Each of you who is impacted will have the opportunity to speak to a leader this week.* * While I want to focus today’s attention on our talented teammates who are departing, I did want to say a few words to the team that is staying and carrying the baton. While today’s news is painful, I continue to be very optimistic about our future and convinced of the importance of the role we can play in the world.*
- db1234 4y agoYou forgot to include CEO taking responsibility.
- nicksrose7224 4y agoWithout any actual implications of them "taking responsibility" too
- xpe 4y agoWhat would that look like? I'm no supporter of PR speak. The CEO ranks seem to have no problem in finding their next gig. Some some receive ludicrous compensation even when the company does poorly. I'm just not sure what is the desired outcome here? And how do we get there?
- azakai 4y agoOne possibile way to take personal responsibility could be to add "and therefore I will reduce my compensation by the same percentage we are reducing headcount". (Based on other comments, that would be 6%.)
- ferdowsi 4y agoTheir CEO compensation is mostly equity, which has dropped like a stone in the past year.
- db1234 4y agoThat's true for most corporate employees as well, no?
- dcgudeman 4y agoDon't you think this is pretty childish? When market conditions change companies need to adapt, sometimes that means laying people off. Isn't that the job of the CEO? They are responsible for the health of the company overall. I don't see why they should be punished for making adjustments to make the company competitive.
- xpe 4y ago> When market conditions chance, companies need to adapt I agree with that part ^ Let me frame this more broadly. _How_ and _when_ should companies adapt? There are many ways, across many timescales. I'll give a made up example, hopefully in a reasonable ballpark. A company needs to save $250M / year. Let's say there are three options under consideration, not mutually exclusive / can be blended: Option A: Lay off 1% of 10,000 employees, saving $250M/year. Option B: 15% across the board salary cuts, saving $250M/year. Option C: Lower executive and VP-level compensation packages (salary, options, stock, deferred pay, etc), saving $250M. Fairness in service of the company goals means that all viable options are given due consideration. It is relatively easy for a CEO to do lay offs, even if other options (lowering their own comp) has better effects.
- azakai 4y ago
- int_19h 4y agoAt the minimum, the desired outcome is that they shouldn't talk about "taking personal responsibility" when there's none to be seen.
- tarunkotia 4y agoImplication is that you get a strike against you which is publicly documented. This also serves a purpose of sending a message to middle-management that we should not repeat this strategic mistake of over-hiring when things are hot and then when things slowdown going through this painful process of separation. I am hopeful that this public admission will inculcate a culture of holding everyone accountable rather than "emperor has no clothes" culture where people live in denial.
- whatshisface 4y agoPeople complain about how these announcements say nothing, but what would you expect a company to say about their layoffs?
- subb 4y agoMaybe start by having a sustainable growth (or you know, no growth!) so you don't have to write a completely emotionless letter explaining why you have to lay off a whole village?
- vikingerik 4y agoWell, perception/observation bias. We never notice the companies that do grow sustainably and don't do layoffs.
- xpe 4y agoYou really think so? I've picked many places to work based on my perception of their business model stability and how they treat people. I'm far from perfect of course. I think many employees and investors care about employee retention. I don't know how much it factors in, but it is something.
- vikingerik 4y agoI meant "we" as on a news site like this, "Company Not Laying Off" will never make a headline. Yes, employees and good investors/owners do care.
- xpe 4y agoRemember the CEO is also accountable to the board and investors who have certain expectations. The morality here is hard because the end results are largely driven by the system. Sure, there are some leaders who are particularly ill-suited for their jobs from the employee POV. Unfortunately some of those leaders serve their investors quite well. If you point one finger, you'll quickly realize you might need many more to follow the interconnected trail of power. Also let's not forget that so much of Silicon Valley's advantageous job market is linked to investor behavior, good and bad. My point? Sure, criticize these feaux-emotional layoff letters, just don't forget to look back to see the reality distortion field already in place when you joined that job.
