4 ms·

what’s financial benefit of being that direct?

• azemetre 4y ago
  It also seems worse than that based on other replies in this post. Twilio has only had one profitable quarter in its entire existence. Both the business model and strategy are clearly broken. I do wonder (read: hope) if this means the next wave of tech companies will be more private/lifestyle focused. 37Signals had a great article about this: https://37signals.com/why-we-choose-profit/ https://37signals.com/why-we-choose-profit/ Not every company needs to be a market leader, what's wrong with having a drastically smaller size (say <200 people, a number plucked from thin air) and decent revenue?
  • throwaway98797 4y ago
    there’s nothing morally wrong with that that being said i don’t know any investor that wants to invest in companies that are middle of the road most employees want to work for winners we may not want that to be true but it tends to be if you’re not first you’re last
    • azemetre 4y ago
      I mean shouldn't there something a little wrong about not running a profitable business for nearly a decade and that the only people who seems to be "winning" are those that took advantage of a relaxed monetary environment and cashed out during the IPO? Why does money trump this? I absolutely disagree that most workers want to work for "winners." Most workers want to have a stable job and a life of meaning outside the company. These companies are not stable at all.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• cardosof 4y ago
  There's none, quite the opposite. Apologies if my previous post is a lame snarky comment, the real criticism is that texts about thousands getting their jobs cut due to "environment changes" often show very little effort to define and quantify what's the environment and which were the changes.