First of all, the people of 1100 is facing a great harmful situation next few months. Some of them get better position but maximum don’t get a good job. The metaverse is falling down because it isn’t income as they want. They don’t get profit. That's way, ot is happened
Topic: Meta fires 11k employees - Effect of economy or being bullish about metaverse? (Read 255 times)
November 13, 2022, 06:31:31 PM
November 13, 2022, 06:23:29 PM
IMHO, it's about corporate and shareholder greed as these companies are not in the red- they are still making money, i.e., profit but not just as much, which expected in a global economic downturn.
That certain can't be the only reason to fire 11,000 employees. Economic slowdown will impact all but Meta is a giant. Such kind of layoffs can only happen when a company spends money into useless areas. That's exactly what Meta did - invested in Metaverse. It has now become a major reason for its own suicide.
Mark Zuckerberg was so bullish on Metaverse that he changed the name of his company to Meta. Now they don't even have 100,000 active users there after burning billions and billions of dollars.
How and why was it allowed that billions of dollars was spent and burned? But of course because of fiat visions. The crazy thing is even if Meta didn't burn billions and nixed investing in the metaverse, they would have still laid off thousands, following industry trend.
November 13, 2022, 05:49:33 PM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
The actual reason is that they are short of funds, possibly they are cost-cutting since the company probably suffer losses from their recent venture. We really don't know the reason at all since Meta never reveal why they are laying off 11k employees. it is also possible that the influence of FB is getting weaker since the competition between messengers and social media platform is really tight.
I think it's a recession thing, but honestly, it's a very rude move. If a company is strong and profitable, it should feel socially responsible for its workers and try to help them survive the recession rather than focus on how much money they can save if they fire people. Helping people out is not only the right thing to do morally, but also something that can help with the effect of the recession, help make it less significant. That's because when people get fired, their purchasing power plummets. Without purchasing power, they don't support the businesses they gave their money to in the past by buying food, entertainment or something else from them. This, in turn, leads to businesses struggling and firing more people, and all that deepens the negative effects of the recession.
unfortunately, not all companies are thinking that way. most are thinking about how to cut their losses by firing some of their employees. it is hard but they need to do it to survive. we can't blame them because that what they think is the best option for them to keep afloat in this market.
It isn't a rude move since the survivability of a company is involved. It would be rude if they lay out employees and don't pay them. I believe those fired employees are well-paid of their benefits. I will do the same if I own a company and the company funds are running low. Because if the company shuts down, it will leave 84k employee with no jobs.
November 13, 2022, 05:40:21 PM
I think it's a recession thing, but honestly, it's a very rude move. If a company is strong and profitable, it should feel socially responsible for its workers and try to help them survive the recession rather than focus on how much money they can save if they fire people. Helping people out is not only the right thing to do morally, but also something that can help with the effect of the recession, help make it less significant. That's because when people get fired, their purchasing power plummets. Without purchasing power, they don't support the businesses they gave their money to in the past by buying food, entertainment or something else from them. This, in turn, leads to businesses struggling and firing more people, and all that deepens the negative effects of the recession.
unfortunately, not all companies are thinking that way. most are thinking about how to cut their losses by firing some of their employees. it is hard but they need to do it to survive. we can't blame them because that's what they think is the best option for them to keep afloat in this market. for sure, they have studied their options. i don't think it is just their random decisions here.
November 13, 2022, 01:37:29 PM
I think it's a recession thing, but honestly, it's a very rude move. If a company is strong and profitable, it should feel socially responsible for its workers and try to help them survive the recession rather than focus on how much money they can save if they fire people. Helping people out is not only the right thing to do morally, but also something that can help with the effect of the recession, help make it less significant. That's because when people get fired, their purchasing power plummets. Without purchasing power, they don't support the businesses they gave their money to in the past by buying food, entertainment or something else from them. This, in turn, leads to businesses struggling and firing more people, and all that deepens the negative effects of the recession.
November 13, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
The second reason is the most likely.
