ARM To Drop Up To 15% of Staff (theregister.com) 49
Chip designer and licensor to the stars, Arm, has reportedly dropped around 1,000 workers onto unemployment queues. The Register reports: An email to staff from Arm CEO Rene Haas, seen and reported by the UK's Daily Telegraph, states: "To stay competitive, we need to remove duplication of work now that we are one Arm; stop work that is no longer critical to our future success; and think about how we get work done." Haas, who has been in the chief exec's chair for about a month, added Arm needs "to be more disciplined about our costs and where we're investing." "I write this knowing that although it is the right thing to do for Arm's future, this is not going to be easy," he added. Between 12 and 15 per cent of staff will be let go as a result globally. The biz employs 6,400 worldwide. The job cuts come just a month after the collapse of the company's $40 billion sale to Nvidia. ARM is now pursuing a potential IPO, according to Bloomberg.
Stupid IPO hack (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously not.
Re: Stupid IPO hack (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Businesses expand when there is lots of money to afford to.
When that money goes away, they need to contract.
It's not that that the people were never needed, it's that the new contracted business no longer needs (can afford) those people. You change the needs to fit the financial reality.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been through several acquisitions in the last 15 years. In not one instance would we have been fooled by a sudden decrease in payroll expenses.
Do you know who funds IPOs? Not Joe Sixpack.
Arm's revenue YoY increase was excellent up until about 2016. It's been stagnant since. They were looking to sell for a reason.
They were unable to, and this is the result. So now they're going to sell to the public.
Re: Stupid IPO hack (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine someone needs to cough up a ton of money if a bunch of money on legal work and escrow is done for a deal that size and needs to be reversed.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe rather than assuming you are smarter than someone because you don't understand something they said, you should take five seconds to look up what they said and see if they're correct. [medwatch.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I've been through 3 acquisitions in my professional life. That is not a thing.
You really think the banks that fund the IPO are going to go "herp a derp! look! their payroll expenses dropped 30% last year! That business is in solid shape!"
Come the fuck on. I'm not assuming I'm smarter than someone because I don't understand something they said. I am assuming that I'm less ignorant than someone because what they said was fucking stupid.
Arm's revenue has been flatlined since 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
Why wouldn't investors fail to check this if the hype is right? After all, my broker says this is the triple crown of opportunities (whatever that means), you really think inves
Re: (Score:2)
I've been to this rodeo more than a few times since I entered the work world back in the '80s.
Then you'll certainly agree with me.
Why wouldn't investors fail to check this if the hype is right? After all, my broker says this is the triple crown of opportunities (whatever that means), you really think investors are all going to stop and dig below the print prospectus?
Are you kidding me? You've been through this rode more than a few times.
Before an IPO, or an acquisition, you go through decades of financials.
The process takes weeks to months.
Again, an IPO isn't Joe Sixpack looking at financials.
I get the impression you're losing it because someone said something you disagree with. I also get the impression you've lost this argument before (perhaps not here).
I'm not losing anything, least of all this "argument".
If you can identify a point that's being argued, I'd be impressed. What we have here is a laughably specious claim that it's common practice to attempt to fraudulently misrepresent your f
Re: (Score:2)
You've never been through one, I can see.
IPOs are underwritten by banks. The largest banks in the world, in fact.
Before they will do so, they want to know if the ass crack of your janitor is clean.
The one I went through had dudes in and out of our conference room for 7 weeks, and involved thousands of boxes of documents pulled out from the warehouse. I was responsible for pulling the data from the financials software's database, so I know exactly how much they wanted to see.
A bank does not
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe I'm concerned that my dumbfuck trolls don't?
Re: (Score:2)
Every time this happens, nobody ever asks the most obvious questions:
- How is it possible that you have 1,000 people who you don't need?
They are doing work that management has determined is not important or profitable enough to keep doing.
- Why were they hired in the first place?
They were hired to do work that seemed like a good idea at the time.
- Are you stupid or merely incompetent?
Could be either, both, or neither. Sometimes priorities change. ARM expected to be acquired. Cutting projects that the acquiring company may want is a bad idea. Now they know they have to stand alone and the calculus changes. They need to be more focused.
Good companies try not do big layoffs or even any layoffs. It is bad for morale
Re: (Score:2)
the MBA drone is strong with this one (Score:2)
Missing from the announcement:
"Improve synergies across all business units"
"Retain our best and brightest talent"
"Focus on our core business values"
"Enhance our shareholder equity"
"Have our customers integrated with our processes"
"Grow without increasing capital spending"
"Brand recognition is one of our key strengths"
"Recognize that the market is changing and we have to change with it"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
dammit!
Re: (Score:2)
And also: "We're sorry to anyone who was offended (by suddenly getting canned)."
Re: (Score:2)
way to cut off an "arm" (Score:1)
way to cut off an "arm" - thats a joke now, right?
Translation (Score:2)
I'm the new CEO, and I feel I should show I'm doing something. This is something. So I'm doing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Translation (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
See ya, see ya, wouldn't want to be ya!
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, the old politician's fallacy [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
This is terrible! Do something! [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This is why we need strong unions. Vote Democrat and support the workers!
Remind me how unions protect employees from layoffs?
Re: (Score:2)
You are being trolled. The account is trolling on the username of rsilvergun, but it's a 4chan tier, mostly right wing, troll. Look at my list of foes and add all similar accounts as a foe. Then never reply to them and, whenever reasonable, mod them down.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for example, teacher's unions have contracts which, while they don't stop layoffs, do require that they get preferential treatment in the first hiring pool and often promote seniority (which helps against age discrimination). They also don't get blind sided by layoffs like this because they have term contracts so at least they get some lead time. They also have lawyers. But, they're not what they used to be for sure, at least in my red "right to work" (doublespeak) state which has gutted their powe
Re: (Score:2)
This is why we need strong unions. Vote Democrat and support the workers!
Remind me how unions protect employees from layoffs?
They can't ultimately prevent lay-offs but they can help ensure that those who are laid off are not selected unfairly, and will be likely to have negotiated reasonable redundancy terms. By knowing that anyone who thinks they have been made redundant unfairly will have free (as in already paid for through subscriptions) access to union lawyers, companies are likely to ensure that selection is fair and only those who are genuinely redundant are let go.
Say what? (Score:2)
With are you talking about? You have absolutely no idea how unions works, do you?
The ONLY difference a union would make here is they've basically be prohibited from distinguishing between unproductive staff and less productive. The layoffs would be either the entire division or by lottery rather than making *intelligent* decisions about who to keep. You just end getting rid of the person who knows all the systems and keeping the idiot, rather than the other way around.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell ya what, why don't you tell me what role YOU think unions play in layoffs? This could be entertaining.
You've made it clear that you think unions are the best thing since sliced bread. And from that general "unions are the best thing ever" idea, you then reason that as superheroes, they must prevent layoffs?
Wish I could edit / delete that (Score:2)
My first reply was unnecessarily aggressive and perhaps condescending. I wish I could remove or edit it. I apologize.
Still curious how exactly you're thinking a union improves layoffs, though.
Generally what unions do is ensure everyone is treated precisely the same. There's a union pay rate for the position and that's what you get. You work the schedule the union negotiates for everyone, etc.
Being treated exactly the same as Barney isn't necessarily what you want when Barney is getting laid off.
Band together? (Score:2)
I hope those fired employees band together to form their own company and then design a RISCV core to compete with ARM. That would be a sweet revenge.
Re: (Score:2)
Revenge or not, the history of Silicon Valley is peppered with similar stories. Innovation in RISC-V would be a boon to the whole industry.
Joking (Score:2)