- Encrypt-Keeper 4y agoThe CEO letter is meaningless, but the severance and departing benefits look pretty generous at least. A nice little cushion while they look for new jobs. I've certainly seen much worse.
- TeeMassive 4y agoMusk did it better
- uuddlrlrbaba 4y agoIn terms of budget, wonder how many staff would equal CEO compensation. A lot of orgs out there carry on just fine through absence and transitions at the top.
- cokeandpepsi 4y agoeh, they gotta say something the exit packages seem good layoffs during this time of year are very stressful
- aardvarkr 4y agoWhat would you rather the CEO say? It’s easy to complain about everything but orders of magnitude more difficult to think critically and offer ways to improve it. It’s more difficult but that desire to think critically and put in the effort is what makes the community here so much better than most sites.
- rco8786 4y ago> obscenely paid PR hacks I genuinely don't understand comments like this. Do you know who wrote the letter? Do you know how much they get paid? Communications is a real skill with actual, real people that devote their careers to doing it well. And they get paid fairly, unless you know something I don't. Nobody wants to write this letter, least of all the PR person who wrote it. What would you have the CEO say, if not what they all say when this happens? "Our business isn't growing like we hoped now get fucked"?
- tuckerpo 4y agoBrevity and directness are appreciated. People's livelihoods are disappearing from underneath them -- give tangible reasons why, in plain language.
- rco8786 4y agoSeriously, what do you think that looks like if not exactly what was written? > We sped up our hiring to catch up with our growth and started many new businesses in response to feedback from our audiences. > Most of our investments are paying off, and while we’ve always been disciplined in how we have managed our business and operational metrics, we were not as rigorous as we should have been in managing our team growth > While our business continues to grow fast, given how quickly we hired, our operating expenses – if left unabated – would continue to outgrow our revenue. We grew too fast and revenue wasn't catching up. What other tangibles do you want? Would they somehow help the situation?
- tuckerpo 4y agoDo you have a horse in this race? Are you the PR guy writing these emails? : ^ ) > What other tangibles do you want? In short-form: you're gone, here's why, here's some money. The diction doesn't need to be apologetic. It's condescending.
- rco8786 4y agoI don't at all. I'm just trying to figure out what people are supposed to be doing. And I was mostly responding to the comment of "obscenely paid PR hacks" in the first place...just unnecessarily cynical. It was a long letter b/c it provided a lot of information. The information you're asking for was wrapped up in 3 sentences. But I guess that was still too long? If it's not apologetic, they get reamed for being too cold/unsympethetic.
- jsnell 4y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33800997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33800997
- dylan604 4y agowell, i guess after the pandemic, all of the fake websites for local eateries that didn't have websites have been made (so that doordash owns the search and orders even if the user thought they were ordering directly), so that's a department no longer needed. /s
- cokeandpepsi 4y agothat and it costs like $40 to order a burger, I was a regular customer at one point and I rarely hit the order button now after seeing the price
- dmamills 4y agoUndercut competition by burning raised capital. Then once you've got the market share, you boil the frogs you gathered. I believe the euphemism around these parts is "disruption".
- quickthrower2 4y agoUnfortunately for them, you can go walk (or drive) and get a burger! I quite enjoy phoning through an order and picking it up like it’s 1986!
- boring_twenties 4y agoNear my old place, there's a poke place that simply refuses to take orders over the phone. They do do doordash, though.
- quickthrower2 4y agoNew startup: we take your orders on the phone and order with doordash. For this we give you a 30% discount funded by VC.
- ProjectArcturis 4y agoWith those enormous fees, how were they not profitable?
- eddsh1994 4y ago> Immigration support: We will set the termination date for March 1, 2023, giving those with visa applications (and a desire to stay in the US) as much time as possible to find a new job. That's really nice.
- bgorman 4y agoDoesn't this violate anti-discrimination laws? It seems like this discriminates against US citizens (discrimination by national origin).
- bhouser 4y agoHow is it discrimination if they set the termination date for ALL employees to March 1, 2023?