On one hand, Facebook/Meta depends much on targeted advertisement and data collection as their business model, they do not sell hardware. But not Iphone users and even Android users are getting anti-tracking features in their stock operative systems, which explains Meta's shift towards the Metaverse as way to sell their own hardware to continue tracking, added to the fees they plan to make out in-game transactions.
This strategy has backfired, not only because the result they have gotten is unappealing (Meta graphics are worse than the average game from the 2000s) and the investors do not longer believe in Meta, pulling out their money, this has obviously led Meta to cut their staff.
At lest, Meta is providing some relief to those fired: some months of salary, temporary insurance, etc. Hopefully those people do not suffer too much till they find another job.
November 13, 2022, 12:46:56 PM
~
Mark stated that the cost of developing Meta for the following year would be doubled. That is enormous. Mark is really into Meta; the problem is if he fires more people next year. Mark is so into Metaverse that it gets to the point that he changes the company's name to Meta. I am not sure, but now the hype of Metaverse is slowly dying. It's likely because of the recession or what, but it is not the same as when Mark first announced it. In any case, I'm still hoping that the development will go well.
With the way things are going, i doubt they will be doubling their spending in developing Meta because after changing the name to Meta they lost a whooping $700 billion wiped off from the market and it has become one of the bleeding stocks in a long time which should be worrying for them and should think twice about increasing the expenditure and in order to tackle the current situation they need to reduce the work force. Mark stated that the cost of developing Meta for the following year would be doubled. That is enormous. Mark is really into Meta; the problem is if he fires more people next year. Mark is so into Metaverse that it gets to the point that he changes the company's name to Meta. I am not sure, but now the hype of Metaverse is slowly dying. It's likely because of the recession or what, but it is not the same as when Mark first announced it. In any case, I'm still hoping that the development will go well.
November 13, 2022, 12:36:52 PM
Mark, you know he has got the past right? I am not sure why are they even trying out new experiments if they are not able to make successful metaverse projects even after spending billions of dollars on it? 
For him, laying off the 11k employees might not seem a thing, but for those employees it was their own universe to work and feed the families. Mark has always been on the negative scale for me. Even facebook being in the court room for their worst data integrity policies but things are unstoppable considering his fat wallet. If he was not capable of making successful path then why bothered to hire people from global market and lead them towards unsuccessful careers.
For him, laying off the 11k employees might not seem a thing, but for those employees it was their own universe to work and feed the families. Mark has always been on the negative scale for me. Even facebook being in the court room for their worst data integrity policies but things are unstoppable considering his fat wallet. If he was not capable of making successful path then why bothered to hire people from global market and lead them towards unsuccessful careers.
November 13, 2022, 11:23:10 AM
Although companies need fresh blood, how many families are there with so many people unemployed? (really a pity)
Now that the recession has emerged, many unnamed companies have also resorted to laying off workers and replacing humans with machines.
Meta is indeed a huge gamble this time around, and the stakes are bigger than ever. But at least he showed it on the bright side.
What do you mean by fresh blood? New employees? But, if I am the company owner, I will just retain my old employees because they already have the experience and I am already familiar with them while it's also good if we will give chance to other people to earn and work with us.Now that the recession has emerged, many unnamed companies have also resorted to laying off workers and replacing humans with machines.
Meta is indeed a huge gamble this time around, and the stakes are bigger than ever. But at least he showed it on the bright side.
Maybe we can just pick the employees who don't do their duties well and they are the ones we will be replaced. Not all things can possibly be done by a robot so indeed that it is big gamble for mark in the event his plans of replacing humans with robots fail but if this becomes a success then he can also save a lot of expenses. What if meta have been planning this before and they only use the recession as an excuse to start it? Hmm..
November 13, 2022, 03:58:07 AM
Facebook/Meta is a classic example of a business that has greatly overestimated itself. Having entered an empty niche (social networks + advertising) and becoming a leader, the owners and management decided that IT WILL ALWAYS BE THIS. Money will always flow like water, they will always use their advertising, there will always be an influx of new users and an expansion of the audience.
