Documents detail plans to gut Twitter’s workforce
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
Then again, I bet it won’t happen. The actual cuts will be far smaller once it’s actually time to do it… Unless his finances are too strained I guess
https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-twitter-exodus-tur...
If so, then, to be blunt, that means their documentation was crap and they had unnecessary choke points to begin with.
We need to stop normalizing tribal knowledge.
my guess is, we’ll see far more users abandon twitter than we see of maga users swarming.
So while there are not that many MAGA types, they tend to punch above their weight in terms of what passes for debate on social media. Conversely, I'm nots ure as many liberals would leave as threaten to, because where would they go - Mastodon? Discord? People use twitter because it's a large flat platform rather than one with a lot of silos. That's why things can go so viral so quickly, but also why there are so many dumpster fires; anyone can find and address/respond to/ be seen by anyone else, with no need to know the address of the super sekrit server where the cool kids hang out.
I do think the likely outcome of all this is best visualized as a smoking crater surrounded by poop emojis, and have my doubts that large advertisers will want to associate their brands with it. On the other hand all sorts of other trash is commercially successful for reasons that completely elude me.
The natural alternative is actually disengagement from social media. Twitter and Facebook are only about 15 years old, which is a tiny blip in history. People managed just fine without them. Social media is one way to spend time, but there are plenty of other ways to spend time.
Elon's plans may not be all that well thought out, as history has evidenced.
“‘The Rage Would Come Out of Nowhere’: Personality Change Has Emerged as a Symptom of Long Covid”
Revenue $5,078 (in millions)
Cost of Revenue $1,798 35.40%
Sales and Admin $1,760 34.67%
R&D $1,247 24.55%
Interest $52 1.02%
Unusual Items $441 8.69%
Their biggest expense 34.40% is "Cost of Revenue" followed by "Sales and Admin". For a company like twitter "Cost of Revenue" includes operations and Customer Care.
I don't think that they can cut 75% at once, just the severance payment will be huge and they may not have the money for that.
With R&D being only 24% it is possible to make large cuts in "Cost of Revenue" and "Sales and Admin" and keep more of the engineering team.
What if the plan is just to scare away as many current employees as possible now, before the deal is completed, thereby minimizing layoffs?
I know a lot of engineers who have already left, but the prospect of a 75% cut may inspire more.
Heading into a possible/probable recession, it may be wise to secure one's next job immediately rather than waiting for the axe to fall.
If you lay them off there are lots of expenses. If you scare them off then they will leave for free.
He is attempting to shake the tree before taking over on purpose.
The ad platform is just barely usable, with an only slightly better UI than LinkedIn.
Its core product has not changed meaningfully in 10 years.
The company down much of its developer-facing offering years ago.
There are e-commerce websites with a more complex stack than Twitter.
This is a product that can run on 1,000 people and nothing about the user experience will be different.
There is probably so much administrative, HR, and operational bloat that the company probably rivals most universities.
is there waste? highly likely. but the kind you’re implying? sounds ridiculous. what are you basing this on?
It seems like the sorta crackhead move we have come to expect from mister attention whore extraordinaire. He’s in a competition of some kind with Kanye, apparently.
Why is he wasting 40 billion on a trumpet of little worth if it’s worth so little?
What a weird mid life crisis sports car to buy, it’s not even red.
I don't see why this would be infeasible.
And that assumes they can even cut the right 75%: what if the measure they use to determine the “valuable” employees turns out to be wrong? How do you even begin to undo / address that when everyone is being paid 2x?
Most Twitter employees (like people everywhere) go there to earn a living and as long as employment conditions remain acceptable they'll sign whatever management ask them to.
In particular if it's a meaningless broad statement such as "commitment to free speech and 1st amendment".
Most people there don't have anything to do with policy enactment or enforcement so why would they care (case in point those other companies, you mentioned which also retained their workforces).
If the real consequence is a work culture in which bullying and harassment is sanctioned (or even encouraged) by management THEN people will leave because it's unpleasant to work in such an environment.
The ones remaining won't necessarily be your high performers
Nor is it useful as a voluntary limit on content moderation. Any social media site that allows absolutely anything First Amendment protected would quickly be overrun by porn and blood and gore.
That can work for direct-to-consumer sales. It's unlikely to work for advertising sales.
> Cut support team by 90%, only highest tier gets support
Twitter has a support team? Not much, in my experience.
Also, why would it reduce the moderation workload?
Twitter moderators allowed Taliban leaders to tweet all sorts of dangerous horrible stuff. But they permanently banned the democratically elected leader of the free world*
I think it’s clear at this point the moderator staff aren’t fit for purpose and a Scorched Earth approach is probably the only way to sort out Twitter
*Trump repeatedly tweeted calling for calm and discouraged violence by his supporters - in no way did he he incite the Capitol riots.