4 ms·

Nonsense. Presumably any private equity firm would also have came to a conclusion of reducing headcount. They wouldn't have done so in a single week based on

Nonsense. Presumably any private equity firm would also have came to a conclusion of reducing headcount. They wouldn't have done so in a single week based on ridiculous analysis. And wouldn't have done so in a way to destroy the morale of remaining workforce.

smoldesu 4y ago
I mean, the running joke in the industry was that you could fire 90% of Twitter's workforce and the company would still run fine. Judging by how few features they've shipped in the past few years, I'm still convinced that's the case.
- folkrav 4y ago
  We'll see when they actually start shipping stuff. Things tend to go smooth when nothing gets deployed...
  - MikePlacid 4y ago
    Right in the article: blue check mark changes. And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects than to help a person in charge to complete changes.
    - katbyte 4y ago
      Because blue check was released with no issues what so ever?
      - MikePlacid 4y ago
        "No issues" is a requirement from some other context. Probably.
    - mynameisvlad 4y ago
      > And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects than to help a person in charge to complete changes. I don't think any of it had to do with people having "nothing better to do on their own projects". I don't know about you, but if my new boss, the one that threatened to fire 3/4ths of the staff, told me to do something, it doesn't matter what I was working on before, my sole new project would be what the boss wanted.
      - MikePlacid 4y ago
        True. But the article does not mention that it was the boss who told the author to pitch in: >Some of us had worked through the weekend trying to help out a colleague who’d been given an insanely tight deadline Note: the deadline was given to "a colleague", not to "our team". Same here: >My colleague, whom I liked a lot, was never going to get it done in time without help, so we all pitched in. Also note that he seems to never have worked on such a schedule before: >I actually quite enjoyed it.
    - shagie 4y ago
      > And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects April 25th, Twitter Locks Down Product Changes After Agreeing to Musk Bid https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/twitter-locks-down-product-changes-after-agreeing-to-musk-bid https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/twitter-l... --- https://archive.ph/CK1X1 https://archive.ph/CK1X1 > For now, Twitter won’t allow product updates unless they’re business-critical, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the situation is private. The company accepted a $54.20-a-share bid from Musk after a whirlwind courtship that began with the Tesla Inc. magnate disclosing a 9% stake in Twitter earlier this month. > Product changes will require approval from a vice president, the people said. Twitter imposed the temporary ban to keep employees who may be miffed about the deal from “going rogue,” according to one of the people. April 26, Twitter is protecting its source code from disgruntled employees, reports say https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/26/twitter-lock-source-code-elon-musk/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/26/twitter-lock-source-code-e... --- For several months, nothing that was not business critical was released (or done). If you were on something that wasn't business critical, you were likely waiting for a fire to fight, working on the "ok, maybe after this all blows over I can deploy this - but not until then." In either case, not having something to do that was more pressing than helping out a person would not be surprising.
      - MikePlacid 4y ago
        >In either case, not having something to do that was more pressing than helping out a person would not be surprising. In the context you have provided - yes. But in the context of my professional experience it is rather surprising. Note that the author has not mentioned he was uncomfortable sitting there doing nothing. What he mentioned was: >we all pitched in. I actually quite enjoyed it. That looks like that was the first time for him ever. Also quite surprising - for me and my experience. PS. Also: >As soon as Musk became owner, there were always three things that had to be done by yesterday Sweet Jesus. Just "as soon"? Just three??
- MikePlacid 4y ago
  Yep. >As soon as Musk became owner, there were always three things that had to be done by yesterday Just when? Just three??
- amrocha 4y ago
  Literally never heard anyone say this before
- kelnos 4y ago
  I doubt that's actually true (I don't doubt that Twitter had too many employees, but I think 90% redundant is a bit hyperbolic), but even if it was, there are good ways and a bad ways to reduce workforce. Musk chose pretty much the baddest of the bad ways.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Presumably any private equity firm would also have came to a conclusion of reducing headcount. Any private equity firm would probably not have come to the recommendation of purchasing a firm that was, in ongoing terms, narrowly profitable in a transaction that would saddle the firm with about a third of its annual pre-acquisition revenue, several times its annual profit, and a sizable share of its project post-acquisition reserves in annual debt service costs, even if the particular buyer wasn’t one where the mere prospect of the purchase would disrupt revenue. As much as they can be very much be criticized, there is a sense in which criticizing Musk’s post-acquisition actions at Twitter is akin to criticizing actions of the Titanic’s officers and crew after the encounter with the iceberg.

