Job Listings Giant Indeed Lays Off 2,200 People, Representing 15% of Staff (theinformation.com) 58
Job listings site Indeed.com told employees on Wednesday that it's laying off 2,200 people, representing 15% of its headcount. From a report: Indeed CEO Chris Hyams broke the news to employees in an all-hands meeting on Wednesday morning, saying that the cuts would affect teams across the company and attributing the decision to broader economic pressures, a person who attended the meeting said. Employees whose jobs were cut were notified via email following the meeting, the person added.
Re: (Score:1)
> companies should not be allowed to register existing words.
Everyone laughed when Delphi's company changed their name to "Inprise".
Re: Job Listings Giant Indeed Lays Off 2,200 Peopl (Score:2)
You mean, when Borland changed their name to Inprise. Borland WAS the original developer of the Object Pascal IDE, Delphi.
That stupid name change nearly wiped Delphi off the board due to loss of a recognized brand name and focus.
What were they going for? They were trying to go after the Java and Application Lifecycle market vs the Developer tools market. They never quite got their groove back.
Embarcadero bought the Delphi, C++Builder, and Interbase DB from the dying company. Finally, they decided to put
Re: (Score:2)
Inprise. LOL, never heard of them. But I've for sure heard of Borland and Delphi. Way to destroy a brand, dipshits. Though it sounds like they make nothing useful, now that they no longer have the legacy software to milk.
Re: (Score:2)
One problem is that a marketing team can spend years working on ads with the same slogans and brands every day. So they get sick of them and assume potential customers, who spend 0.001% as much time looking at the ads, are also sick of them.
So they want to mix stuff up and change things, so it is "fresh" and different. This is almost always a mistake.
"You're marketing to a parade, not a classroom."
Re:Job Listings Giant Indeed Lays Off 2,200 People (Score:4, Informative)
I am gobsmacked that they employ 14500 people.... to do what?
Re:not technology, obviously (Score:5, Insightful)
The company brings in $3.2 billion a year, you think it just takes a couple guys to keep the servers running and they can kick back and drink beer all day? It's a big business like any other, and as companies they get bigger they get less efficient. A small company can have a few smart people who do it all, and at a certain point you need a whole lot of people doing specialized things and they aren't going to all be busy at the same time.
If their revenue really is just $3.2 billion per year, with 14,500 employees, that's only ~$221k of revenue per employee. Even considering that a decent percentage of them are probably admins or call center workers or employees in the corporate cafeteria, at Silicon Valley wages, that's probably not sustainable.
Re: (Score:2)
Offshore devs are SOOOPER good at creativity and innovation, lol.
Re: Job Listings Giant Indeed Lays Off 2,200 Peopl (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Has anybody used the word "ironic" yet?
This is a perfect example of correct usage.
Re: (Score:2)
companies should not be allowed to register existing words
You mean, like
- Apple
- Caterpillar
- Alphabet
- Target
- Intel
- Progressive
- Nationwide
- Travelers
- Delta
- United
- Visa
- Southern
- Whirlpool
- Block
Irony.com (Score:4, Funny)
Indeed.com will be DOS's by too many submissions of their ex-employees' resumes.
Re: (Score:3)
Some days the punch lines just write themselves.
Re:Irony.com (Score:5, Funny)
Some days the punch lines just write themselves.
Indeed.
New jobs (Score:3, Funny)
So a survey came out (Score:4, Interesting)
Most of the fake posts were there to trick investors into thinking the company was growing, and another chunk of them were to trick overworked employees into thinking the company was going to hire help.
The "nobody wants to work" nonsense is just that, nonsense. It's lies. The job market is heavily inflated and things are much, much worse than we're being told.
Meanwhile Jerome Powell has raised interest rates again. His projections say there will be 2 million layoffs soon, followed by at least another 1.5 million. Will you be one of them? Time will tell.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So a survey came out (Score:5, Insightful)
Meanwhile Jerome Powell has raised interest rates again. His projections say there will be 2 million layoffs soon, followed by at least another 1.5 million. Will you be one of them? Time will tell.
The silver lining to all this is that if the economy crashes hard enough, maybe housing will become affordable again, assuming you're among the lucky ones who are still able to earn a living. Being prepared for a recession really is the only way to get a leg up in this whole late stage capitalism game.
Re:So a survey came out (Score:5, Interesting)
You really should be prepared for recession at all times. Make as much as you can without sacrificing your principles, practice living in poverty from time to time, and only buy what is absolutely necessary, and books. That not only makes you more resilient to downturns, it is more satisfying as it makes life less complicated.
Re: (Score:1)
buy what is absolutely necessary, and books.
Lovely comment. I like that you added "and books". Right on.
Re: (Score:3)
He's right, though. Books are good for keeping the fireplace running in the winter.
Re: (Score:2)
buy what is absolutely necessary, and books.
Lovely comment. I like that you added "and books". Right on.
Because unlike electronic "books", no one can take them away from you or alter their contents.
