Google's parent company, Alphabet, spent $70 billion on stock buybacks[2].
I know I'm drastically oversimplifying the complexities of accounting required for a trillion-dollar empire, but this comes across as more of a punitive measure than a cost-saving measure.
I acknowledge that being able to take the force of money and apply in a direction that results in growth at Google's scale is arguably one of the most difficult problems in business at the moment. But how does downsizing your offices do anything but make the hard times for Googlers a bit more uncomfortable? How does this news attract the talent that could help Google grow?
It feels as though Sundar and the board decide stray away from doing things that keep their employees at the happiest (and most loyal to the company) because that doesn't help the company grow at a rate that would please shareholders. The Lindy effect[4] suggests that Google will probably be around for another twenty years. To his credit, Sundar has spent the last 3 years navigating one of the largest companies in the history of mankind through an event that society hadn't seen in 100 years. So, Sundar, when do we start thinking about where Google will be in 20 years instead of the next quarter?
Google was revered in the media for decades as being one of the best places in the world to work at, you can look Xooglers talking as far back as 2008 and see stories of people who went to work there and left disappointed because of the homogeneous mindset and work benefits failing to match the competition[3].
1: https://curiocity.com/seattle-google-lake-union-campus-sold-...
2: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/26/alphabet-announces-70-billio...
3: https://techcrunch.com/2009/01/18/why-google-employees-quit/