- teaearlgraycold 4y agoBy that logic is the existence of visa programs discrimination by national origin?
- sidewndr46 4y agoNo, because the employer must prove their are no legal residents in the US that are eligible for the job.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- howinteresting 4y agoThis is a common myth but is not true for H-1B visas. It is true for EB2 and EB3 green cards, however.
- sidewndr46 4y agoAs part of the LCA the employer must attest there is no strike or lockout, that the salary of similarly employed workers is not affected, & that the job application must be provided to workers already at the company. So no, you can't just threaten to replace all your employees with H1-B visa holders.
- UncleOxidant 4y agoWhat's the fuckedcompany site of our current era? Is there one?
- bilbo0s 4y agoHacker News
- leet_thow 4y agohttps://layoffs.fyi/ https://layoffs.fyi/
- shortstuffsushi 4y agoThank you for this, I was actually going to post asking if there was a collection.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tuan 4y agoaccording to this CNN article https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/30/tech/doordash-layoffs/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/30/tech/doordash-layoffs/index.h..., it's about 6% of their workforce.
- actusual 4y agoYowza, >20,000 employees?? Does that include drivers?
- sergiotapia 4y agoI led the tech at a similar company and most of our "drivers" were not W2 employees. I imagine the drivers are the same.
- csa 4y agoI assume that drivers are “gig workers” who can’t be laid off.
- NelsonMinar 4y agoCNBC says 8600 corporate employees, so this would be 15%. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/30/doordash-lays-off-1250-employees.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/30/doordash-lays-off-1250-emplo...
- mrweasel 4y agoWhile I do feel sorry for the people who are losing their jobs, I do wonder why so many of these unicorns / VC funded / startups / Silicon Vally darlings, all seems like they are, shall we say, a bit overstaffed? If you can lay off between 10% or more of the staff and expect to continue to operate unimpeded, then why didn't they do it sooner? I'm not counting Twitter, because while perhaps overstaffed, firing 50%+ is just nuts.
- SeanAnderson 4y agoBecause opportunity cost of expanding into larger markets more quickly was worth the inefficiency until interest rates went up.
- slater 4y agowe were not as rigorous as we should have been in managing our team growth. That’s on me. Therefor you, the CEO, are resigning as well, right? Oh.
- Tempest1981 4y agoJust like at Hooli: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u48vYSLvKNQ
- gretch 4y agoI guess you’re implying that resignation would be the more just course of action from the CEO, but I don’t think everyone sees it that way (not me for 1). I think resignation would be the more cowardly move. The ceo dug a deep hole and at least 1k ppl lost their job. They have the responsibility of digging out of that hole before more ppl have to get laid off. Resigning now would read to me like “hey guys, I know I made a mess here but, oh well, have fun dealing with it, good luck to the next guy”. Absolutely would not work with someone like that in future prospects
- staunch 4y agoWhatever you think about the letter, the fact that they're providing reasonable severance/vesting/healthcare support proves a large degree of competence and ethics. My simple policy is: I will never stop talking trash, never work for, and avoid entirely any company that lays people off without the basic ethics of providing reasonable financial support. The companies providing two weeks should be shamed for eternity. As long as enough people adopt this attitude it will effectively force companies to behave well, even if they don't want to. Tech workers on HN have particularly powerful influence in this regard and should utilize it. (It'd be great if layoffs.fyi provided severance data to shame and reward the right companies.)
- erehweb 4y agoLarge companies may be effectively required to give a lot of severance for large layoffs to avoid having to announce layoffs in advance - see e.g. the California WARN act. https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN
- rmk 4y agoIt’s great that they have set a March 1 termination date for those on visas. And the severance and stock vesting are also reasonable. Not to mention the fact that health insurance continues for quite a bit longer and then goes into Cobra. The verbiage is standard PR pap but the actual actions are quite very considerate. However, what actual responsibility are the CEOs taking after hiring like crazy knowing fully well that the pandemic exuberance and stimulus wasn’t going to keep the recession away, only delay it? I’m sure competitive pressure was part of the reason for the overhiring but it’s still not the whole story.
