It makes me physically ill to hear billionaire CEOs "take full responsibility" for the layoffs in an impersonal email while taking no pay cut themselves. Look

It makes me physically ill to hear billionaire CEOs "take full responsibility" for the layoffs in an impersonal email while taking no pay cut themselves. Look at Meta as one of the worst offenders. Meta's layoffs will save what? $5 billion a year? Assuming those employees were actually producing some value, the true savings will be less (since you also have to factor in severance costs). Now consider that Meta has spent $36 billion [1] building the Metaverse with basically nothing to show for it. Now Meta has fully internalized the idea that it cannot exist without a monopoly of some kind. FB (and even IG) are dwindling. The Metaverse is the answer to that. That's literally all it is. But there's no business strategy here, no value proposition to consumers (on the contrary, this is something consumers clearly do not want) and no product-market fit. Yet the intention here is to spend over $100B on this unproven effort. For what return on investment? My point is that Meta could've achieved multiples of the "savings" from layoffs by simply scaling back or, better yet, scrapping entirely the Metaverse. Focus on the core business and acquisitions. So many of these layoffs are purely virte signaling for "investor confidence" and nothing more. A less charitable interpretation is that it's aimed and making the remaining staff work harder and for less money, fearing future layoffs. Meta in particular is rudderless and layoffs are a bandaid on that. [1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/meta-lost-30-billion-on-metaverse-rivals-spent-far-less-2022-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/meta-lost-30-billion-on-meta...