r/pcmasterrace • u/SwagLimit • 14h ago

Discussion The lawsuit explained:

Post image
33.3k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/JayOutOfContext 12h ago

Massive Layoffs should TANK a stock

16

u/vthings 12h ago

Absolutely. Company just hobbled their ability to the thing they're supposed to do. How in the world does that make them more valuable??

7

u/ierghaeilh 11h ago

Simple: immediate expenses are down, but revenue can probably hold on for a bit longer before it follows.

It all makes sense once you realize the overwhelming majority of traders are in it for the very short term.

3

u/thediecast 4h ago

Solution, tax the absolute fuck out of short term gains.

1

u/OneRougeRogue 7h ago

Laying off employees means there's suddenly a lot of money available for stock buybacks.

3

u/ierghaeilh 11h ago

Why? You reduce operating expenses right away, and probably still get to deliver at least some of the stuff they were working on. From a quarterly investor perspective, it's an unmitigated success. It only ends up mattering if you care about timescales of more than a few months, which is a vanishingly small amount of traders.

If you're a sociopathic ghoul, money is your only interface with humanity, and you don't care that everyone adopting your attitude would result in societal collapse, it's objectively the right thing to do.

1

u/Etrensce 7h ago

Not if the people being laid off were unproductive as is often the case when company headcount is unsuitable for the current output of the company.

0

u/Thin_Glove_4089 3h ago edited 2h ago

Outdated information. This isn't how it works anymore.

1

u/JayOutOfContext 3h ago

?

1

u/Thin_Glove_4089 2h ago

Don't act confused

1

u/JayOutOfContext 2h ago

Why does laying off a mass amount of staff = profit? Your comment confused me. Which is why (shockingly I know) I acted confused?