- stu2b50 4y agoIf I were a board member I wouldn’t really want an environment where CEOs were deathly afraid of making bets that made sense at the time. It just leads to stagnation. What consequence do you think the CEO should face?
- rmk 4y agoThat is a fair point. However, my point is not that the CEO should face consequences, but voluntarily take responsibility in some meaningful way. "That's on me" in a corporate email != taking actual responsibility. The empty platitudes are the problem. The accommodations for employees who are being let go are above and beyond, which is the silver lining.
- dymk 4y ago> but voluntarily take responsibility in some meaningful way Nobody seems to be able to explain what they think this looks like. "You'll know it when you see it"?
- sovnade 4y agoWhat are they supposed to do? Demand ramped up significantly during covid - they needed staff to support it. They really had no choice but to hire that staff unless they wanted to have an undersupported platform with extremely long wait times for things like customer service or onboarding new restaurants. And with DD having a lot of competition (Uber Eats, Postmates, etc etc), someone else would pick up their slack and keep that business.
- welder 4y agoAnother way to say that: USA is really mean [to immigrants].
- FredPret 4y agoMean? No. Confusing and illogical? Yes
- lzooz 4y agoMean why? Staying in a foreign country is a privilege not a right.
- PartiallyTyped 4y agoI mean, it's all imaginary lines carved eons ago by colonialists with blood for ink, but who cares.
- eddsh1994 4y agoEven Chimpanzee tribes have land borders that they protect. When do 'imaginary lines' just become 'lines', when they've been created and destroyed since pre-history? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
- matai_kolila 4y agoHm, “chimps do it” is not the stellar argument you think it is. Chimps throw feces, should we start doing that too?
- eddsh1994 4y agoMy point is while 'imaginary lines' seem theoretically interesting to point out when we discuss free movement, it's far too ingrained into animals to really change. Maybe in the distant future we will have planets as borders instead of country lines, but the lines will be there! Also any reason to point out Chimpanzees have wars including patrolling land borders and recon missions :)
- magundu 4y agoI think, hacker news should add Layoff menu after jobs tab. It is happening so often. Almost everyday.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deanmoriarty 4y agoI feel envious of these folks getting such a nice severance. It would be rather nice for me to be laid off with a great cash flow of money and take a long vacation. Naturally my life is financially in order (no debt, no kids to support, no visa issues), so I recognize my privileged position, and I say this as a first generation US immigrant who went through many precarious visas including H1B. Envy was nonetheless the first emotion the article evoked in me.
- justizin 4y agoIt's not the best time to be looking for work.
- sfe22 4y agoExactly, the best thing to do right now is hold on to your job. It is unclear when the economy will recover and you may be able to find a better job.
- itake 4y agoWith a severance package and savings like OPs, why do they need to look for work now?
- shpx 4y agoIf many of these thousands of tech people start just spending their large savings and not working, that could lead to more inflation.
- ar_lan 4y agoIt's sort of the same envy I feel when I see student loan forgiveness. I worked a ton (30+ hrs weekly) in college, and 40+ hrs during summer/winter break, to ensure I graduated college with no loans taken. And now to see loan forgiveness for people who took far fewer sacrifices (especially lawyers/doctors, who make significantly more than me now) - it sort of reinforces that working hard is a sucker move, and definitely discourages me from doing such paths if I believe I can just get a bail out later.
- sergiotapia 4y ago>Most of our investments are paying off, and while we’ve always been disciplined in how we have managed our business and operational metrics, we were not as rigorous as we should have been in managing our team growth. That’s on me. As a result, operating expenses grew quickly. Translated: The free money party from VCs is over. Across the board, it's OVER. Time for actual good businesses. No more spending $1.50 to make $0.60 and grow. Party's over gents.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y agoHard times coming for a lot of people, and only some people that I feel deserve it. Overall, I agree. The Free Money Party is over and it's going to be a net good. I do wonder how much of the shitty behavior we've seen in the past 10-15 years eventually falls back to "Whatever, we'll just get more money if we need it". I am optimistic of businesses that do their work and stay out of politics, that actually need to be competitive, that give a shit about customers because they really do need you.
