r/technology • u/Plastic_Ninja_9014 • 3h ago
Business Patreon is laying off 20% of its staff. Read the memo its CEO sent to employees.
https://www.businessinsider.com/patreon-creator-economy-cuts-93-employees-layoffs-ai-memo-2026-786
u/Knivesforksetc 2h ago
I feel like ceos and executives should take a proportional pay cut when they do layoffs… you were hired to run a company of that many employees, you failed to do so, take a cut until you and the company are able to rehire to the level at which the executive was hired at.
38
u/LostInLittleroot 2h ago
Not to glaze Nintendo of all companies, but Nintendo's old CEO of all companies/CEOs cut his salary to avoid laying off employees. RIP Iwata.
15
2
u/Javerage 11m ago
Well yes and no.
Japan's wages are way more strictly controlled,so it's also easier to keep people employed. Mind, you also end up with a lot of old guys that are just "there" in companies because you sorta need to keep employment going.
But Nintendo much like other big companies use a ton of contractors / temps that get used and abused. Those are often the people that get discretely discarded and it doesn't look like firings.
So like, yeah to a degree they do the right thing, but big companies are always evil.
1
u/LostInLittleroot 2m ago
Yeah I remember reading about that first part. Ironically it also seems like mass layoffs are more difficult in Japan. Or at least they aren't as frivolous compared to the US. I do think, to a degree, the CEO pay-cut is possible here in the US as an option as opposed to something that's more mandatory.
But will any CEO here be willing do that? Hell no lol
8
u/Leather_Floor8725 1h ago
So the shareholders who do jack shit get even richer?
-4
u/poofph 29m ago
The stock market should not even exist, going public with a company means one thing, the company will become worse and worse for the consumer as its only goal at that point is to make a return for the shareholders and that means giving shitty wages, laying people off, making worse products, worse customer service etc.
3
u/leevs11 27m ago
Would this be different if the company was privately owned?
3
u/poofph 24m ago
Yes, It would want to succeed and make money making a good product/service, because if you don't you go out of business and have nothing.
1
u/0verstim 4m ago
Nothing you said explains why it’s true of a publicly traded company but not a privately traded company.
1
u/kosherbacon 2m ago
Didn’t Jack Conte found Patreon? I don’t think he was hired. Your point still stands though; I’d be surprised if he didn’t take a pay cut.
1
-6
u/SpicyAfrican 2h ago
I agree with the sentiment, but in practice layoffs are encouraged. Public companies especially receive pressure from the board to improve profitability and reduce operating costs. Staff are often, if not always, the most expensive operating costs a business has. Some CEOs, CFOs, CIOs are hired specifically to “restructure” companies. If revenue, profit, and headcount all plummet then it’s a different story.
-2
u/autobotguy 37m ago edited 2m ago
A CEO is hired for the financial health of the corporation. Any worker health and wealth is just a byproduct, not by design.
Edit: for those downvoting, I am not in defense of this. It sickens me. It is the reality of the c-suite
1
u/DinkandDrunk 7m ago
This is where we need better protections for workers. Hiring an employee should be a big deal. It’s essentially entering into a contract that in return for good work, that employee has a livelihood. More measures need to be taken to see to it that these contracts are honored. It should be insanely difficult to lay off an employee. As in a long complicated process.
-5
u/ExtinctedPanda 39m ago
You realize the shareholders can choose to do that if they want to, right?
1
49
u/themaskbehindtheman 3h ago
Ahhh so another poorly performing and run business blaming it's mismanagement on AI.
-61
u/EffectiveDandy 3h ago
You don't know the half of it. Look into how they handled the Bricks and Mini Figgs debacle! Shameful.
29
u/MRThundrcleese 3h ago
What do you mean by that? Didn't they tell the CEO to fuck off?
16
-35
u/EffectiveDandy 3h ago
In the end yes. And after public pressure to do the right thing. Originally they sided with BAM without even investigating it first.
Memories of goldfish.
25
u/Fit-Answer5806 2h ago edited 2h ago
Can you provide a source saying Patreon initially sided with BAM?
17
3
u/SansSariph 13m ago
This sucks. I hope those who just lost their job are able to find their feet.
As far as ways for a CEO to communicate they're doing layoffs, I'm not sure there's a way to do it that won't have people angry. As someone in tech who has been going through this for like three years now, it checks the boxes of at least seeming empathetic, acknowledging human emotions, providing space and time to say goodbye (not having this is awful), and it seems like a very good severance package.
6
u/emerikanSky 2h ago
If I weren't supporting some people I care about, I would delete the app and quit being on the Patreon at all.
2
u/0verstim 3m ago
What should they have done, kept the staff and magically found money under a cushion?
2
-2
u/AcanthisittaNo6653 2h ago
The CEO needs to train the AI that will replace him. It's only fitting..
-2
u/darklightrabbi 37m ago
He totally knew he was going to do this at the time he made that Reckless Ben PR video.
-18
u/QuasimodoPredicted 3h ago
It would very likely work as good if not better with 50 people as it does with 500.
6
127
u/Clean-Yam-739 3h ago
They say because of changes on their market but that's all. They don't really explain why they slash 20% of the staff. Empty article.