So much for that hire 3,000 people! Hiring Freezes ALWAYS come 1 to 2 Quarters BEFORE layoffs. Freeze are one of the few levers companies have before layoffs, the challenge is that attrition is a real thing and existing employees are over worked.
Look at the corporate raiders of the 1980s. Firing people, loading up a company with debt. And taking them bankrupt makes a ton of money for private equity. No product required, immensely profitable!
Look at the corporate raiders of the 1980s. Firing people, loading up a company with debt. And taking them bankrupt makes a ton of money for private equity. No product required, immensely profitable!
Depends on your worldview. Historically, companies had a purpose first and profit second. You needed approval by the crown before you were allowed to start a company. Then, once your company fit the purpose as seen by the crown, you were allowed to make profit with it.
That has changed, especially since the 80s, where the prevalent world view turned to "let's have the market figure out purpose", which equates to anything that is profitable is good.
We've since learned that this isn't automatically true (as exemplified in this abandoned merger, for example), and my understanding is that right now there's no clear opinion in society whether profit or purpose comes first in companies.
When there are elected officials who say that maybe capitalism is more important than democracy, it becomes clear that consensus is going to be difficult to achieve.
Why do you say that, and how does it work? Are you making a completely different statement than the point the parent was making? Sure you usually need to sell something in order to get the profit, but that doesn’t mean that the good or service or it’s quality was prioritized above getting any profit, which is what I think parent was talking about.
Generally speaking, private non-subsidized companies that offer goods and services for sale cannot actually survive without any profit, right? They can bootstrap for a while with investment, but they tend to die, statistically speaking, if they prioritize goods and services over profit. The way companies tend to survive death is by doing everything they can to ensure that the sale of their goods or services generates a profit. You might also be temporarily forgetting that it’s also incredibly common for companies to pivot on what products they make and sell whenever they’re not making enough profit.
TBH it actually seems really funny to me argue about which comes first, because the kind of company we’re talking about needs both, it doesn’t otherwise exist. But the idea parent shared, that profit takes the highest priority, is often absolutely true in practice, many companies will do everything they can to avoid not making a profit, from lowering the quality of their goods and services, to coming up with other more profitable products, to merging with another company that has more customers for your product and/or a longer runway.
Pick up the phone and you'll find an INCREDIBLY competitive price quote for Microsoft Fabric Lakehouse, as pricing is subject to change monthly/daily/hourly.
Tonight is really as good a time as any to make a baby.