- Dicey84 4y agoAre there any write ups on how you simultaneously terminate this many employees from a logistical point of view? Ie: does HR numbers need to be bolstered to handle it? How do you choose the 1200+ individuals?
- killjoywashere 4y agoThese announcements are required by labor law. Examples: * https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/termination/plantclosings https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/termination/plantclosings * https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN
- doovd 4y agoCould someone please explain why this note reads identically to the Meta and Stripe note?
- kick_in_the_dor 4y agoMeta and Stripe attract some of the top tech talent and are seen as leaders in their respective fields. Thus, their actions often create de facto templates for other companies following suit.
- djur 4y agoAlso the senior leadership in these companies are all part of overlapping social circles, have similar educational backgrounds, have a similar media diet, etc.
- doovd 4y agoYeah but in the case of these notes, they're identical almost word for word - i.e. there is a central template being used.
- CorruptedArc 4y ago*DoorDash to Layoff 1250 Employees
- kwertyoowiyop 4y agoAt least he called them ‘teammates’ rather than ‘Dashers’ or some other cringe.
- cletus 4y agoAmericans generally won't appreciate how scary this can be for those on work visas, particularly when the chances of finding a new job have dropped drastically. Generally speaking, work visas and employment-based green cards are based on the premise that you were unable to fill the role with an American citizen or lawful permanent resident ("LPR"). That becomes tricky for sponsoring such a process if you recently laid people off. There are also more job applicants and it becomes harder to lawfully filter them out to justify your case. For people born in India, regardless of current citizenship, this may end up terminate a wait for a green card that has been ongoing for 10-15 years, leaving them little choice but to leave the country. The process is completely arbitrary and deliberately capricious. For example, USCIS randomly audits some percentage (estimated to be ~30%) of applications, ostensibly to stop people figuring out how to game the system (ie by figuring out what USCIS will flag for further review). Now that's fine in principle but the audit (at the time my application was in process) added an additional 18 months. Completely randomly. When the audit happened it simply passed. with no requests for evidence ("RFEs"). Another example: examiners aren't consistent. Your case will be assigned to an officer. That officer might be quick or slow. Two different officers may treat the same application different. For example, one may request a form you and your lawyer think unnecessary while another doesn't. If you proactively include it anyway, that too can lead to delays to explain why that form is in there. Unfortunately immigrants are an easy political scapegoat and a non-voting one at that. No party seems inclined to truly address these problems. Or it comes up occasionally with a bad bill. In 2004, PBS had a documentary called The New Americans. I can't really find a way to wtach it online. It follows immigrants from a number of different countries. One was an Indian man (and his family) who got laid off in the dot-com crash (and ultimately returned to India IIRC). I suspect there'll be many repetitions of this in the coming year. This lack of certainty and security in your living situation can hang over your head for years, sometimes more than a decade. It's stressful and cruel.
