This claim in the Forbes article doesn't make sense to me: "It doesn’t need the money but it does want to learn from how riders interact with a service they are paying for."
Alphabet has been pressured to show more tangible financial results by activist shareholders[1]. Waymo has 2,500 employees. Waymo's annual budget for headcount alone include stock based compensation is over $1B by my estimate.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/6daa5d29-8595-4630-a633-eb1f8b138...
Or The Guardian? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/15/major-inv...
> “We are writing to express our view that the cost base of Alphabet is too high and management needs to take aggressive action,” TCI wrote in the letter, signed by managing director Christopher Hohn. “The company has too many employees and the cost per employee is too high.”
This is a follow-up from TCI
1. TCI writes a letter to Google saying that they should layoff employees.
2. A few weeks later, Google lays off employees.
3. Literally the day the Google layoffs are announced, TCI writes a letter to Google saying "I have appreciated our recent dialogue concerning Alphabet's cost base. I am encouraged to see that you are now taking some action to right size Alphabet's cost base and understand that it is never an easy decision to let people go."
How else should these facts be interpreted.