Mistake, miscalculation, overestimation. Considering that the flow of money will never dry up, they decided to massively "invest" huge sums in new technologies. But they calculated something ... More precisely, they did not take into account:
1. There are no guarantees that this technology will give a profit NOW or at least pay for itself
2. They did not assess the objective condition of the donor, Facebook. The audience is decreasing, many have refused just because of the dominance of advertising, advertising has lost its former effectiveness - the total has dropped sharply, but the bloated staff, projects, spending money - have remained the same.
What's left for Mark? It is logical to reduce regular expenses while reducing regular income. And I don't think it's the end...
Mistake, miscalculation, overestimation. Considering that the flow of money will never dry up, they decided to massively "invest" huge sums in new technologies. But they calculated something ... More precisely, they did not take into account:
1. There are no guarantees that this technology will give a profit NOW or at least pay for itself
2. They did not assess the objective condition of the donor, Facebook. The audience is decreasing, many have refused just because of the dominance of advertising, advertising has lost its former effectiveness - the total has dropped sharply, but the bloated staff, projects, spending money - have remained the same.
What's left for Mark? It is logical to reduce regular expenses while reducing regular income. And I don't think it's the end...
November 12, 2022, 07:03:25 AM
Have they even released anything from their metaverse project? I think a lot of big companies have these sorts of projects just to stay in the news and attract investors, much like their attempts at libra.
He has afaik. It's called Meta Horizon Worlds, I've watched someone play it, and oh boy was it horrid. Just the simple fact that it can't even load the lower part of the models on some specific VR headsets is already bad, from what I've heard you also have to pay to like clap to someone or something similar? There's even an article about how the head of the production or something is forcing its dev team to "love" what they made, and it honestly sounds more like a guilt trip than anything else since anyone can see how bad the product they made is. Even VR chat which is 8 years old is a thousand times better than them and most of the content that's there was community made (afaik).
Quote
In a follow-up memo dated September 30th, Shah said that employees still weren’t using Horizon enough, writing that a plan was being made to “hold managers accountable” for having their teams use Horizon at least once a week. “Everyone in this organization should make it their mission to fall in love with Horizon Worlds. You can’t do that without using it. Get in there. Organize times to do it with your colleagues or friends, in both internal builds but also the public build so you can interact with our community.”
Source: https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/6/23391895/meta-facebook-horizon-worlds-vr-social-network-too-buggy-leaked-memo November 12, 2022, 06:46:20 AM
I do not blame them.. the global economy is in a recession and many companies are scaling down on projects that are expensive... that said.... 13% of their global workforce is not a lot.
I do not think the Metaverse is a failed project, I just think the timing for it is not really good.... because loads of people are struggling with finances and connectivity like this will cost a lot of money.
I do not think the Metaverse is a failed project, I just think the timing for it is not really good.... because loads of people are struggling with finances and connectivity like this will cost a lot of money.
November 12, 2022, 06:24:22 AM
...
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Zuck totally invests in technology which will probably not yet be implemented in the next 5 - 10 years so I believe that they must maintain a financial balance. I've heard that Zuck said the success of the meta made them have to reduce employees, and I see that's not the real reason, Zuck was just making some shit.
Now here we are talking about it again and realized we were wrong in the next years as meta become our primarily needs just like facebook as a tool of communication nowadays.
There is nothing to do with recession or something , it is all just planned one indeed.
November 12, 2022, 04:20:54 AM
...
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Zuck totally invests in technology which will probably not yet be implemented in the next 5 - 10 years so I believe that they must maintain a financial balance. I've heard that Zuck said the success of the meta made them have to reduce employees, and I see that's not the real reason, Zuck was just making some shit.
November 12, 2022, 02:18:34 AM
Although companies need fresh blood, how many families are there with so many people unemployed? (really a pity)
Now that the recession has emerged, many unnamed companies have also resorted to laying off workers and replacing humans with machines.
