Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RaycharlesN t1_ixonq30 wrote

These are not non performing employees, they were told that this wasn’t performance related at all.

−11

akmalhot t1_ixoo2ff wrote

Yes. Economies shift. The fed raised interest rates

They literally paired back non profitable departments (for example Alexa ) - you can't fund those with debt when it becomes expensive and the marker has turned from favoring growth to profits..

For 12+ years the marker favored growth over all else and there was cheap rates, so you could employ people despite their departments making a loss

This is a stupid argument.

I know you feel bad, and it sucks. But this is a non starter. They over hired , they funded bad investment with cheap debt and they hype of groeth, and the market was okay with those loses. They are not anymore

11

RaycharlesN t1_ixoojm6 wrote

They increased executive stock compensation by $1.5B

−4

akmalhot t1_ixor1rq wrote

Yes they hired 100k people

And let go of 10k of them

The market changed, interest rates went up in the fastest pace ever

What aren't you understanding , amazon is a company, they do what is best for them

Cost of money get very expensive, the market changed, investors don't want to see divisions that are losing billions of dollars per year continue to be funded

This isn't complicated.

Amazon has a fiduciary responsibility to it's investors (lol, but it's true )

It sucks that this happened, but it's a symptom of the entrenched inflation the fed is trying to fight after blasting out helicopter money for 2 years after a decade of zirp .... It's Infidtry wide. Google, fb (fb still makes a metric shit ton of money), etc etc

Maybe these concepts are over your head. Or maybe you should move to France or one of the other countries where it's nearly impossible to fire someone, but it's also extremely difficult to get a decent salary because once your hired you can't fire them easily.

9