- outworlder 4y ago> That becomes tricky for sponsoring such a process if you recently laid people off. There are also more job applicants and it becomes harder to lawfully filter them out to justify your case. All correct. General recommendation is to wait at least six months. A friend got his case delayed for two years, due to constant layoffs in our area. > for example, USCIS randomly audits some percentage (estimated to be ~30%) of applications, ostensibly to stop people figuring out how to game the system Yeap. Got unlucky with that too. And apparently the audit did nothing, because not only very simple and irrelevant things were asked (like org charts for a non-managerial position). Then, when I got to the I-140 process they issued a NOIR (Notice of Intent to Revoke), asking for a document that was filed in the PERM. One would think that, if there was an issue, it would have been flagged back then. What it did do was to delay the process by a lot. On top of the usual delays – plus delays until your company gets around to filing for your green card. Which they have zero incentive to do. Most immigrants don't know all the details and all the rules that exist before they sign up. It's not due to lack of research, it's because some things are really obscure and don't come into play until you care about them. For example, H1B is restricted to _one income source_ (spouse can't work). However, there's an exception for purely "passive" income. Examples would be investments – as long as you don't trade frequently. What's "frequently"? Noone knows. Day trading is obviously out but you still can't be "too active". You can also be a landlord. But you are not allowed to be involved in the day to day activities. For example, a faucet broke. You could go to Home Depot, grab a new one and install it, right? No, that would be a violation. You would have to pay someone else to do it. But wouldn't hiring a plumber be something that demands time, and thus you are "working"? No, apparently not. Even _expectation of future income_ can run afoul of the rules (and you don't receive a booklet explaining that). For example: you spouse cannot work, but can they start working on a game, or iOS application, but not sell until they are authorized to work? No, they can't. They are considered to be "working" even if they are not getting any income right now. So, if you are on H1B and your spouse has a career(but not in a field that's in high demand), they essentially have to kiss their career goodbye. There will be a massive gap in their resume in the best case. Also, if you are from India (not my case, and it still took 7 years), given the current wait times, even if you bring your newborn to the US, there's a chance you won't get a green card by the time they turn 21. Which means they will have to leave as they are no longer considered to be your dependent. It doesn't matter that they have not known any other country and may not even speak the language. Much more can be said about the whole thing. I would advise any wanna-be immigrants to talk to someone that's been through the process. Don't ask US citizens (unless they have naturalized and used the work visa path) because they will have no idea what the process is like.
- wokibroki 4y ago
- 1attice 4y agoI really find these mea-culpas hard to take when I know even just a smidge more than they expect. In this case, I did a Doordash technical screen three months ago during a job hunt. Recruiter painted a rosy picture of growth and outlook, slathered me in honey-words, etc. This was well into the downturn. Normalcy bias is powerful and I can understand that some companies did not move fast enough to respond to the change in the weather, but I can also fault them for it, and find these apologies self-serving.
- SheinhardtWigCo 4y agoI don't understand, do you expect recruiters to have realistic insights into the company's trajectory?
- ferdowsi 4y agoRecruiters are salespeople. Toxic positivity, undue flattery, etc are all part of their toolbox. It's ultimately on the candidate to perform due diligence on the organization, like with any product.
- SoftTalker 4y agoGood salespeople are at least somewhat objective. I had a realtor point out issues with properties that I might never have thought to ask about. Now, maybe that was to steer me to other properties that he would make more money on, but they were real issues. It did serve to build a sense that he was not hiding information just to get a sale.
- anm89 4y agoWere you expecting a recruiter to say "Yeah things aren't great. I expect layoffs in the next few months" .? If so that's honestly on you. They would get fired for saying that. Of course they are never going to
- namibj 4y agoWell, sounds like an easy situation to find yourself committing fraud in as the recruiter. Getting a bonus and the recruit loosing a better/lasting chance might already suffice depending on how aware the recruiter was about the future of the company.
- DenisM 4y agoSomething I wanted to discuss - the bandwagon effect. If you want to do layoffs you will be best suited doing them at the same time as all the other companies. That’s because normally layoffs bust morale and lead not only to the ejection of the people you wanted gone, but also to the departure of the people you wanted to stay. However when everyone is doing layoffs at the same time there is nowhere for your good employees to go. Is this effect real, or am I seeing things?
- alberth 4y agoFor negative announcements like this, companies like to "hide in the herd" of other such announcements happening in the industry. Another tactic is announcing negative news on a Friday afternoon, to miss the news cycle.
- roflyear 4y agoLayoffs always happen, but I imagine it is like a wave. Sometimes you have very few, other times you have a lot. "nowhere else to go" isn't really a thing right now - but "the mood is right" is probably more of what is happening. Employees are at least a little on edge (which significantly impacts performance, for what it is worth) right now. Most companies that are laying off people do not need to lay them off. Their survival is not at stake. Doordash, for example, is making something like 4billion $ of gross profit a year. That's enough to pay all of these 1200 employees $3m a year, with some left over.