Meta is indeed a huge gamble this time around, and the stakes are bigger than ever. But at least he showed it on the bright side.
Now that the recession has emerged, many unnamed companies have also resorted to laying off workers and replacing humans with machines.
Meta is indeed a huge gamble this time around, and the stakes are bigger than ever. But at least he showed it on the bright side.
November 11, 2022, 04:52:23 PM
Both look possible. I think Meta already have too many employees so cut down some of them would affect them positively in the long run.
About Metaverse, we are still in very early stages. They probably have to spend so much money and time to get an actual product that makes money for them. Maybe it will never happen, maybe another company will develop better product and Mark will have to buy that company to get bigger. There are a lot of possibilities in the long run.
About Metaverse, we are still in very early stages. They probably have to spend so much money and time to get an actual product that makes money for them. Maybe it will never happen, maybe another company will develop better product and Mark will have to buy that company to get bigger. There are a lot of possibilities in the long run.
November 11, 2022, 11:01:25 AM
I prefer the second reason, Mark took a big adventure and spent huge amounts of money to invest in Metaverse but he did not get the required spread so far, of course he will not be able to get the return in a short period of time unless there is a huge demand for people to use Metaverse, he bet on something new It is unknown and he expected great results, but his hope has been disappointed so far, but in any case, no one knows that the market situation may change with the change in the situation of the global economy, and then everything can change.
November 11, 2022, 10:49:56 AM
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
All these so-called big CEOs are always gambling, but it's always money they can afford to lose and continue to live as if nothing important has happened. For all of them, people are just numbers that they can manipulate very easily, and it is precisely these people who are expendable to the point that they are so easy to get rid of.
However, he is not the only one who tries to save money by laying off workers, all similar companies have been doing it for some time, especially in the US. The largest US CEX already fired about 1200 people a few months ago, which is about 18% of the total number of employees, and a few days ago they fired another 60 people. We shouldn't be too surprised by that, it's our harsh reality and it will become even harsher with more and more automation and robotization.
November 10, 2022, 11:39:47 PM
IMHO, it's about corporate and shareholder greed as these companies are not in the red- they are still making money, i.e., profit but not just as much, which expected in a global economic downturn.
That certain can't be the only reason to fire 11,000 employees. Economic slowdown will impact all but Meta is a giant. Such kind of layoffs can only happen when a company spends money into useless areas. That's exactly what Meta did - invested in Metaverse. It has now become a major reason for its own suicide.
Mark Zuckerberg was so bullish on Metaverse that he changed the name of his company to Meta. Now they don't even have 100,000 active users there after burning billions and billions of dollars.
Mark stated that the cost of developing Meta for the following year would be doubled. That is enormous. Mark is really into Meta; the problem is if he fires more people next year. Mark is so into Metaverse that it gets to the point that he changes the company's name to Meta. I am not sure, but now the hype of Metaverse is slowly dying. It's likely because of the recession or what, but it is not the same as when Mark first announced it. In any case, I'm still hoping that the development will go well.
November 10, 2022, 07:05:30 AM
IMHO, it's about corporate and shareholder greed as these companies are not in the red- they are still making money, i.e., profit but not just as much, which expected in a global economic downturn.
That certain can't be the only reason to fire 11,000 employees. Economic slowdown will impact all but Meta is a giant. Such kind of layoffs can only happen when a company spends money into useless areas. That's exactly what Meta did - invested in Metaverse. It has now become a major reason for its own suicide.
Mark Zuckerberg was so bullish on Metaverse that he changed the name of his company to Meta. Now they don't even have 100,000 active users there after burning billions and billions of dollars.
November 10, 2022, 02:35:02 AM
The hype about economic value is making headlines, but there are thousands of developers and entrepreneurs who are bringing their own dreams to this new frontier.