Re: (Score:1)
Because unlike electronic "books", no one can take them away from you or alter their contents.
I love thinking about all the books that I have which censorious partisans would love to alter and burn. Nope. They are sitting right there, unwoke, immutable. Now, sometimes I wonder how long it will be before the authoritarians want to backdoor PC computers for the feds to spy with. Will they outlaw or try to burn my old Thinkpad, too? After all, who knows what subversive material I'm hiding there. The government has no agent/eyes there!
You make a good point (Score:2)
No the problem is in to rent seeking and regulatory captured it's clearly all these lazy kids and their avocado toast. Above All Else the problem is never my political decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
The silver lining to all this is that if the economy crashes hard enough, maybe housing will become affordable again, assuming you're among the lucky ones who are still able to earn a living.
It didn't get much affordable after the 2008 crash, why do you think this time would be any different?
Re: (Score:2)
It didn't get much affordable after the 2008 crash, why do you think this time would be any different?
Housing became very affordable after the 2008 crash. Even when I bought my current house in late 2013 there was a significant amount of foreclosure homes still working through the system. The Case-Shiller index started to drop in July 2006 and didn't stop dropping until February 2012, when it represented a 27.5% drop. It took until January 2017 before the market had fully recovered from the crash.
Every market is different, so perhaps homes in your area were unaffected by the 2008 recession, but most home va
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Housing only became cheaper after 2008 in shithole areas. Prime locations never decreased in price. And everything more than caught back up to where it was in 2008 by 2013 at the latest. Then it skyrocketed after that. 2015 was a red hot market in the entire United States, unless it was some dying rust belt town or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Housing only became cheaper after 2008 in shithole areas. Prime locations never decreased in price. And everything more than caught back up to where it was in 2008 by 2013 at the latest. Then it skyrocketed after that. 2015 was a red hot market in the entire United States, unless it was some dying rust belt town or something.
That simply isn't true. In fact it was the exact opposite. Prices of homes in dying rust belt areas were never inflated prior to the housing crash, so they did well. It was hot markets that saw the greatest drops after 2008. California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida, and Rhode Island (in that order) were the worst states for falling prices. Nebraska, the Dakotas, Iowa, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Alaska were among the least effected states.
Re: (Score:2)
The prices of houses did actually go down significantly after the 2008 crash, it's just that people out of work obviously couldn't afford to take advantage.
It'll get worse (Score:2)
When the market crashes they're going to buy up houses on the cheap so they can monopolize access to housing. They don't care if the houses are empty because they can raise the prices to whatever they want. They have strong control over most state governments so it's difficu
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, not a chance. Because just because your economy crashes doesn't mean it does for every market, and you don't think that your fat cats are the only ones who try to park money somewhere where their government can't grab it, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Real estate only goes up in price.
Re: (Score:2)
It's always been lies. Everyone's been saying that since 1860 or so. Yes, people have been complaining since the 19th century.
The more accurate statement is "nobody wants to be exploited". As in no one wants to work for peanuts. People are smart, they won't do dangerous work without adequate protections and compensation, and they won't work crazy hours without sufficient compensation.
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't find a mention of that on Reuters.
Regarding Powell, we're waiting on your ideas to lower inflation. You don't strike me as the type that would enact fiscal austerity.
14,000 employees? (Score:2)
Why would such a company need 14,000 employees to begin with? It boggles my mind why Indeed would need that many employees to do what they do, or am I missing something?
I don't know much about their business model except that its a jobs site. Is there anything unique that they do that others like Monster or other resume posting sites do not do?
Re: (Score:2)
Why would such a company need 14,000 employees to begin with?
Once a company reaches a certain size, it requires additional employees to support other departments in the organization. Growing the business requires a marketing department, you need a payroll/finance department to make sure everything gets paid, marketing and finance needs IT support, then you need a HR department to hire all these people in the first place, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
This was my thought as well. Sounds like over-hiring to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would such a company need 14,000 employees to begin with?
From the broadcasts I've heard over the last couple of years, my impression is that most of those employees were kept busy making and buying radio ads.
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't know much about their business model" ...but you are absolutely sure they are doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly what I was thinking. 200 employees to maintain the core function, 2000 DIE enforcers, 5000 salespeople, 6000 advertising writers...
Indeed is laying off??? (Score:2, Funny)
I think Indeed just came up with a brilliant new way of creating new customers.
Re: (Score:1)
Slashdot really needs a "Sarcasm" moderation.
Re: (Score:2)
that is indeed a bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
Lot of hits at Monster.com tomorrow (Score:5, Funny)
This reminds me of a bad joke: What's the worst part about getting laid off while working at the unemployment office?
Still having to go in to the office the next day.
Oddly,.. (Score:2)
I was reading this story when an Indeed.com ad ran on the TV in my living room.
I rather thought positioning themselves as the leader in helping find new jobs was a bit uncool after laying off 15% of their workforce.