Discussion

• @jeffhorwitz Jeff Horwitz on x

  We aren't in a position to confirm the exact size of the cuts, but this is likely going to be the biggest round of tech layoffs to date by a margin. Many thousands of people will be getting laid off.

• @rsg Bobby Goodlatte on x

  I worked at Facebook when we had 200 employees I've never understood why FB needs 20,000 employees. And less so the 70,000 employees Meta has now @elonmusk's Twitter layoffs are appropriate Unfortunate, but appropriate These businesses just don't require that many people

• @jeffhorwitz Jeff Horwitz on x

  A bit of grim Sunday news: large scale layoffs at Meta start next week, possibly Wednesday. https://www.wsj.com/...

• @shiraovide Shira Ovide on x

  When Nadella was hired as CEO and Microsoft cut ~18,000 jobs, it was unusual for a very profitable company with growing sales to cut so deeply. Meta sales are shrinking right now but it is highly profitable. Vibes matter. https://www.wsj.com/...

• @gergelyorosz Gergely Orosz on x

  To be clear, I am hearing that we will *very likely* hear Meta announce layoffs this week. The Wall Street Journal was the first to report on this yesterday: https://www.wsj.com/.... I checked in with my sources and, unfortunately, it checks out. This week will be rough.

• @elliottgray Elliott on x

  https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...

• @mikeelgan Mike Elgan on x

  Zuckerberg always copies what other social networks do. https://twitter.com/...

• @ryan_landay Ryan Landay on x

  @nikitabier How many successful new apps has Meta ever built internally? (Or is the government going to start letting them do acquisitions again?)

• @kvlly Kelly Vaughn on x

  Going to be another tough week. https://twitter.com/...

• @paleofuture Matt Novak on x

  WhatsApp has 2 billion users, Facebook has 2.7 billion users. If you think that just requires a “set it and forget it” website, you have no idea how technology works. https://twitter.com/...

• @aegies Arthur Gies on x

  Meta's losing billions on a gigantic push to create a product nobody is looking for for a problem that doesn't exist by a CEO who answers to no one and it's workers who will pay for it. https://twitter.com/...

• @nikitabier Nikita Bier on x

  This is certainly more common among startups. I see so many founders wasting cycles on trying to make a point to someone, instead of just smiling, moving on, and making money.

• @tszzl Roon on x

  no zuck's balls got put in a 3way vice grip - govt de facto banned facebook's acquisitions of new social media platforms - apple let the golden cow grow & started squeezing them dry as soon as they reached a steady state - fb apps not allowed in china but must compete w tiktok ht…

• @samir_madani Sam on x

  Frankly speaking, I do not see a future for Meta with Zuck at the helm. In fact, I do not see Meta existing either without reverting to its Facebook brand. Shareholders and board can't be happy with current trajectory. Zuck used other people's money on metaverse. Huge mistake. ht…

• @milesklee Miley on x

  “As you probably know, the money that would've paid your salaries next year was spent on virtual legs.” https://twitter.com/...

• @jeffhorwitz Jeff Horwitz on x

  We've heard additional details circulating at this point among employees, some of which is conflicting. I'd be glad to hear from anyone with more specific information. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

• @malwaretechblog @malwaretechblog on x

  The best changes usually follow the biggest implosions. People will simply maintain the status quo until it becomes completely unviable, only then comes innovation. So, godspeed to Musk and Zuck. May the platforms you burn light our way.

• @jeffhorwitz Jeff Horwitz on x

  One final thing: the company's heavy metaverse spending has already caused a substantial amount of internal griping in relation to the stock price, RSUs and resources for the company's highly profitable platforms. Sacrificing colleagues to it is going to ramp that up.

• @frankcatalano Frank Catalano on x

  For those who recall the turn of the century: Yes, this is the dot-com bust all over again, for very different reasons (said the guy who had a regular “dot-gone” TV segment). This time, easy money + appear to grow at all costs. Not broad based this time (yet), but reality based. …

• @austen Austen Allred on x

  @nikitabier I think this sounds good but is mostly wrong. Most companies only exist at all because of a founder's ego, where ego is someone thinking they see something nobody else can. Most companies end up dead or in obscurity because they don't take just the right chances.

• @nikitabier Nikita Bier on x

  @ryan_landay They never made it a priority. And they never followed best practices on zero-to-1: • They would only do high profile launches (instead of high frequency tests) • They never targeted niche audiences (always mass-market “it's for everybody” products)