Metaverse may not be obvious to those in the marketing sector. But in my view, for those who have gone into cyberspace, it is a standard bearer for the future. The higher-ups at meta might predict that customers will make that jump from the internet to the metaverse, and honestly it will take time. Currently, Meta has suffered a significant loss of market value, and only time will tell whether this is due to being overly optimistic about its potential or being forced to downsize after facing layoffs and job cuts. may be.
Metaverse may not be obvious to those in the marketing sector. But in my view, for those who have gone into cyberspace, it is a standard bearer for the future. The higher-ups at meta might predict that customers will make that jump from the internet to the metaverse, and honestly it will take time. Currently, Meta has suffered a significant loss of market value, and only time will tell whether this is due to being overly optimistic about its potential or being forced to downsize after facing layoffs and job cuts. may be.
November 09, 2022, 10:23:55 PM
IMHO, it's about corporate and shareholder greed as these companies are not in the red- they are still making money, i.e., profit but not just as much, which expected in a global economic downturn.
November 09, 2022, 10:18:41 PM
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
In my opinion, this baseline is due to the slow economic growth in the US this summer, and maybe even worse in the fall, besides, investors sent their shares so there was a decline in META shares from the start year. that's because investors are not happy with the allocation of funds made by Zuckerberg for financing into the METAVERSE project of $10 billion per year and Reality Labs, which manages the METAVERSE project, has lost $3.67 billion in its operations. on the other hand, the reason why META fired 13% of its employees was due to increased competition such as with TikTok and the loss of advertising signals which caused revenue to drop significantly and was driven by inflation that is now happening everywhere.
November 09, 2022, 06:55:29 PM
The thought for the success is good, but being overconfident had ended up with the firing. This isn't good for a big corporate network. Elon Musk once after acquiring Twitter made a firing and that had different reason. What Meta done gives an outlook of down market which will directly affect their product. He should've made some alternate plans than getting into firing during the hard time.
Developing highly advanced system is good, but this needs to move with the reality. For now it looks like people aren't prepared enough to meet the standards of Meta.
Developing highly advanced system is good, but this needs to move with the reality. For now it looks like people aren't prepared enough to meet the standards of Meta.
November 09, 2022, 06:44:58 PM
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
I think we just need to rely on what Mark said about the reason and that's it:
"to reduce costs following disappointing earnings and a drop in revenue"
I don't think that Mark did some gambling here. It's just that their Metaverse-related investment might need a longer timeframe before it can actually reach its peak. However, it will take a continuous heavy cost during the process, and reducing the company's expenses might be the best way to deal with it.
November 09, 2022, 06:36:02 PM
Labor costs are one of the largest liability chunks for large corporations. Especially tech based industry with high skill labor wages. The net sum of innovation and development for large tech corporations has diminished significantly in recent years. Which doesn't justify the expense of skilled labor wages in exchange for lack of expansion and invention. For whatever random reason, the intellectual muscle aren't pulling their weight, which leads to an era of fat trimming and slimming down to maintain viability.
Economic slowdown certainly doesn't help as it leads to forecasts of reduced advertising revenue, upon which internet platforms like facebook and meta depend heavily upon.
To an extent, the large amount of silicon valley headhunting and hoarding of personnel could have been implemented in the expectation of a future silicon valley dot com bubble. Everyone wants to control the developers and intellectual assets, perhaps expecting one of them to contribute towards a spin off side project that grows into the next billion dollar big tech monolith. With economic recession on the horizon, growth and innovation expectations are on the decline. Which leads to layoffs. Although, of course there are many other variables and circumstances in play.
Economic slowdown certainly doesn't help as it leads to forecasts of reduced advertising revenue, upon which internet platforms like facebook and meta depend heavily upon.
To an extent, the large amount of silicon valley headhunting and hoarding of personnel could have been implemented in the expectation of a future silicon valley dot com bubble. Everyone wants to control the developers and intellectual assets, perhaps expecting one of them to contribute towards a spin off side project that grows into the next billion dollar big tech monolith. With economic recession on the horizon, growth and innovation expectations are on the decline. Which leads to layoffs. Although, of course there are many other variables and circumstances in play.