- ctchocula 4y agoLike most growth-phase startups from SV, Doordash are not profitable at the moment and have no profit to speak of with an EPS of _negative_ $2.41. Please correct your "$700m in gross profit a quarter" to "$1.7b in revenue a quarter" or "$296m in net loss a quarter" [1]. [1] https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1 https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1
- lotsofpulp 4y agoAnd they have never had a profitable year: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DASH/doordash/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DASH/doordash/net-...
- jrm4 4y agoSure. Honestly, forget this company entirely. There is no good reason that any third party should see more than a tiny tiny bit of operating money for the act of local drivers delivering local food from local restaurants to local customers. They made a bit of money in the beginning, great. Time to move on to a fairer solution, given that it's trivially easy to replicate.
- School-Cotton 4y agoIf it’s so easy to replicate, what stops competitors from undercutting them with lower fees and dominating the market?
- jrm4 4y agoThe money that they already have that they can use to influence other companies and government, et al. This is all very common; your likely problem is that you've bought into the "free market" fantasy; that somehow some meritorious competitor will rise above the others. Unfortunately, a free market like that requires more protections against e.g. "healthy competition" than we currently have.
- School-Cotton 4y agoThis is a valid argument for an entrenched monopoly, but DoorDash already has lots of big, powerful competitors (e.g. Uber). Are you suggesting they’re all involved in a price-fixing racket? That’s possible, of course, but I don’t think it’s the most plausible hypothesis without more evidence.
- jrm4 4y agoThis presumes that "as long as technically legal, what they're doing is fine" and I don't subscribe to that necessarily -- I think they can, and are, screwing people legally -- in fact, we've heard all the weird stories about price frontrunning, etc. I'd add Uber to the list of bad guys too. Screw 'em all. I don't care about legality, I care about fairness and obvious first principle things. Namely: everyone here knows it would be extremely cheap and easy to build a local uber/doordash whatever competitor. Lots of off the shelf software to do so. I don't believe those companies deserve that money for doing relatively little work, especially today. This is generally in tune even with the principles of intellectual property, namely a temporary advantage. No need anymore. Like a lot of services, local would be better.
- roflyear 4y agoAnother case of a company not needing to lay people off, but they are. Stock of course is up 9% today. Doordash is making something like $700m in gross profit a quarter. Just remember this when a company calls you a family.
- ctchocula 4y agoLike most growth-phase startups from SV, Doordash are not profitable at the moment and have no profit to speak of with an EPS of _negative_ $2.41. Please correct your "$700m in gross profit a quarter" to "$1.7b in revenue a quarter" or "$296m in net loss a quarter" [1]. [1] https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1792789&owner=exclude https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1792789&owner=exclude
- roflyear 4y agoWhat are you talking about? This shows $700m of gross profit: https://s22.q4cdn.com/280253921/files/doc_financials/2022/q3/DASH-Q3-2022-Shareholder-Letter_FINAL.pdf https://s22.q4cdn.com/280253921/files/doc_financials/2022/q3...
- adamsmith143 4y agoThe company has never made a dime in profits and has no path to do so. Just a matter of time until the VC money dries up.
- gagabity 4y agoIt's a public company.
- danrocks 4y agoI am all for free markets, but I am frustrated about how these unprofitable distribution companies just won't die. They are a net negative for our society.
- citizenpaul 4y ago>The pandemic presented sudden and unprecedented opportunities We were hungry piggies at a trough and didn't care what was in it we just ate. >Most of our investments are paying off I got rich, what about you? Oh? no? Well too bad. >we’ve always been disciplined in how we have managed our business...operating expenses grew quickly We were/are not disciplined we just fly by the seat of our pants. Where does one learn disgusting corporate double speak like this? Its so common now it must be taught somewhere. Seeing a person write something like this with a straight face makes me understand why some people believe demons are a real thing.