> well, his duty is to the shareholders so having that as a priority sounds like a good thing to me. I think it's pretty tone deaf in a letter to employees. Bu

> well, his duty is to the shareholders so having that as a priority sounds like a good thing to me. I think it's pretty tone deaf in a letter to employees. But tomato/tomato I guess. I didn't say anything about keeping redundant positions, just that he wants to raise the bar for results, and I feel like this release only hurts that effort. I'm not aware of any great turnarounds that began with "look, we're here for the share-holders". (I'm sure for good or ill they're out there, but they haven't come to my attention for whatever reason). It's just about the exact opposite of other famous turnarounds based on the "it's the product stupid". I don't know... I just feel like there's a lost opportunity here. Morale is going to suffer regardless. That doesn't mean you have to make it worse by being tone-deaf.