When 80+% of GOOG's revenue comes from advertising, it is bound to cause pressures to cut costs especially when the leading indicators are showing a broad reces

When 80+% of GOOG's revenue comes from advertising, it is bound to cause pressures to cut costs especially when the leading indicators are showing a broad recession across the board. If Sundar had just kept the headcount betting that the recession won't impact GOOG, and was proved wrong, the investors and employees would be out with pitchforks. If the recession does hit, at least Sundar has cut costs before the fact and his rational investors should be happy with that outcome. If the recession doesn't pan out as deep as they have estimated, they could just restart hiring. It is terrible for the people impacted by this decision and I empathaize with them. But when heads of peer group companies are also doing similar cuts (some even deeper than GOOG), I see it as a broader economic trend and not something specific to GOOG. (The problems related to GOOG's service mix, cash cows and innovation impact are a separate issue and the CEO should be judged on that separately. All things considered, the current headcount reduction decision is a rational one, imo.)