4 ms·

> They got hired for leadership roles. They make big leadership money total compensation. Then, they make business 101 mistakes (don't over hire during COVID un

by gretch 4y ago

> They got hired for leadership roles. They make big leadership money total compensation. Then, they make business 101 mistakes (don't over hire during COVID under the expectation that the escalated demand will remain permanently forever), then nothing happens to them and they continue making big money. Is that not more or less how this is playing out? You forgot the part where right before he did all of that, he made Facebook, one of the biggest money printing machines on the planet of its time. Even after all the mistakes, Zuck is still vastly net positive (from a business perspective).

bink 4y ago
> Even after all the mistakes, Zuck is still vastly net positive (from a business perspective). So were many of the employees who were and will be laid off. Isn't business more about "what have you done for me lately"?
- dragontamer 4y ago
  Allow Facebook to stagnate while Zuck focuses on the Metaverse.
dumbotron 4y ago
My read was that as long as the money printing machine is running, Zuck can do whatever random side project he wants. Once it starts struggling (ad tracking, macro environment), shit gets real, and not just for the company, but also Zuck.
- otoburb 4y ago
  >>Once it starts struggling (ad tracking, macro environment), shit gets real, and not just for the company, but also Zuck. This might apply to other companies that don't have founder-majority ownership, but that's not the case with Meta because Zuck still retains control with over 50% voting power.[1] [1] https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/zuckerberg-motivates-supervoting-stock-resistance-2022-10-27/ https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/zuckerberg-motivates-s...
htrp 4y ago
>Even after all the mistakes, Zuck is still vastly net positive (from a business perspective). Zuck didn't do anything, except maybe put the organization in place to succeed (though most would argue that was Sandberg)
- disgruntledphd2 4y ago
  I don't think that's fair. Sheryl definitely made the business/ops side work, but Zuck definitely made the product/infra side work. Neither of them are perfect, but they had a really good division of responsibilities that worked for over a decade.

by gretch 4y ago

bink 4y ago

> Even after all the mistakes, Zuck is still vastly net positive (from a business perspective). So were many of the employees who were and will be laid off. Isn't business more about "what have you done for me lately"?

dragontamer 4y ago
Allow Facebook to stagnate while Zuck focuses on the Metaverse.

dumbotron 4y ago

My read was that as long as the money printing machine is running, Zuck can do whatever random side project he wants. Once it starts struggling (ad tracking, macro environment), shit gets real, and not just for the company, but also Zuck.

otoburb 4y ago
>>Once it starts struggling (ad tracking, macro environment), shit gets real, and not just for the company, but also Zuck. This might apply to other companies that don't have founder-majority ownership, but that's not the case with Meta because Zuck still retains control with over 50% voting power.[1] [1] https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/zuckerberg-motivates-supervoting-stock-resistance-2022-10-27/ https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/zuckerberg-motivates-s...

htrp 4y ago

>Even after all the mistakes, Zuck is still vastly net positive (from a business perspective). Zuck didn't do anything, except maybe put the organization in place to succeed (though most would argue that was Sandberg)

disgruntledphd2 4y ago
I don't think that's fair. Sheryl definitely made the business/ops side work, but Zuck definitely made the product/infra side work. Neither of them are perfect, but they had a really good division of responsibilities that worked for over a decade.