November 09, 2022, 05:26:58 PM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
You are absolutely right. The only thing I will add from myself:
1. Social networks have degenerated from normal means of communication, into something that is trying to shove intrusive advertising at every step and "sell" unnecessary goods / services.
2. Trust in social networks, as experts, is flying to 0. Income from advertising budgets that were inflated 5 years ago is flying there too ... Income is dropping sharply, it is not effectively growing, and regular costs are STABLE. And today they are still growing.
The conclusion from all this - what to do? Reduce, inefficient resources and regular costs! For example, staff... This is normal, this is self-regulation of the market.
November 09, 2022, 04:22:23 PM
This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Not only was it stated this was coming, but the market has absolutely punished tech stocks this year. I imagine that many companies will be joining Meta in the near future to layoff employees. I only hope that it is contained to some extent and we don't see another massively damaging recession like we saw in 2008 when it was very common for people to be laid off from their jobs. That extended into a massive drop for the stock market and housing markets, which led to stimulus by the government that caused the last 15 year runup in the markets topped by the Covid money printing that has now caused the government to even pull back on the market support.
Pray this doesn't get worse, because there's plenty of time for it to get much worse, especially with Biden at the helm for another two years.
Pray this doesn't get worse, because there's plenty of time for it to get much worse, especially with Biden at the helm for another two years.
November 09, 2022, 04:13:50 PM
It's both. Nearly all the giant tech companies in the U.S. reported low earnings and lower userbase for Q3. These layoffs were inevitable considering the financial sectors throughout all of Q3 were all but certain a recession was coming. U.S. GDP for Q3 did not show recession, but my expectation is within the next 6 months there will be so it makes sense that Meta is laying off employees. Not that I would have expected the utter garbage of the "Metaverse" to be resounding success, regardless of the economy.
Side note - Musk also said that Twitter was losing 4M USD per day which contributed to his decision to fire half of Twitter's staff. Seems like we might be moving past the tech bubble that's existed for some number of years.
Side note - Musk also said that Twitter was losing 4M USD per day which contributed to his decision to fire half of Twitter's staff. Seems like we might be moving past the tech bubble that's existed for some number of years.
November 09, 2022, 03:55:18 PM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
It's going to be a bit of both and even Mark Zuckerberg has been open about it. He said that he expanded the Facebook staff too far, which in large part is directly related to this metaverse fantasy that has been tried a dozen times before in the past - "3d worlds". I'm sure he got somewhere decent with it and took it further than it has ever been before, but ultimately he needs an audience of customers who will be able to participate and people are being rather careful with their money right now. He saw Elon firing a bunch of people and it is an opportunistic time to fire people when that happens, the attention is already elsewhere so it slips under the radar a little bit. The economy is also in trouble so all round spending is going to be coming down and job losses are part of that cycle too.
November 09, 2022, 03:29:02 PM
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
market which it is really hard to distinguish about these negative numbers and could really say that it did really give that impact.It would be normal for a company on firing employees if it needs too but
when the time comes where this market be on greens again then expect that there would be some hiring again.It all do varies with the market trend and of course with the demand which is really hardly to be pushed through on this very long bearish market.Let the dust settle down and see further possible situation.
November 09, 2022, 03:17:20 PM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Currently, the world economy is in recession.
People need real resources - food, oil, gas, metals, wood. Interest in virtual reality and the Metaverse has fallen. Under these conditions, investment in the creation of the Metaverse does not guarantee a quick profit.
Therefore, the dismissal of employees is a painful, but forced decision.
The Metaverse will be created, but most likely not now, and perhaps not even in the current decade.
November 09, 2022, 03:05:10 PM
He really did gambled on it and I think that he's got no experience looking at the charts. Yeah, he may be experienced for something like this as if it's going to be huge in the future.
But, he's not on the right time because it was done already since last year. The money he has invested on it has removed him from one of the top rich people in the world.