smoldesu 4y ago

I mean, the running joke in the industry was that you could fire 90% of Twitter's workforce and the company would still run fine. Judging by how few features they've shipped in the past few years, I'm still convinced that's the case.

folkrav 4y ago
We'll see when they actually start shipping stuff. Things tend to go smooth when nothing gets deployed...
- MikePlacid 4y ago
  Right in the article: blue check mark changes. And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects than to help a person in charge to complete changes.
  - katbyte 4y ago
    Because blue check was released with no issues what so ever?
    - MikePlacid 4y ago
      "No issues" is a requirement from some other context. Probably.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    > And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects than to help a person in charge to complete changes. I don't think any of it had to do with people having "nothing better to do on their own projects". I don't know about you, but if my new boss, the one that threatened to fire 3/4ths of the staff, told me to do something, it doesn't matter what I was working on before, my sole new project would be what the boss wanted.
    - MikePlacid 4y ago
      True. But the article does not mention that it was the boss who told the author to pitch in: >Some of us had worked through the weekend trying to help out a colleague who’d been given an insanely tight deadline Note: the deadline was given to "a colleague", not to "our team". Same here: >My colleague, whom I liked a lot, was never going to get it done in time without help, so we all pitched in. Also note that he seems to never have worked on such a schedule before: >I actually quite enjoyed it.
  - shagie 4y ago
    > And how a lot of people had nothing better to do on their own projects April 25th, Twitter Locks Down Product Changes After Agreeing to Musk Bid https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/twitter-locks-down-product-changes-after-agreeing-to-musk-bid https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/twitter-l... --- https://archive.ph/CK1X1 https://archive.ph/CK1X1 > For now, Twitter won’t allow product updates unless they’re business-critical, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the situation is private. The company accepted a $54.20-a-share bid from Musk after a whirlwind courtship that began with the Tesla Inc. magnate disclosing a 9% stake in Twitter earlier this month. > Product changes will require approval from a vice president, the people said. Twitter imposed the temporary ban to keep employees who may be miffed about the deal from “going rogue,” according to one of the people. April 26, Twitter is protecting its source code from disgruntled employees, reports say https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/26/twitter-lock-source-code-elon-musk/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/26/twitter-lock-source-code-e... --- For several months, nothing that was not business critical was released (or done). If you were on something that wasn't business critical, you were likely waiting for a fire to fight, working on the "ok, maybe after this all blows over I can deploy this - but not until then." In either case, not having something to do that was more pressing than helping out a person would not be surprising.
    - MikePlacid 4y ago
      >In either case, not having something to do that was more pressing than helping out a person would not be surprising. In the context you have provided - yes. But in the context of my professional experience it is rather surprising. Note that the author has not mentioned he was uncomfortable sitting there doing nothing. What he mentioned was: >we all pitched in. I actually quite enjoyed it. That looks like that was the first time for him ever. Also quite surprising - for me and my experience. PS. Also: >As soon as Musk became owner, there were always three things that had to be done by yesterday Sweet Jesus. Just "as soon"? Just three??
MikePlacid 4y ago
Yep. >As soon as Musk became owner, there were always three things that had to be done by yesterday Just when? Just three??
amrocha 4y ago
Literally never heard anyone say this before
kelnos 4y ago
I doubt that's actually true (I don't doubt that Twitter had too many employees, but I think 90% redundant is a bit hyperbolic), but even if it was, there are good ways and a bad ways to reduce workforce. Musk chose pretty much the baddest of the bad ways.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Presumably any private equity firm would also have came to a conclusion of reducing headcount. Any private equity firm would probably not have come to the recommendation of purchasing a firm that was, in ongoing terms, narrowly profitable in a transaction that would saddle the firm with about a third of its annual pre-acquisition revenue, several times its annual profit, and a sizable share of its project post-acquisition reserves in annual debt service costs, even if the particular buyer wasn’t one where the mere prospect of the purchase would disrupt revenue. As much as they can be very much be criticized, there is a sense in which criticizing Musk’s post-acquisition actions at Twitter is akin to criticizing actions of the Titanic’s officers and crew after the encounter with the iceberg.