4 ms·
Was that the case? Can you provide sources to your claims and provide a foundation to your theories?
by 7bit 4mo ago
Was that the case? Can you provide sources to your claims and provide a foundation to your theories?
- tomnipotent 4mo agoIt's literally a Google search away. If you had the time to write this comment, you had more than enough time to do the search.
- 7bit 4mo agoNot my job to proof the wild claim that the layoffs were to save the company from bankruptcy .
- tomnipotent 4mo agoThe company raised $10M, did two rounds of layoffs totaling a quarter of the company, and was then acquired not long after. Early stage companies like that don't do layoffs unless it's to extend cash runway, but run wild with whatever unfounded fantasy you have about it all.
- jasonlotito 4mo agoGoogle said you are 100% wrong.
- tomnipotent 4mo agoRight, the very public two rounds of layoffs the company did right before being "acquired" had nothing to do with them running out of money.
- dust-jacket 4mo agohttps://www.theregister.com/software/2019/04/01/nice-people-matter-npm-may-stand-for-not-politely-managed-job-cuts-leave-staff-sore/1074471 https://www.theregister.com/software/2019/04/01/nice-people-... Year before the MSFT takeover. No idea about their actual financials but they were definitely shedding headcount pre 2020, including kicking people for trying to unionise.
- 7bit 4mo agoNothing in there suggests that this was done to save the company from bankruptcy, which was the wild claim.
- shimman 4mo agoYeah, it's like people are forgetting that the executive team at GitHub was composed of sex pests and people defending said sex pest. Of course they'll call any attempt at unionizing as "damaging" to the company and must be blamed accordingly! After all the company was in such dire straights that they were acquired for $7.5 billion! Only companies with terrible prospects get acquired, that's just business 102.
- tomnipotent 4mo agoNo one said anything about bankruptcy, you seem to have made that up for your "argument" or whatever this is. The company didn't have a viable business model and was running out of cash. MSFT right-sized the team for the project they wanted it to be, rather than the business model the prior company was trying to be.
- 7bit 4mo agoLearn to read > Would you rather the company went under after it ran out of money and had to fire everyone instead?
- tomnipotent 4mo agoApparently you don't understand what bankruptcy means. A company can run out of funds and not be able to meet payroll without declaring bankruptcy, they're different things. But by all means keep talking out of your ass.