This firing of employees is what he think is best for the company. It only shows that they also make mistakes in terms of decision making for their companies.
But, he's not on the right time because it was done already since last year. The money he has invested on it has removed him from one of the top rich people in the world.
This firing of employees is what he think is best for the company. It only shows that they also make mistakes in terms of decision making for their companies.
November 09, 2022, 02:16:28 PM
Honestly to me, cutting your workforce if you do not have cash-cow services at hand is foolhardy.
I'm talking about staff cutting when all you got is some "Observer"-like digital service that hardly breaks even.
Here's a metaphor: If you're on a see-saw that's perfectly balance, and suddenly you put a 5-ton weight on it, you(r profits) will be flying against gravity and straight into the ground, assuming it doesn't outright break the see-saw (your business) first.
Meta will probably do fine, because Facebook. Twitter is in bigger trouble though.
I'm talking about staff cutting when all you got is some "Observer"-like digital service that hardly breaks even.
Here's a metaphor: If you're on a see-saw that's perfectly balance, and suddenly you put a 5-ton weight on it, you(r profits) will be flying against gravity and straight into the ground, assuming it doesn't outright break the see-saw (your business) first.
Meta will probably do fine, because Facebook. Twitter is in bigger trouble though.
November 09, 2022, 12:57:53 PM
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
They took risks hoping to become the leader of the metaverse space. They have the will as they have been very successful in every investment they did in the past. But they didn't count on war to get worse and recession to come.
But the Meta development is not yet over. The recession may also be controlled soon now that the election is over and Biden's policies could be reverted as GOP won the house.
November 09, 2022, 12:51:29 PM
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
I also do not think that it has stopped delving into new experiences, especially in the field of blockchain applications, which it still imagines that it will generate profits, even though this market is not huge and the expected size is at the level of Meta's aspirations.It was announced a few days ago that the Instagram application will support the Polygon network to facilitate the use of NFT.
I do not expect that this large number of employees is dismissed due to the lack of sufficient financial resources. I expect that this is a comprehensive change in the policy of human resources management, especially since many projects have not been launched after allocating work teams to work on them. An example of these projects is the Libra coin, then Denim, in addition to Metaverse.
November 09, 2022, 12:30:11 PM
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
The metaverse project has really cost Mark Zuckerberg a lot without a very good result.1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming year.
If they had not invested in the metaverse project, I'm very certain that they would not have laid off as many as 11,000 employees over claims of recession and a negative business prediction. The effects and the position that the metaverse project has put them must have encouraged this move to ensure that they remain in business. 
November 09, 2022, 11:59:02 AM
Have they even released anything from their metaverse project? I think a lot of big companies have these sorts of projects just to stay in the news and attract investors, much like their attempts at libra.
I think news like this is actually bad for tech firms as it does show they're making cutbacks to deal with a potential recession but it also shows they can't weather the storm and react to economic conditions as they arise (if they don't have a few years worth of funding to pay salaries - probably the cheapest part of the business - where is that money going to go? Are they just going to wait and be innovative in 3 to 5 years when everything's bullish again.
I think news like this is actually bad for tech firms as it does show they're making cutbacks to deal with a potential recession but it also shows they can't weather the storm and react to economic conditions as they arise (if they don't have a few years worth of funding to pay salaries - probably the cheapest part of the business - where is that money going to go? Are they just going to wait and be innovative in 3 to 5 years when everything's bullish again.
November 09, 2022, 11:50:18 AM
As people might be seeing in the news, Meta has fired 11,000 employees. It's a 13% reduction of their global workforce.
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
There might be multiple reasons behind it but two main reasons are surfacing across the social media,
1. They are preparing themselves for the upcoming recession and forecasted negative business revenues for upcoming years
2. Meta had invested heavily on Metaverse which failed to find users or ways to earn revenue. Now the investment is lost and putting huge financial pressure on Meta.
Which one you think might be the actual reason? Don't you think Mark had gambled quite heavily in an uncharted territory and put the existence into huge risk?
Jump to: