[HN Gopher] The layoffs at Klarna
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The layoffs at Klarna
        
       Author : lauluz
       Score  : 286 points
       Date   : 2022-08-14 16:04 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.pragmaticengineer.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.pragmaticengineer.com)
        
       | justin66 wrote:
       | > The CEO said employees at Klarna are superstars, and superstars
       | don't want unions negotiating for them.
       | 
       |  _Actual_ superstars are happy to take advantage of what the
       | Screen Actor 's Guild does for them, just as the crew working on
       | their shows are also happy to have their union, the writers are
       | happy to have their union, and so on.
        
       | m8s wrote:
       | Buy now pay later schemes are usually really terrible ideas.
       | Companies like Klarna and Afterpay should be avoided at all
       | costs. Often the loan repayment schedules are intentionally
       | confusing and predatory.
       | 
       | Here's a relevant You Need A Budget podcast episode for those
       | looking for more on this topic:
       | https://open.spotify.com/episode/0Z9NQoseq5nvutAInURR2r
        
         | Cornelius267 wrote:
         | The Venn diagram of C-levels who are willing to work at a
         | company with an inherently predatory business model, and those
         | who will lay people off and screw them over is basically a
         | circle.
         | 
         | It is impossible for someone who leads a company like that to
         | be a good person. Why would anyone be surprised at them being
         | heartless to their employees?
        
       | lupire wrote:
        
       | throwaway859383 wrote:
       | I still currently work at Klarna.
       | 
       | The article is a very good write up of what happened. I'm going
       | to talk about what the current internal situation is and how
       | people are feeling based on what I'm seeing.
       | 
       | Since the layoffs there has been a noticeable shift in
       | atmosphere. Previously quite a few people would regularly come to
       | the offices, now not so much. Some still do come but
       | significantly less. Performance has gone from people often going
       | beyond what was expected to "I'll do enough to keep my job". A
       | colleague who was previously very keen working for Klarna and
       | would often work a good 11 hours+ is now "disenchanted" and
       | doesn't quite know what to do with themself.
       | 
       | Job satisfaction and overall happiness has rapidly declined and
       | is still going down. Some departments do internal anonymous
       | surveys where people outright get asked if they are happy at
       | work. From the ones I saw, every single one had a drop of at
       | least 20%, some significantly more. Participation rate of those
       | surveys has also declined. Most people I spoke to outright said
       | they're not participating anymore because they're on the way out.
       | 
       | A good 50% of the people I asked, outright said they are looking
       | for a new job. I expect some are not sharing because they want to
       | keep it a secret. I'm expecting my team to loose about 40% of its
       | members within the next 5 months. As far as I know, there is only
       | replacement hiring, no active hiring.
       | 
       | One of my very talented colleagues that I have been working with
       | for 3 years got laid off. During a chat with our direct
       | supervisor I asked them if they could tell me the reason. Trying
       | to reassure me, they said I had nothing to worry about and that
       | my colleague wasn't fired for poor performance but other internal
       | reason. I knew this colleagues salary so I also know they weren't
       | let go because of their high salary. Since then my team has an
       | open position that is hiring for this exact role. Make of that
       | what you will.
       | 
       | As you might have read from the article, communication was
       | absolutely horrendous. One of the key things I'd like to mention
       | is that Klarna always promoted open and frequent communication.
       | Only this was never practiced by the C-Level. This was incredible
       | apparent during the layoffs. Many people had questions but
       | C-Level was dead silent and let HR people "manage" the fallout.
       | My colleague had their meeting at the start of the working day on
       | Tuesday (layoffs were announced the day before). My supervisor
       | got told of the layoff 15 minutes before my colleagues meeting.
       | Informing my supervisor was done through a 3 sentence slack
       | message.
       | 
       | 2 weeks after the announcement, quite a few pregnant women came
       | forward that they also received an offer. Additionally, a lot of
       | people on long term sick leave were contacted. Since the layoff
       | decisions weren't made centrally, I doubt these groups we're
       | specifically targeted but Klarna is, in comparison to the average
       | Swedish company, quite international. I know of at least one case
       | from a decision maker (not C-Level) that a woman was laid off
       | because she was 8-months pregnant and due to go on her maternity
       | leave. I'm not going to speculate on what, if any, legal actions
       | are following from this.
        
         | akudha wrote:
         | One of my ex-colleagues simply quit one day - no emails, no
         | notice...nothing.
         | 
         | Another one of my ex-colleagues told me he was doing two jobs,
         | but only working 8 hours in total per day, if that.
         | 
         | Then COVID layoffs happened. In the first case, the company
         | simply turned off the logins - it was their way of laying
         | people off (one laid off guy had been with the company for 15
         | years, another one had health issues and needed the insurance).
         | In the second guy's case, they told him one Friday afternoon
         | that it was his last day. We were in different teams at the
         | time, but neither of us had any work, despite asking our
         | respective managers for work daily. He got frustrated with
         | having no work and took another job. Also, it took them three
         | more months to give us the last two paychecks (for two months).
         | 
         | Both times, I thought my colleagues were nuts and were
         | unethical - doing second job, not giving notice etc just felt
         | ugly. Now I feel different. If employers treat employees like
         | crap, why should any employee show any loyalty? When my
         | colleague was laid off, he didn't care, as he was already had
         | another job. I on the other hand, spent the next month looking
         | for one.
         | 
         | In every contract job I worked, the first thing they say is
         | "you can (and should) work more than 40 hours if we need you
         | to, but you can only bill us for 40 hours".
         | 
         | If this is the treatment in a sophisticated, (relatively) high
         | paid industry like software, I wonder how people are treated in
         | service industries, retail etc. No wonder so many workers are
         | striking and trying to unionize... Maybe it is time for
         | software developers to unionize too
        
           | tialaramex wrote:
           | In Europe (I work in the UK) it's usual to require that both
           | sides commit to the employment on a rolling basis. My
           | contracts have for over a decade now required roughly 90
           | days, but it's common to see 30 days in most jobs.
           | 
           | That means if I want to leave I need to give 90 days notice
           | and if they don't want me any more I get 90 days notice of
           | that _or_ I get 90 days pay immediately.
           | 
           | This also leads to "Garden leave":
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave
           | 
           | As I understand it Garden Leave is not uncommon in the US...
           | for executive level jobs. The guy cleaning the hallways is
           | lucky if they remember to tell him not to come in tomorrow
           | rather than just locking the doors and not paying him any
           | more.
        
           | SahAssar wrote:
           | > the company simply turned off the logins - it was their way
           | of laying people off
           | 
           | In a lot of countries this is illegal, you need to prove a
           | cause for firing anyone. One of the reasons klarnas firings
           | in Sweden have been controversial and complicated is that
           | they specifically tried to sidestep that by "firing people"
           | by getting them to resign and accept a deal. They would not
           | be able to just outright fire people without negotiating the
           | terms, and those terms are usually based on a LIFO queue.
           | 
           | > One of my ex-colleagues simply quit one day - no emails, no
           | notice...nothing.
           | 
           | Some people don't want to leave with fanfare, but notice is
           | basically required in sweden (again, using sweden as a
           | comparison since the thread is about klarna).
           | 
           | > Another one of my ex-colleagues told me he was doing two
           | jobs, but only working 8 hours in total per day, if that.
           | 
           | If they were dishonest about that then that does not look
           | great IMO. If they weren't and both companies were fine with
           | it then it seems OK.
        
       | bastardoperator wrote:
       | I left a company at the beginning of covid that jumped at the
       | opportunity to reduces everyone's pay... except the executives.
        
       | marsven_422 wrote:
        
       | ygram wrote:
       | I have never understood why health ensurance is handled by the
       | employer in the US, why don't people buy private health insurance
       | instead? It feels insane to put yourself in that kind of
       | dependency on your employer.
        
         | dudul wrote:
         | It is indeed a stupid system. Private insurance is very
         | expensive compared to the premium you usually pay when you're
         | covered by your employer's plan. Employers can negotiate better
         | prices because they bring a pool of insured to the insurance
         | carrier. An individual doesn't have the same leverage.
        
         | petsormeat wrote:
         | Private health insurance can be extremely expensive, especially
         | if you have a chronic illness, or are over age 40. I buy my own
         | as a freelancer; the monthly premiums for even a basic plan are
         | extortionate. There are government subsidies for lower income
         | people, but many tech freelancers earn too much to qualify.
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | Around the Great Depression, in an effort to get control of
         | inflation, the 1942 Stabilization Act was passed. Because
         | employers could no longer attract new employees by offering
         | higher pay, they started offering other things like health
         | insurance. Since it was payed directly by the employer it
         | wasn't taxable income and didn't fall under control of the
         | Stabilization Act, and since then it just stuck.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | Note: 1942 is the middle of ww2, not the great depression.
           | The war effort dramatically reduced labor availability. (back
           | of the napkin math says roughly 12% of the US population
           | served in the military, disregarding the massive labor pool
           | required to support the military industrial complex)
        
           | drdec wrote:
           | If I am not mistaken, WWII was a bigger driver for that
           | legislation than the Great Depression.
        
         | tryptophan wrote:
         | If EMPLOYER pays you 10k and you want to buy a plan for 5k, you
         | first have to pay taxes on the 10k, lets say 20%, so you have
         | 8k - 5k = 3k left over.
         | 
         | OR
         | 
         | The employer can just buy the 5k plan for you tax free, and pay
         | you 5k instead. This means you have 4k left over after tax!
         | This is because healthcare plans are not taxed if provided by
         | the employer.
         | 
         | Incredibly retarded, yes, it is.
        
           | doktorhladnjak wrote:
           | Employers also often get better pricing on insurance for
           | their employees because the pool is less risky overall. Those
           | buying health insurance on the private market are more likely
           | to have health problems and need it. Lots of healthy, young
           | employees with limited health problems at tech companies.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | Why isn't this just tax deductible?
        
             | rullelito wrote:
             | Then a lot more poor people could get insurance, not very
             | 'merican.
        
             | doktorhladnjak wrote:
             | When McCain ran for President against Obama in 2008, there
             | was talk about making employer provided health insurance
             | taxable as a way to even this playing field. The idea was
             | more employees would refuse employer coverage and buy their
             | own for cheaper.
        
         | kolanos wrote:
         | Most employers subsidize, in part or in whole, employee health
         | insurance as a part of their benefits. Private health insurance
         | is very expensive. [0]
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/individual-and-
         | fa...
        
         | eschneider wrote:
         | It started that way because it got around WWII-era wage caps
         | and it remains advantageous because it gets paid for with pre-
         | tax dollars. (Which isn't, I know, carved in stone. But that's
         | the way it is atm.)
        
         | whichdan wrote:
         | Employers cover a majority of the cost of insurance. In Boston,
         | I pay maybe $70 every 2 weeks for health insurance, but on the
         | private market I'd be paying 5-10x as much for worse coverage.
        
           | ygram wrote:
           | Do people ever try to negotiate higher salary instead of
           | health endurance from employer and then have a private one
           | instead?
        
             | rhinoceraptor wrote:
             | I've never heard of that, it would cost you more than it
             | would cost the employer since you first have to pay taxes
             | on your income, and employers can often get better rates.
        
             | doktorhladnjak wrote:
             | A law called ERISA makes this unlikely. Companies must
             | offer benefits like health insurance and retirement savings
             | plans on the same terms to similarly situated employees.
        
         | drc500free wrote:
         | Private insurance can be thousands of dollars a month, so
         | before Obamacare it was a pretty niche thing. It still kind of
         | is, because for professional jobs the expectation is a
         | massively subsidized health plan. Voluntarily paying an extra
         | $1500/month for the independence of not relying on your
         | employer is not a choice most people would make.
        
       | ec109685 wrote:
       | I'm not sure who the audience of all 5000 words of that article.
       | 
       | Obviously it caused me to click the link, but it seems like a lot
       | of excruciating detail about internal company process.
       | 
       | I guess its useful for potential future Klarna recruits.
       | 
       | And there's an even longer extended version behind a paywall!
       | https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/layoffs-at-klarna
        
         | brtkdotse wrote:
         | Oh, come on. Everybody likes a good, juicy airing of dirty
         | laundry.
        
       | dom96 wrote:
       | Adjacent to the topic of this article but I really love Gergely's
       | reporting. It's great that he is shining a light at how poorly
       | these companies are handling layoffs. Hopeful that this will
       | change our industry for the better.
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | > Klarna made a major mistake in not letting the majority of
       | employees know if they were safe from layoffs or not, for a whole
       | night.
       | 
       | I worked for a company that didn't let people know if they where
       | safe, for a week. A friend worked for a company that didn't let
       | people know for 3 months. It's beyond stupid, people becomes
       | nervous and starts looking elsewhere and it's always the best
       | people who leave first.
       | 
       | That being said: Why does Klarna have 7500 people employed? I
       | feel bad for the people who will be losing/have lost their job,
       | but they also won't be the last in tech. Klarna have done what
       | Google, Twitter and other have done, hired people they didn't
       | need, so now productivity per employee is too low.
       | 
       | 15 years ago I worked for a company that used Klara for payment,
       | right when they started to expand beyond Sweden. The experience
       | was interesting to say the least. They where completely naive
       | about fraud. They didn't understand the markets they where trying
       | to expand to. If everything else failed, payback the customers
       | and let the retailers deal with any loses.
       | 
       | While I'm sure they improved, based last my experience with them
       | in 2016, I don't see how they could be ready to enter the US
       | market.
        
         | GordonS wrote:
         | I've worked for (non-tech) companies that didn't let employees
         | know they were safe for _months_ - and they did it almost
         | every.single.year... and _always_ just before Christmas, like
         | they planned to hurt people as much as possible. Utterly
         | despicable.
         | 
         | Thinking about it, I guess they hoped to make people jump ship
         | before they were pushed, but it destroyed any semblance of a
         | good relationship between employees and management/HR.
        
         | jks wrote:
         | > I worked for a company that didn't let people know if they
         | where safe, for a week. A friend worked for a company that
         | didn't let people know for 3 months.
         | 
         | Finland has in some respects even more stringent employment
         | laws than Sweden. If a company is laying off people, it needs
         | to "negotiate" with employee representatives for a set amount
         | of time. For small companies or small layoffs, the time is two
         | weeks, but if there are at least 30 employees and the layoff
         | affects at least 10 of them, the negotiation time is six weeks.
         | Companies typically say at the outset which employee groups are
         | affected but delay the decisions about individual employees to
         | the end. I don't know if this is by law, but I suppose that
         | saying sooner would be an opening for a union to claim that the
         | negotiations were not done in good faith, and possibly sue the
         | company.
         | 
         | Having been a potentially affected employee on two occasions
         | and an employee representative on one of them, let me say that
         | waiting six weeks for the decision is not fun for anyone.
        
         | lumost wrote:
         | For the last 7 years I noticed a strange trend in tech. The
         | skill of management was not getting the people you needed, but
         | instead turning down people you didn't.
         | 
         | Whenever ive been a manager for the last 7 years its the same.
         | One day you get a ping for "can you onboard X". It doesn't
         | matter if you had work for one more person or not, thus
         | projects are created for them to do something.
        
         | rsanek wrote:
         | > productivity per employee is too low
         | 
         | When referring to productivity, what do you mean in this case?
         | For Google, their profit per employee is still very high (about
         | $300k [0]). Of the top 10 biggest employers in that list, they
         | are 3rd-highest-earning per capita.
         | 
         | [0] https://tipalti.com/profit-per-employee/
        
       | Maro wrote:
       | I feel for the people who were layed off, esp. ones who just left
       | their previous jobs and/or relocated. One thing as an employer I
       | would never do (if it were my call) was to lay off somebody who
       | just recently joined/relocated [unless there are already
       | performance problems]. That's just a shitty thing to do, at a
       | human level.
       | 
       | Putting that aside (since all tech companies will lay off new
       | joiners), I don't think this story points to any (cultural)
       | problems at Klarna.
       | 
       | Layoffs are always tough and people will be unhappy. Based on the
       | timelines presented in the article, everybody knew within 1-2
       | days whether they are affected or not, and affected people got a
       | good severance package. By "good" I mean more than Klarna had to
       | pay based on the law, based on the article.
       | 
       | It's important to remember that 99% of working people in the
       | world would not get this deal in a layoff.
       | 
       | I think we (tech workers) need to stop expecting to always be
       | treated as unicorn snowflakes (esp. in the current market
       | conditions).
        
         | doktorhladnjak wrote:
         | I've been through several tech layoffs. I can't think of any
         | case where new joiners were targeted. It was always some
         | combination of performance and cost (either personal pay or an
         | entire group being less profitable).
        
           | Maro wrote:
           | Based on my reading of the article, Klarna didn't _target_
           | new joiners, they were just part of the unfortunate mix.
        
       | jarym wrote:
       | > this approach was the fairest option for all
       | 
       | I have heard this line a few times for HR recently and it makes
       | me cringe every time. Putting everyone in the same shitty boat is
       | never fair. Takes me back to George Orwell's Animal Farm every
       | time!
        
       | jedberg wrote:
       | Wow, that sounds so poorly handled. Not figuring out a way to
       | tell everyone affected at (nearly) the same time is probably the
       | worst sin.
       | 
       | Best layoff I ever went through was when my boss came to our team
       | and said, "look, don't tell anyone, but we have a layoff coming
       | in a few days. I have to let one of the three of you go. Do you
       | want me to decide or do you want to decide amongst yourselves?".
       | She knew we were good friends outside of work and would probably
       | make a better choice than her.
       | 
       | I ended up volunteering because one other guy had just bought a
       | house and had a baby and the other guy had debts to pay off and I
       | didn't. Ended up working with both those guys again. One of them
       | ended up leaving and getting a new job, then he pulled me in
       | after 1.5 years of unemployment, and then we pulled the last guy
       | in after he eventually got let go.
        
         | blantonl wrote:
         | 99 out of 100 times this would have been 3 spidermen pointing
         | at each other.
         | 
         | Glad your manager was able to recognize your team could handle
         | this decision themselves. But, wow.
        
         | matrix_overload wrote:
         | Yeah, so the company ended up losing the most
         | confident/competent person (since they have the highest chance
         | of quickly getting another job).
        
         | ergocoder wrote:
         | This sounds like a worse way of doing a layoff. It specifically
         | worked for you in your situation. I doubt it would work for
         | anyone else.
        
         | lr4444lr wrote:
         | Just wanted to say, that's a great story, and you should tell
         | it often.
        
         | yibg wrote:
         | Yea but try doing that with 700 people.
        
         | rospaya wrote:
         | Wow, that sounds awful for me. Being a boss means making hard
         | decision, he just dumped that on the three of you. Glad it
         | worked out for you, but I can't imagine this working in most
         | situations.
        
           | nr2x wrote:
           | *she
        
         | literallyWTF wrote:
         | How was that the "best layoff"?
         | 
         | Instead of being an actual fucking leader and making a
         | difficult decision, your boss just said "lol so who wants to
         | leave."
         | 
         | I swear sometimes the shit I read here makes me go insane.
        
           | babyshake wrote:
           | Sometimes people are planning to leave anyways, and wouldn't
           | mind a potentially generous severance package.
        
           | puchatek wrote:
           | By quoting her wrongly you missed precisely the reason why
           | her's was considered a good approach to communicating this.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | She was a great leader. She recognized that our team was
           | cohesive and could make a better decision than she could. She
           | was one of the best managers I ever had.
        
             | ImPostingOnHN wrote:
             | she is supposed to be part of the team and have the same
             | knowledge and thus be able to make an equally or more
             | informed decision
        
               | lr4444lr wrote:
               | Sometimes there is no good decision, and empowering the
               | underlings to make it is best term for everyone.
        
               | literallyWTF wrote:
               | Don't bother man. These people will bend over backwards
               | to justify inane decisions like "who wants to lay
               | themselves off".
        
               | compiler-guy wrote:
               | The reports were all good friends, she knew that, and
               | gave them the option for her to decide or them. She
               | apparently didn't know the personal lives of the reports
               | as well as they did themselves.
        
           | compiler-guy wrote:
           | Context and relationships matter. Apparently this manager had
           | a relationship with her reports where that would work. It's
           | obviously not going to work in nearly any other situation,
           | but kudos to her for figuring out what would work in this
           | situation.
           | 
           | Bottom line is that all of the reports involved were
           | reasonably ok with the outcome--no one is ever happy about
           | getting laid off--and that is far better than the situation
           | in most layoffs.
        
         | ronnier wrote:
         | > I ended up volunteering
         | 
         | You are a good person.
        
         | curiousllama wrote:
         | > Best layoff I ever went through was when my boss came to our
         | team and said, "look, don't tell anyone, but we have a layoff
         | coming in a few days. I have to let one of the three of you go.
         | Do you want me to decide or do you want to decide amongst
         | yourselves?"
         | 
         | Judging from your reaction, it sounds like yall had a great
         | work environment, and that this was a good way to handle the
         | layoff for your team. It sounds like it went smoothly, which is
         | 100%, A+, great.
         | 
         | But HOOO BOY, that was a HIGH RISK move by your boss. I
         | sincerely can't imagine the clusterf** that would've resulted
         | from that at some of the places I've worked. Good GOD. This is
         | an invitation for a lawsuit on a silver platter, holy
         | guacamole.
        
           | babyshake wrote:
           | What would the grounds of the lawsuit be? I can think of
           | reasons to not announce a layoff in advance, but I can't
           | think of why what the boss did was illegal.
        
             | curiousllama wrote:
             | Person X argues they only volunteered because Y is
             | pregnant. 'If I had stayed, I would've been the subject of
             | retaliation because I'd look like a bad person.'
             | 
             | In discovery, it's found that person Z pinged a friend and
             | said 'yea, we totally couldn't let C be laid off. What kind
             | of person would fire a pregnant woman?!"
             | 
             | That's pretty strong proof that membership in a protected
             | class factored directly into a retention/compensation
             | decision.
             | 
             | This is why managers are (/should be) trained to handle
             | this with lawyers involved.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | Oh yeah for sure. The only reason she could do it is because
           | we all got along.
           | 
           | I would not recommend this approach for most managers. :)
        
           | nvarsj wrote:
           | Maybe she had just watched The Hunger Games and was feeling
           | inspired.
        
           | YPCrumble wrote:
           | Why would this invite a lawsuit? Layoffs are part of
           | business.
        
           | stormbrew wrote:
           | Fwiw there is a more normalized practice that resembles this
           | and is, afaik, not a massive hr risk: openly offering a
           | voluntary severance with defined benefits.
           | 
           | Obviously it's not a great signal to those who don't take it
           | about the health of the company, and you might lose a bunch
           | of people you'd rather not, but I think allowing some level
           | of self-selection is good when it's possible.
        
             | TulliusCicero wrote:
             | The issue with voluntary severance, is that the strongest
             | employees tend to be the most likely to take it.
        
             | dento wrote:
             | I find it rather rare that a relatively compentent dev
             | couldn't get approximately equal compensation working for
             | some other company. So if offered $X for volutary
             | severance, where $X at least N months total compensation,
             | most devs who can get a similar job in less than N months
             | will leave. This leaves you with least capable people,
             | which is (usually) not what's wanted when doing layoffs.
             | (This is of course assuming that interview performance is
             | correlated with work performance, which is not necessarily
             | a great assumption to do)
        
               | stormbrew wrote:
               | I think there are two problems with this in practice:
               | 
               | 1) In the end those people will leave anyways once it's
               | obvious the ship is sinking, so I think you wind up with
               | a double whammy of attrition.
               | 
               | 2) Mass layoffs don't usually allow for a particularly
               | good perspective on who is a high preformer because it's
               | hard to vet decisions on that scale. Also this assumes
               | that performance is the primary axis, and not cost or
               | tenure. You will likely lose high performers along with
               | low and medium in a top down layoff.
        
               | SilverBirch wrote:
               | I think you need to consider that we're in the context of
               | a job market that has been hoovering up devs for the last
               | 10 years. There are 30 year olds who graduated into a
               | fairly good market who are now expeirenced developers who
               | have never seen a really difficult job market. It's all
               | fun and games if you're a fungible 20 something who can
               | go off to be another cog in another machine. But if the
               | market dries up - as is starting to happen with all the
               | big names slowing, it's a very difficult situation to be
               | in, and long term unemployment isn't just a financial
               | burden, it can be a massive emotional burden as well. One
               | thing that has always troubled me in my career is that I
               | look around and I don't see many 50+ or 60+ year old
               | engineers, and partly it's that our industry is still
               | emerging and 60 year old engineers pre-dated the
               | industry. But some of it could well be that at some point
               | attrition pushes people permanently out of the industry.
        
               | ml_basics wrote:
               | What are reasonable ranges for N in a typical severance
               | package?
        
           | xmonkee wrote:
           | I know right, what a firecracker.
        
         | orzig wrote:
         | That is awesome for a cohesive, high functioning team. I worked
         | at a company with some obvious (to everyone else) under
         | performers, and as much as I wish they had not been a layoff, I
         | would have been pissed if some of the nicer members of the team
         | had volunteered to take the bullet.
         | 
         | That said, the standard layoff protocol only got rid of one of
         | them, and the other only left after reacting badly to the
         | slight uptick in performance feedback (suggesting his lack of
         | self awareness)
        
       | jupp0r wrote:
       | Seems like a poorly executed layoff. I've seen a few of those in
       | my previous job. Things like an SVP of Product congratulating the
       | machine learning team for an awesome alpha demo and asking when
       | we would be ready to ship this to customers. The answer he got
       | was that it would never get to customers because he laid off the
       | whole team the day before.
        
       | xkbarkar wrote:
       | Almost reads like a detective story as if not only mass layoffs,
       | but poorly managed ones are unique to Klarna. Feels like the
       | author has not really understood how incredibly common mass
       | layffs as a tool for keeping profit margins really are.
       | 
       | Layoffs sucks no doubt but I cant say I feel as "outraged" as the
       | author seems to intend. My current employer cut 10% of the
       | workforce about 3 years ago (1800 ppl).My preevious one did that
       | twice (about 3500 people in total). Another former employer would
       | cut 2-3% every other month or so. Then go on a hiring spree, and
       | then cut again.
       | 
       | Laying off 5% every year Microsoft style because of a crazy in
       | house performance review system, now thats a news worthy evil
       | story. This is just standard bad management vs profit margin not
       | really interesting.
       | 
       | Yea Sweden, it happened to you too. Welcome to the club.
        
       | jyriand wrote:
       | Why do startups(tech companies) need so many employees? My first
       | thought is that because of the rapid growth startups are plugging
       | inefficient holes with more brains.
        
       | literallyWTF wrote:
       | Lol wow. What a complete shit show. Gotta love when a billionaire
       | also shits on unions.
       | 
       | And still people in this industry will forever think that unions
       | are a waste of time.
        
       | brycewray wrote:
       | Re item "The pay cut of 2020 which became permanent": the Day Job
       | I had in 2008 used that year's onset of the Great Recession to
       | stop annual raises and *never* brought them back -- at least, not
       | while I was still there, which was until early 2015.
        
         | ivraatiems wrote:
         | Wow, what kept you there so long?
        
           | brycewray wrote:
           | No other opportunities to speak of; inertia; I was in my
           | mid-50s at the time (59 by the time the final cut came for
           | me) and didn't think a massive recession was a good time to
           | look. Take your pick. :-)
           | 
           | [Plus, I really liked the company. Had been there longer than
           | in any other job, and it was where I wanted to be when
           | retirement came. Wasn't to be, however.]
        
       | drakonka wrote:
       | I was actually surprised to read that the Swedish CEO "took a dab
       | at unions". Sure, relationships with unions can be complicated,
       | but I've never heard an employer talk negatively about them here
       | (maybe I'm just sheltered?). I am used to seeing union reps come
       | to the office a few times a year for Q&As and feedback sessions,
       | and taking about union membership was normal in internal
       | channels. Never heard of anyone in leadership batting an eye
       | (heck, they were likely also union members). Being hostile to
       | unions seems like a normal thing for some other parts of the
       | world, but seeing a Swedish employer talk like this about union
       | membership here immediately leaves a bad taste in my mouth about
       | the company. It's a red flag.
       | 
       | Unfortunately it can take a while for employees who have
       | relocated to Sweden to consider joining a union. It took me about
       | a year or two after moving here to realize it was a thing, and
       | such a normal thing at that. I can imagine that Unionen et al
       | would have gotten more than a few phone calls from Klarna
       | employees asking for advice during/after this whole thing.
        
         | rightbyte wrote:
         | > I was actually surprised to read that the Swedish CEO "took a
         | dab at unions"
         | 
         | My impression is that he wants to be like the cool kids on the
         | other side of the Atlantic. Meanwhile the Engineering union and
         | Bankers guild are suing Klarna for the way the layoffs are
         | being done. Maybe they are pissed. Dunno.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | At least in Finland the tech unions are mostly toothless. They
         | might help you with a lawyer if it is certain that employer
         | screwed up. And any actions taken are very light, in lines of
         | we recommend you not to work overtime... And maybe day or two
         | of walking out... And then finally capitulate for minimal pay
         | increase...
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | Swedish unions aren't perfect for sure, but so far I've only
           | had positive experiences myself. I've luckily never had an
           | actual conflict at work to bring my union in over though, so
           | the extent of my experience has been calling them for general
           | advice and getting an extra week of vacation as part of a
           | collective agreement. I've also heard a few stories of
           | coworkers bringing in union reps when they felt they were
           | being pushed out on unfair terms and negotiating much better
           | severance packages.
        
         | Kiro wrote:
         | From my experience, it's not very common in tech companies in
         | Sweden. They often lack collective agreements and in the last
         | company I worked at I never heard anyone talk about it or say
         | they were a member.
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | The only companies I've worked for in Sweden have been tech
           | companies, and union membership was very common. At EA we had
           | a collective agreement, along with some other larger games
           | companies here iirc. Many people are members but don't
           | mention it unless it gets specifically brought up since it's
           | such a non-event.
           | 
           | Edit: Was curious to find some numbers about this. I don't
           | read Swedish fluently yet so having to use Google Translate,
           | but one report I found from 2020 says that "Information and
           | communication" (which I suspect IT/software engineering might
           | fall into) has 69% membership [0]. It seems to say white
           | collar workers actually have a higher membership rate than
           | others at >70% overall; will look some more and add any other
           | numbers I can find.
           | 
           | [0] - (page 13) https://www.lo.se/home/lo/res.nsf/vRes/lo_fak
           | ta_136602747878...
        
             | Kiro wrote:
             | EA seems to be an exception, as confirmed by this article:
             | https://kollega.se/avtal/fa-kollektivavtal-i-
             | dataspelsbransc...
             | 
             | The gaming industry is notorious for not having collective
             | agreements (as per the article, only 1% of the companies
             | has it). So I'm not sure your experience is representative.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | Having a collective agreement is not a prerequisite for
               | being a union member. It is common to be part of a union
               | even if the company does not have a collective agreement
               | (such as the games company I worked for after EA; no
               | collective agreement, but still plenty of union members).
        
         | jdasdf wrote:
         | Have you considered that this:
         | 
         | >Being hostile to unions seems like a normal thing for some
         | other parts of the world, but seeing a Swedish employer talk
         | like this about union membership here immediately leaves a bad
         | taste in my mouth about the company. It's a red flag.
         | 
         | is the reason for this:
         | 
         | >I was actually surprised to read that the Swedish CEO "took a
         | dab at unions". Sure, relationships with unions can be
         | complicated, but I've never heard an employer talk negatively
         | about them here (maybe I'm just sheltered?).
        
       | ImPleadThe5th wrote:
       | I heard some horror stories from some managers that have since
       | left.
       | 
       | They were not told that there would be any layoffs, and when
       | their employees came and asked them what it was all about there
       | was no support from the top so they had to just tell everyone "I
       | don't know". What an awful position to put people in.
        
       | ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
       | Klarna is another one of these businesses like affirm which
       | should not exist. Propped up using VC money, it will all come
       | crumbling down. What a disaster. Shopify also got caught up in
       | this mess by investing in all this. A lot of Shopify's revenue
       | came when Klarna went public instead of product and merchant
       | revenue. Everything burning down.
        
       | kqr wrote:
       | Since this is presented as a voluntary separation agreement for
       | the Swedish staff -- does anyone have information about what
       | happened to those who went, "thanks but no thanks"? I assume they
       | have to be let go in LIFO order, which ought to give them more
       | time to get their affairs in order.
        
       | redleggedfrog wrote:
       | Well, that's some seriously incompetent management. Thing is,
       | when these reports get out and later I'm assessing tech to
       | potentially use I go back in my head "Oh yeah Klarna -
       | incompetence. Moving on."
        
       | status200 wrote:
       | It is unfortunate that people lost their jobs, but is anyone else
       | not upset that a "buy now, pay later" company is struggling? They
       | are exacerbating consumer's reliance on credit and causing some
       | reckless spending, I personally believe they do more harm than
       | good.
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | I mean the warning signs of the overvaluation and hype around
       | Klarna was there ever since a private early investor unloaded
       | their shares on to retail via an online investment [0] [1]
       | platform at $45B, last year December. [2]
       | 
       | Those 6,000+ retail investors who FOMOed and bought in are now
       | down more than 80% of their investment due to the down-rounds,
       | with the private early investor escaping and banking $8 million.
       | So it is no surprise that the layoffs had to happen especially
       | with the recent rate hikes which are accelerating the costs at
       | Klarna.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.crowdcube.com/cubex/klarna
       | 
       | [1] https://milled.com/navia/klarna-pitch-is-launching-
       | tomorrow-...
       | 
       | [2] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/online-investment-
       | platfor...
        
       | rconti wrote:
       | > Garden leave is when an employer requests that an employee,
       | upon submitting their notice, need not return to the office. This
       | is a type of absence where an employee is asked not to work
       | during their notice period, in anticipation of their departure,
       | while still being kept on the payroll.
       | 
       | https://www.personio.com/hr-lexicon/garden-leave-uk/
        
         | nibbleshifter wrote:
         | Usually they kill your VPN/email/AD access as soon as you hand
         | in your notice.
         | 
         | You can also be put on gardening leave when you are fired, if
         | there's a notice period there.
        
           | rightbyte wrote:
           | So ... handovers is not a thing at Klarna?
        
         | esel2k wrote:
         | Isn't garden leave agreeing that you won't work for the
         | competition? Or is it even saying not working at all, not even
         | in an unrelated job?
         | 
         | If I had a job the next day I might just enjoy two salaries.
         | Would this be blocked by a garden leave agreement?
        
       | koinedad wrote:
       | Clear communication is not easy...
        
       | no_wizard wrote:
       | I don't understand why companies do these scale up things. Hoard
       | your cash and wait it out a stint before making major moves.
       | Don't hire fast hire smart.
       | 
       | If you are in a money problem environment maybe start with
       | transparency and freezing of things like hiring? There just seems
       | to be 100 better ways to approach this
        
       | Areading314 wrote:
       | Klarna generated $1.42 billion revenue in 2021, a 32 percent
       | year-on-year increase. A majority of Klarna's income comes from
       | interchange, processing and merchant fees.
       | 
       | As Klarna has expanded its BNPL offering, its losses have
       | increased. It reported a net loss of $730 million in 2021, a 337
       | percent increase on its 2020 loss.
       | 
       | I would say its surprising that this company is still in business
       | at all with numbers like this.
        
         | hotpotamus wrote:
         | I recently left an 8,000 person company that's been on a 2
         | decade loop of private money to publicly traded and back a
         | couple times now. It occurred to me that in 25ish years (about
         | 10 of which I worked there) that it might never have made any
         | money - I can't remember a profitable year ever; we were always
         | seeking growth above all else. I now work at a small SaaS
         | company of around 50 people and it's only ever made money.
         | 
         | Every day I feel like I live the Homer Simpson quote, "I don't
         | know how the economy works".
        
           | drc500free wrote:
           | > Every day I feel like I live the Homer Simpson quote, "I
           | don't know how the economy works".
           | 
           | This was my attempt to explain this phenomenon.
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32453161
        
           | allenu wrote:
           | > I recently left an 8,000 person company that's been on a 2
           | decade loop of private money to publicly traded and back a
           | couple times now. It occurred to me that in 25ish years
           | (about 10 of which I worked there) that it might never have
           | made any money
           | 
           | That is crazy if true. My fear is that there are a ton of
           | tech companies like that, just chasing future profits or an
           | acquisition, but not actually creating anything of value (at
           | least in terms of profit).
           | 
           | I don't know. It just doesn't sit well with me knowing that a
           | lot of products we build don't actually make any money. We're
           | all just part of some weird system of money re-allocation and
           | the software is just there as a signal that money should
           | change hands.
        
             | blantonl wrote:
             | Rackspace?
        
               | hotpotamus wrote:
               | Well spotted ;)
        
             | BeFlatXIII wrote:
             | Software as the chips in the stock market casino.
        
             | hotpotamus wrote:
             | I actually worked providing infrastructure to tech
             | companies; from large enterprises to startups. I think I
             | realized starting in the early to mid 10's that all the
             | startups I was working with were just about taking VC money
             | to provide the founders with hip, well paying jobs - the
             | stated goal of the company was mostly immaterial and the
             | "change the world" talk was virtue signaling to the rank
             | and file so they don't feel so bad about their place in it.
             | I wasn't all that thrilled but I've got to eat too and I'm
             | not built for retail or labor, so what was I going to do?
             | 
             | Might be worth noting that I tend towards the depressed
             | side already so my point of view might be a bit skewed. But
             | when I watch Office Space or other works by Mike Judge, I
             | realize I'm not exactly alone at least.
             | 
             | And keep in mind that this article is about a Buy Now, Pay
             | Later (BNPL) type business - what about that is all that
             | revolutionary? I'm sure the leadership wrapped it up as
             | "empowering people to purchase goods they need today" or
             | something else, but everyone knows they're selling people
             | baubles like TVs with predatory lending, right?
        
               | erenyeager wrote:
               | Buy Now Pay Later actually has a really good use case,
               | it's for people who may be wary of credit cards,
               | interest, and or low credit scores. For example, many
               | people who wouldn't take out credit cards will use BNPL.
               | Also, usury is prohibited in the major Abrahamic
               | religions, so BNPL can also work for client avoiding
               | interest loans.
        
               | hotpotamus wrote:
               | So before I worked at the last job, I worked for a camera
               | store back in the last days where those were still
               | generally a thing (2004-2010 - it wasn't too bad of a job
               | for a kid in school). We offered by now, pay later back
               | then, and I don't think we invented it either. Of course
               | it was basically just a credit card application, and
               | there was no requirement to pay it off within a set
               | amount of time, but if you didn't, then they'd hit you
               | with all the interest that had quietly been accruing
               | during their "introductory period" or whatever they
               | called it. Which is to say that it was scummy and
               | deceptive, but not much more so than other American
               | business practices and certainly less than others, and
               | hey they had to make money and eat too.
               | 
               | Perhaps Klarna really is better, but then again maybe
               | that's why they're hemorrhaging money at such an
               | impressive rate.
        
               | geysersam wrote:
               | > what about that is all that revolutionary?
               | 
               | Exactly. I've seen a lot of media coverage on Klarna (I'm
               | Swedish), often with the angle "wow, innovation". The
               | question I've too often wished journalist had asked is
               | "Why?", what's the benefit of what you do? Except being
               | more shiny.
               | 
               | Lot of waste in the tech sector. Sad how many skilled
               | people work endlessly on more effective ways of pushing
               | ads and loans, to make us desire and buy things we don't
               | need with money we don't have.
        
               | apurtbapurt wrote:
               | Revolutionary is of course an extreme stretch, but they
               | do add unique convenience to the checkout process.
               | 
               | No user account creation, no entering of address and
               | credit card number. Just click purchase and confirm with
               | BankID. I also like that they retain neatly organized
               | purchase history across all vendors, including permanent
               | storage of the product images.
               | 
               | I prefer klarna so much, that I occassionally simply go
               | to another etailer if there is no Klarna checkout option
               | in the first place I try to buy something.
        
               | ww520 wrote:
               | Story time. I was looking to buy a 911 in the past. Found
               | one at a dealership. The car was 3 years old, just off
               | lease, in good condition, and with no accidents shown in
               | Carfax.
               | 
               | I searched the VIN number in the state's DMV car
               | registration database. Well well. The car had an expired
               | tag and had high thousands of dollars of unpaid taxes,
               | fees and penalties against it. The owner had never
               | bothered to pay any taxes and fees over the years. I
               | would have to pay all those when doing the car transfer
               | at DMV.
               | 
               | I was kind of pissed and disgusted. I then searched the
               | VIN number on the web. Found the VIN in a post in a car
               | forum for an attempt to sell the car. It had a phone
               | number!
               | 
               | I searched the phone number. Got the name of the guy and
               | his company. He was the founder and CEO of a startup.
        
               | justsomehnguy wrote:
               | > I would have to pay all those when doing the car
               | transfer at DMV.
               | 
               | ...why are these are on the car and not on the person?
        
               | ww520 wrote:
               | DMV doesn't care who pays it. They won't process the
               | title transfer of the car as long as there're unpaid
               | taxes or fines. Imagine I've already paid the money to
               | make the purchase, and later going to DMV to transfer the
               | car title but find out I couldn't due to unpaid fines.
               | What could I do? Either paid the outstanding fines or
               | sued the owner to revert the sale. Headaches all around.
               | I didn't go through with the purchase at the end.
               | 
               | I talked to another car dealer and asked him about it. He
               | said this kind of car was usually sold to people in
               | another states, where their DMV won't enforce
               | California's taxes and fines.
               | 
               | The lesson here is be sure to check for a clear title on
               | the car, including DMV fees and fines, before making a
               | purchase.
        
             | hef19898 wrote:
             | That is the Amazon way, baby! Not.
             | 
             | If a company doesn't make money, cash flow and / or profits
             | (preferably both), it is just under cutting the competition
             | (if smart) or on its way into bancrupcy (if not so smart)
             | or both.
        
               | allenu wrote:
               | I agree that many are just trying to undercut the
               | competition. My pet theory is this is having an effect on
               | consumers' expectations for tech-based products.
               | Specifically, nobody thinks anything is worth paying for,
               | or at least only want to pay a small price. That leads to
               | only big companies being able to compete in markets since
               | they can subsidize products for a long time.
        
           | djmips wrote:
           | Sounds like the old old SNL skit about banking.
           | 
           | Wikipedia- "First CityWide Change Bank - Two ads promote a
           | financial institution whose only service is providing change
           | (e.g. "you come to us with 16 quarters, 8 dimes, and 4
           | nickels, we can give you a 5 dollar bill"). How does First
           | CityWide make money doing this? As one service rep says it,
           | "The answer is simple: Volume"."
        
             | nr2x wrote:
             | So good, stands the test of time!
             | 
             | https://youtu.be/CXDxNCzUspM https://youtu.be/KodqIPMbyUg
        
             | Animats wrote:
             | That's Coinstar's business model.
             | 
             | They charge a commission now, but originally, they didn't.
             | They pitched the system to stores as a way of freeing up
             | cashier time wasted counting coins.
        
         | lumost wrote:
         | For transaction processing, wouldn't a 1-3% margin be about the
         | maximum achievable? That would translate to about 15 million
         | dollars in potential profit against a 730 million loss.
        
           | dilyevsky wrote:
           | Per https://www.klarna.com/international/regulatory-
           | news/klarna-... their volume was $80B last year, 1.4B was
           | their cut (1-3%) aka revenue, and the profit would depend on
           | bunch of things such as their marketing/sales spend, wages,
           | debt servicing, etc and most likely has been negative.
           | 
           | Edit: not "most likely" - apparently they lost to the tune of
           | $700M
        
           | peyton wrote:
           | Visa's margins are like 50-60%.
        
           | treis wrote:
           | 1-3% of the transaction volume. That percentage is the 1.4
           | billion Klarna takes as revenue. The margins of that can be
           | very high.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | yobbo wrote:
             | > That percentage is the 1.4 billion Klarna takes as
             | revenue.
             | 
             | Implying that transaction volume is on the order of $200
             | billion? No.
             | 
             | For perspective, Amazon's 2018 revenue is $230 billion.
        
             | lumost wrote:
             | Are we sure that that's true? As a private company klarna
             | can choose any metric they so desire as revenue...
        
               | christophilus wrote:
               | What? Isn't revenue kind of ... revenue? What else can it
               | be?
        
               | lumost wrote:
               | To my knowledge, there isn't any reason klarna can't
               | describe their transaction volume as revenue. Then
               | declare their margin 3%.
               | 
               | As a private tech company I would assume that they are
               | using the broadest possible definition of revenue.
        
           | naturalauction wrote:
           | I think Klarna can charge slightly higher fees to merchants
           | (it looks like they charge up to 6%) as sales increase with
           | buy now pay later. Also they probably think they can make
           | money off of servicing the debt (late fees, interest on
           | balances).
        
         | throwaway859383 wrote:
         | Up until a massive expansion push some years ago, Klarna used
         | to be a profitable company. It expanded from 3200 employees in
         | 2019 to the 7000 that are there now. They also started spending
         | money on experiments that had not much to do with the core
         | business.
        
           | indymike wrote:
           | Employee count may be the worst business metric of all time.
        
             | throwaway98797 wrote:
             | money raised is better (worse)
        
             | ImPostingOnHN wrote:
             | depends, for what?
             | 
             | it is a good metric for number of employees you employ :)
        
         | RandomLensman wrote:
         | From the outside, I find it difficult to judge as management
         | might have been focused on top line growth (given investors
         | preferences in recent years). A (possibly) changed focus could
         | now mean a very different profit profile will develop.
        
         | tibbydudeza wrote:
         | Uber
        
         | logifail wrote:
         | > As Klarna has expanded its BNPL offering, its losses have
         | increased. It reported a net loss of $730 million in 2021, a
         | 337 percent increase on its 2020 loss
         | 
         | Yet the tone from the acticle is that employees appeared to
         | think the company was successful?
        
           | foepys wrote:
           | Since Uber seems to be a benchmark for VC start-ups (Uber for
           | X) and Uber is still losing money in the tens or hundreds of
           | millions per year, I am not surprised that employees think
           | that Klarna is a success.
        
           | PheonixPharts wrote:
           | At least in tech there are people who have had decade+ long
           | careers where it was very feasible to _never_ work for a
           | company that actually made more money than it spent. I 've
           | been at multiple startups that had VCs pressure leadership
           | _not_ to make profit because that would hurt growth of some
           | other KPI of interest (users, revenue etc).
           | 
           | In the last few year many of these people have seen these
           | companies go public, and their imaginary Options/RSUs
           | suddenly turn to liquid assets. Company hasn't started making
           | profits, P/E is negative, but TC has gone up by 50%-200%.
           | That certainly feels like success.
           | 
           | Looking back at my own career the companies that made the
           | least profit (including negative) are the ones that have paid
           | me the most.
           | 
           | I'm old enough to remember the pre-dotcom bust chats of "new
           | economy" and "things are different now", and how all of the
           | stuffy old finance people who thought businesses should make
           | more than they spend where ultimately proven correct.
           | 
           | For many people, even in their late 30s, the ability for a
           | company to actually make more than it spends has been an
           | academic curiosity, hardly relevant to the success of a
           | company.
        
             | orzig wrote:
             | Agreed, and the opposite is true: I started at a small
             | public company which had stopped growing and become
             | profitable. It was targeted for a hostile takeover by PE
             | who thought it could grow more.
             | 
             | To their credit it did, and (to the extent your willing to
             | believe unaudited financials) again became profitable.
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | The stock and exuberance are the product.
        
               | logifail wrote:
               | > The stock and exuberance are the product.
               | 
               | I've worked at places where the slide decks were always
               | full of exuberance. At one of them they were exuberant
               | right up until the moment the staff found themselves
               | locked out of the offices after being told that a
               | liquidator was in charge.
               | 
               | It's not pretty.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | Same!
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | hef19898 wrote:
           | It truely shocking how little employees can care about their
           | employers finacials.
        
           | cosmodisk wrote:
           | The company I used to work for got acquired by a listed
           | company. At the same time, I was doing finance module at the
           | university. One assignment was to analyse a company's
           | financial reports and come up with a conclusion. So I
           | analysed the company I worked for and the outcome was that I
           | need to get out. At the same time the company was sending
           | communication as it's about to discover time travel and
           | unicorn milk.
        
             | logifail wrote:
             | > At the same time, I was doing finance module at the
             | university. One assignment was to analyse a company's
             | financial reports and come up with a conclusion. So I
             | analysed the company I worked for and the outcome was that
             | I need to get out.
             | 
             | That's interesting. My OH is almost half way through her
             | MBA and for one recent module, she chose to analyse her
             | current employer's financial reports and come up with a
             | conclusion. Her conclusion is also that she needs to get
             | out.
             | 
             | I wonder how many tech employees can actually read a
             | financial report, though?
        
               | dthul wrote:
               | Any good resources for a tech employee to learn about
               | these things without having studied it?
        
               | cosmodisk wrote:
               | The Economist Guide To Analysing Companies is a good
               | start. Others would be corporate finance books or intro
               | books to accounting.
        
               | sys_64738 wrote:
               | > Her conclusion is also that she needs to get out.
               | 
               | It depends. I haven't been RIF'd before but would take a
               | package if they were layoffs if I had the opportunity.
               | I'd also use as much of unemployment as I could for as
               | long as I could. Basically I'd be looking to maximize the
               | amount of time I can go before I'd need another job.
               | 
               | Just because a company appears to be running out of cash
               | doesn't necessarily mean you need to leave immediately if
               | they do downsizing.
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | To my surprise hardly anybody outside, and even some
               | inside, of finance can. Not that I'm an expert, but I
               | understand a balance sheet, can interpret the expebse
               | lines, understand a cash flow sheet and can read (after
               | having been to a couole of audits) the SOX relevant audit
               | statements of public US companies. And yes, those tell
               | you an aweful lot about your employer. And yes, part of
               | me came to the same conclusion as your OH and the OP.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Employees base company success on internal metrics and how
           | they're being paid, few employees bother looking at publicly
           | available numbers lest they "jinx" it.
           | 
           | (Or the ones that do see the writing on the wall and bail, or
           | decide to ride it out as long as they can).
        
         | Traubenfuchs wrote:
         | That's insane -what's the magic event people believe will turn
         | those losses around?
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | It's kinda fascinating really. We had a client that had only
           | ever lost money. Their idea was pretty good, they had what
           | I'd call a working prototype and paying customers. Our CEO
           | happened to know one of the investors, and chatted with him
           | about the investment and the numbers we did on a whiteboard.
           | Even if they grew their business with 10 times the number of
           | customers, and each customer ramped up their usage 10 times
           | it would take 10 - 12 years to make back the money that had
           | already been spend. That was assuming no new investments and
           | zero cost in those 10 to 12 years. The idea that this may not
           | have been the best investment in history was more or less
           | brushed, as the stock price would surely rise.
           | 
           | VC funding is weird.
        
             | sys_64738 wrote:
             | It depends on the exit strategy. The technology will
             | sometimes be scooped up by a big fish and take the key
             | employees with it. When folk invest VC cash then they are
             | sprinkling it amongst many projects that will have most
             | typically fail. A Couple making it will give them the VC
             | investment reward.
        
             | runnerup wrote:
             | Even if the already-invested money can't be recouped,
             | marginal additional investment could theoretically be with
             | favorable (LIFO) terms offered typically offered to later
             | investment.
             | 
             | So sure, acknowledge a bad $300 million bet, but then throw
             | your next $50 million at the same bet if it looks like the
             | best place to put a marginal $50 million.
             | 
             | I don't always think investors are doing this rationally -
             | sunk cost fallacy / gamblers paradox / greater fool theory
             | / FOMO all play a part, but also recognize that lots of
             | these super large investments are led by a small team using
             | lots of other peoples money so there are ways for the
             | decision-makers to come out closer to breakeven if much of
             | the pot is lost.
             | 
             | Also with potential IPO's and sky high rate of valuation
             | growth over the past decade, the "greater fool theory"
             | isn't necessarily an irrational motivation to invest.
             | 
             | Not all smart investments are value-based.
        
               | lumost wrote:
               | A company built to operate as a 100 billion dollar
               | behemoth can rarely transition to a 1 billion dollar
               | success without lots of pain.
               | 
               | To make this transition, your going to need to crush a
               | lot of dreams and projects. Why would the result not be a
               | hollowed out hulk of a company?
        
           | kzrdude wrote:
           | Monopolizing it's market? It looked they were nearly there
           | for payment processing in swedish online shopping.
        
           | vadym909 wrote:
           | Most point to Amazon as the example of it will turn around
           | once they start to dominate their space
        
           | VLM wrote:
           | A classic argument is future sales are equivalent enough to
           | be an asset. So as long as your balance sheet including
           | future sales is growing faster than your income sheet is
           | shrinking, its "OK".
           | 
           | There's a lot of assuming spherical cows going on. If the
           | bean counters like the result when the average customer is
           | milked for six years until having to replace them, that's
           | great, unless customer service is so awful the average
           | customer is gone in six months, or a competitor comes along
           | in two years and wipes you out, market changes evaporate the
           | revenue stream in five years, etc.
           | 
           | BTW this is the housing bubble in a nutshell. Lets say you
           | buy a shack for half a mil at 6% for 30 years which from
           | memory is almost exactly $3K/month. Not because you would,
           | but because these are engineering estimates with very round
           | numbers that are easy to memorize. Anyway, you'll spend 30
           | years in a row with a negative income statement of losing
           | $36K per year on that shack. Actually you'll lose a ton more
           | money due to maint, taxes, insurance, PMI, remodeling,
           | appliances, whatever else. But who cares about the income
           | statement, because if the total losses over 30 years are a
           | bit over a million, if on the balance sheet the asset goes up
           | to five million because interest rates only go down and real
           | estate only goes up (until it doesn't, LOL) over the same
           | time frame you can cash out for four million net gain? Of
           | course if the shack only goes up to a million because its not
           | in a bubble area like Arizona or whatever, you've not quite
           | broken even, or god forbid if it only goes up to 3/4 of a mil
           | you've lost quite a large life changing sum of money.
        
         | qbasic_forever wrote:
         | For the past decade money has been effectively free to borrow
         | with interest rates at zero. All the companies that immediately
         | went bankrupt, into layoffs, etc. when interest rates were
         | raised this year were coasting on these financial fumes.
        
           | killSp4m wrote:
           | Powell wants to keep wages tethered to his preferred reality
           | of 2% inflation versus the actual reality people live on. The
           | real issue with inflation is it devalues the public
           | hallucination; fiat money:
           | https://www.wsj.com/articles/transcript-fed-chief-powells-
           | po...
           | 
           | Fear mongering over employment security is a favorite tactic:
           | https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-
           | insecurity-o...
           | 
           | The reality is "people need to eat", will trade as they must
           | to do so. We don't actually rely on government officials to
           | do the work; we placate the die hards by speaking in the
           | traditions. They're yanking on the leash they have.
           | 
           | Big tech looking to axe senior talent and big pay days for
           | cheaper Gen Z grads; a quiet wealth redistribution plan. Some
           | of the rich senior tech people would move on to cheaper
           | locales and perhaps build businesses.
           | 
           | We're in the ML era and a lot of senior folks are from the
           | "manually program a machine" era; that's a way over valued
           | skill set now; it's everywhere.
           | 
           | Cheaper talent with the latest collegiate training not the
           | old ways baked in, could offset the expense of moonshots,
           | hoping to boost an ML-backed cloud economy post generic
           | server backed cloud.
           | 
           | Google's Eric Schmidt has been in DC lobbying for AI
           | investment:
           | https://www.vox.com/recode/2022/6/9/23160588/eric-schmidt-
           | am...
           | 
           | Picking the winners right away to avoid the last decades
           | shotgun approach.
        
         | treis wrote:
         | In a lot of ways internet businesses are like buying bonds. You
         | pay some cost to acquire a customer and will get revenue from
         | them over time. You can calculate a present value for that
         | customer based on that future revenue. As long as that value is
         | more than what you paid to acquire the customer you're making
         | money.
         | 
         | And if your numbers are right then you, more or less, want to
         | spend as much money as you can buying customers. So that's how
         | companies with numbers like this continue to operate.
         | 
         | To put it simply, Klarna is spending a billion dollars to buy
         | customers that will generate more than a billion dollars in
         | revenue. The catch is that you have to pay now for later
         | revenue. So your numbers look like crap until your existing
         | customers far outnumber your new ones.
        
           | yuliyp wrote:
           | They're much riskier bonds. The market can change, or
           | competitors can try to win customers over, or anything else
           | to throw out those lifetime value calculations.
        
           | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
           | This is a very, very dangerous business to be in unless your
           | numbers are rock solid and you make sure your models reflect
           | reality.
        
             | deltree7 wrote:
             | all businesses are risky. that's why we have capitalism and
             | there are bunch of people who are willing to take the risk
             | and rewarded for taking that risk
        
               | geysersam wrote:
               | Rewarded for luring people into consumption loan debt?
               | Great system.
        
               | deltree7 wrote:
               | debt is a fantastic instrument that solves a production /
               | consumption mismatch of both individuals and humanity.
               | 
               | A 55 year old is the most productive member of a society,
               | but that is also the age where you start to consume very
               | little.
               | 
               | Imagine if you had to 'save' to get your college
               | education, your home, a laptop, or starting a business.
               | There is a reason we don't ask babies to 'pay up' for
               | milk or shelter.
               | 
               | Imagine if Larry Page or Sergey Brin had to work and save
               | to start Google.
               | 
               | Imagine if government had to save trillions of dollars
               | before investing in Carbon Capture and renewable energy
               | generations.
               | 
               | Yes, all good things can be abused. But you can't prevent
               | good things for 95% society because a 5% of the society
               | abuses it
        
               | geysersam wrote:
               | Never said debt is intrinsically harmful.
               | 
               | I do however think _consumption_ debt, for goods such as
               | clothes or the next iphone, is harmful.
               | 
               | They're not investments, like an education or a car.
               | 
               | It's a tax on people who don't have money in the bank to
               | buy such things up front.
               | 
               | Usually such loan "services" are marketed in a way that
               | hides the effective cost of the loan to the customer.
               | Especially problematic for young people less experienced
               | handling money.
               | 
               | > But you can't prevent good things for 95% society
               | because a 5% of the society abuses it
               | 
               | Sounds like you thought I suggested prohibiting debt in
               | general. That's a misunderstanding. It's definitely
               | possible to prohibit predatory lending strategies.
        
               | deltree7 wrote:
               | I would challenge that notion too.
               | 
               | I rather travel the world, eat great food, take tennis
               | lessons, dance into the night when I'm in 20's and 30's
               | where I get the most enjoyment rather than in my 60s
               | where my body is not in good physical shape to do any of
               | those things.
               | 
               | The fact that I travelled the world in my 20s may also
               | enhance my own future productivity.
               | 
               | I would even further claim that not enough people go into
               | debt. There are plenty of young people (70% or more) in
               | developing countries who can get into travel, education,
               | iPhone/Samsung, great food debt and their country (and
               | the rest of the world) will benefit immensely from it in
               | the long run.
        
               | geysersam wrote:
               | This is delusional and besides the point.
               | 
               | You can't loan for consumption in your 20-30s, planning
               | to pay it back in your 40s and 50s. Klarna does not even
               | offer loans beyond 36 months, and month 1 to 36 you have
               | 20% interest rate! If you skip a payment there are steep
               | fees.
               | 
               | Klarna is for short term loans. Like, half a month.
               | 
               | Klarna is definitely not offering their service to poor
               | people in developing nations. Even if they did, how would
               | a 20% interest loan for an Iphone help anyone escape
               | poverty?
        
               | deltree7 wrote:
               | I never mentioned anything about Klarna. I merely
               | commented on capitalism and debt
        
       | speedgoose wrote:
       | I'm surprised to read that Klarna had 7500 employees. It seems to
       | be a lot for an online payment company offering consumer loans.
       | 
       | What were the people doing?
        
         | VLM wrote:
         | The problem with a secret sauce is the market needs more than
         | sauce.
         | 
         | So even if they could proactively leverage their synergies
         | using mobile apps or whatever their secret sauce was,
         | activities like, I donno, collections maybe, still scales up
         | linear with size like legacy companies.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | I understand them being somewhat big with customer support and
         | all the debt collection they are likely involved with. But
         | still 7500 is a lot.
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | My understanding was that, at least in Scandinavia, their
           | debt collection was a separate company. I may have gotten
           | that wrong, but we had a few customers who paid us using
           | Klarna. When Klarna didn't get their money after some period
           | of time they'd normally let some 3rd. party handle debt
           | collection. In some cases they just reverse the charges and
           | leave us to eat the lose arguing that: The customer claim to
           | have never received the item, or straight up let us know that
           | they weren't about to lose money on this transaction, reverse
           | the charge on us, the retailer, and leave debt collection to
           | us.
        
         | throwaway859383 wrote:
         | Lots of experimental things that had nothing to do with its
         | core business such as Blockchain currency. Klarna massively
         | expanded in the last 3 years. In 2019 there were about 3200.
        
         | akmarinov wrote:
         | > Klarna's "Super App" was an area getting lots of investment
         | in 2021. This investment was a step away from the core offering
         | of the handling of payments. The vision of this app was to
         | create an experience where people could do all their shopping
         | within a Klarna super-app.
         | 
         | However, this super app never launched as planned. Internally,
         | confusion arose when it emerged the super app would use scraped
         | data from customers who were already partners of Klarna. The
         | super app efforts are still progressing slower than originally
         | planned, and some employees think the company is spending too
         | much on this area for too little return.
         | 
         | Trying to come up with something out of nothing it seems
        
           | enviclash wrote:
           | I might be just an ignorant user in Europe, but this super-
           | app thing could scare me out of Klarna and let me find an
           | alternative, I got uncomfortable with the app when they
           | required unnecessary data for a payment.
        
           | speedgoose wrote:
           | But can you keep thousands of people busy on such a project?
        
             | djbusby wrote:
             | A technique I learned from possibly the worst
             | project/product manager ever was to have loads of meetings.
             | And over schedule them. And show up late. It makes
             | everything so slow, and you have to have more people so
             | that somehow, in between meetings a line of code could be
             | written.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Apparently every "payment" app/startup is valued as if it
           | will somehow magically replace Amazon instantly.
           | 
           | I don't understand it myself, but that's what happens.
        
         | Traubenfuchs wrote:
         | > What were the people doing?
         | 
         | Right? If they are even somewhat productive, there should be
         | enormous output created by them.
        
           | jon-wood wrote:
           | This is the death spiral all large organisations go into,
           | they hire more people so that they can do more things, but
           | then they spend increasing amounts of time in meetings or
           | trying to work out how some other team's system works, so
           | productivity goes down, so more people are hired to
           | counteract that.
        
       | xBK wrote:
       | With Klarna's valuation spiralling downwards, those bonuses in
       | RSU's couldn't have been timed worst for the workers.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | A 'deal' forced on you is almost always not to your benefit (or
         | it wouldn't have to be forced).
        
       | travisgriggs wrote:
       | I admit that I was barely aware of this apparently largish
       | company? I'd heard the name Klarna before, but knew nothing of
       | it.
       | 
       | And yet, I found myself reading this in a riveted fashion. Why is
       | that? Is it just the macabre nature of humans to slow down when
       | passing accidents? My anxiety about how the little guys world can
       | suddenly be turned upside down? I'm honestly intrigued why I
       | couldn't quit reading this.
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | Should be noted that employment in Sweden is as far from "at
       | will" as you can get. There is basically no legal difference
       | between a union worker at a paper mill and a software developer
       | at a startup (once it reaches a certain size). The law basically
       | says that the last one in must be first out, and sidestepping
       | this order requires negotiating severance with unions (yes also
       | for white collar tech workers). So if you need to reduce
       | headcount by 10% it's going to be cheap if you fire the 10% most
       | recent hires. If you want yo choose the 10% to cull it's going to
       | be expensive. The compensations in the article don't look very
       | generous at all.
        
         | rsanek wrote:
         | It seems like the article is saying that the fact that there
         | isn't a union is actually a big help in the ability to do this
         | kind of lay-off.
         | 
         | > Swedish companies must negotiate with unions before layoffs.
         | However, this was not the case at Klarna, nor is it the case at
         | most Swedish tech companies. Klarna does not have a collective
         | bargaining agreement (called "kollektivavtal" in Swedish) in
         | place. This means that Klarna as an employer is not forced to
         | negotiate layoffs with a union. Instead, Klarna is entitled to
         | negotiate directly with each affected employee, which they are
         | doing.
         | 
         | Klarna is also pretty big (7500 employees according to the
         | article) so I imagine it doesn't have to do with the company
         | size.
        
           | alkonaut wrote:
           | Yes exactly, If there is no collective agreement then it's
           | simpler: the law applies. It's the law that says you fire the
           | last hire first.
           | 
           | To sidestep it then just requires bargaining with the
           | individual rather than a union.
        
           | mongol wrote:
           | I never heard this before. I thought unions were always
           | involved, regardless of kollektivavtal or not. Would like to
           | hear from a Swedish expert on this.
        
             | rnd33 wrote:
             | Yes, if unions exist at the company (which they did at
             | Klarna), a company is required by law to negotiate with ALL
             | employee organisations present at the company. This is one
             | of the reasons large companies adopt kollektivavtal, it
             | allows them to only have to negotiate with one union for
             | employment changes.
             | 
             | Source (Swedish law): https://lagen.nu/1976:580#P13S2
             | 
             | Google translated:
             | 
             | > If the employer is not bound by any collective agreement
             | at all, the employer is obliged to negotiate in accordance
             | with SS 11 with all relevant employee organizations in
             | matters relating to dismissal due to a lack of work [...]
        
               | Moru wrote:
               | In Sweden the Unions actually makes it easier for both
               | the workers and the company. This is a big surprise for
               | most foreign leaders coming in unprepared for swedish
               | culture :-)
        
             | Moru wrote:
             | I'm no expert but how I under stand it is the company can
             | offer x months of pay if you leave by your self. This does
             | not need to be negotiated with the union. If this makes
             | enough people leave, there will be no negotiation. If
             | however they want more to leave they have to negotiate with
             | the Union that the workers are connected to, it does not
             | matter if the company have a contract with them or not.
             | 
             | Also, they have to give six months notice to the
             | unemployment agency if they plan to fire more than 100
             | people.
        
         | dymk wrote:
         | The article makes it sound like this is a suggestion, not a
         | requirement, for layoffs
        
           | Kiro wrote:
           | "Last in, first out" is stipulated in law but you can still
           | negotiate, which means the employee themselves quit and get
           | compensated for it.
        
       | throwaway36756 wrote:
       | I worked at Klarna between 2011-2013 as a software engineer and
       | later as a team manager. I was laid off in a very similar fashion
       | at the same time a bunch of others also got the same surprising
       | news.
       | 
       | When it happened to us there was no announcement from the CEO.
       | Sebastian had actually just gone on parental leave and one of the
       | co-founders, Niklas Adalberth had taken the reigns.
       | 
       | At the time, my suspicion was that it was because Niklas
       | Adalberth was getting rid of people he didn't like and that the
       | main reason my firing in the way it was done.
       | 
       | I was invited to an external meeting room at 17:00 in the
       | Stockholm office with my boss and my boss's boss, where they
       | proceeded to tell me "we think we need someone else in your
       | position".
       | 
       | My boss looked helpless and sat quietly the whole time. My boss's
       | boss did all the talking and seemed just like someone following
       | orders.
       | 
       | Reading this now it's sad to see how nothing has changed at
       | Klarna and makes me think that even if Niklas did had something
       | to do with my firing that it couldn't have happened without
       | Sebastian's knowledge and approval.
       | 
       | My experience of Sebastian was that he was a talented product
       | guy, but unfortunately seems to leave a lot to be desired as CEO.
        
         | doktorhladnjak wrote:
         | What happened to you is not a lay off. You got fired!
        
         | Aradalf wrote:
         | It sounds like you were fired, not laid off.
        
         | dudul wrote:
         | Doesn't sound like a lay off to me, you were just terminated
         | and let go. When you lay people off you don't replace them, you
         | eliminate the position.
        
       | enviclash wrote:
       | I am a user. Annecdotically, since a few weeks ago the app
       | started working slow and not as perfect as before, when it was
       | flawless for years.
        
       | chrsig wrote:
       | > The culture of "we are awesome" has dominated most internal
       | communications for the last couple of years, including in 2022.
       | We all believed that we were awesome and would continue growing
       | and winning.
       | 
       | This is the big thing that drives me _nuts_.
       | 
       | I don't know if it's a fragility of ego thing or what the cause
       | may be, but it results in a corporate inability to critically
       | self-evaluate at the highest levels. If you can't say where your
       | weak areas are, you're not improving.
       | 
       | One of the experiences that untreated ADHD blessed me with was
       | routinely failing classes. That repeated exposure to undeniable
       | failure (and the consequences of it) really helped me accept that
       | failure is the default. If you're not constantly fighting against
       | failure, you're failing. You can't pretend that something didn't
       | work out, or stop thinking about it because it hurts.
       | 
       | The self congratulatory back-patting (even if it's just
       | "everything is fine, we're doing great") is treating success like
       | an achievement. Success requires vigilance. Excellence is not an
       | achievement, it's an activity.
       | 
       | We need more leaders that talk about the things we could be doing
       | better, and doing so inspirationally, not derogatorily. It's ok
       | that you're not the best at something. Very few are. That doesn't
       | mean you can't or shouldn't do better.
       | 
       | Try internalizing that if you're not constantly struggling to do
       | better, _you 're not living up to your potential_.
        
         | datalopers wrote:
         | > The self congratulatory back-patting
         | 
         | HN is guilty of this constantly. Everyone who posts here is
         | implicitly in the right and users unequivocally back that
         | attitude, even when it realistically is a scenario of "maybe
         | you were a shit employee and were fired for it and your
         | employer isnt in the wrong?" or "your Show HN really isn't that
         | impressive". We're not allowed to say anything critical of
         | other HN users without being downvoted or reprimanded by dang.
         | 
         | So why is it any surprise that every startup company has
         | precisely the same back-patting culture?
        
           | vorpalhex wrote:
           | There's a difference between being introspective and just
           | being a jerk.
        
             | blueflow wrote:
             | Did you just prove their point?
        
               | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
               | If their point is that they get mad because people would
               | downvote "Your Show HN isn't really that impressive",
               | then I guess so. I would certainly downvote that kind of
               | comment, because it's pretty much by definition a jerky
               | comment.
               | 
               | But I have seen _tons_ of reactions to Show HNs that are
               | "How is your product different from XYZ?" or "How will
               | you address problem Foo?" Those comments actually bring
               | something helpful to the discussion. I've also seen, in
               | cases where the Show HN isn't something the community
               | generally appreciates, get fair comments along the lines
               | of "Your product just appears to make it easier to spam
               | people. Why should we like this?"
               | 
               | Offering critical commentary without a point isn't
               | something that adds to the value of the site.
        
               | mk89 wrote:
               | No. You can provide constructive criticism without BS or
               | say things in a meaningful way without diminishing
               | people.
               | 
               | I wonder why so many people in this thread seem to see
               | this topic either black or white.
        
           | chrsig wrote:
           | You're complaining that you can't shit on other people. I'm
           | complaining that people don't shit on themselves.
        
             | datalopers wrote:
             | It's the same problem. People are afraid to face reality,
             | internally or externally.
        
               | Apocryphon wrote:
               | The context is somewhat different on an anonymous online
               | forum such as HN. Giving feedback as a stranger can be
               | fraught with insufficient information. Criticism can
               | easily spiral into negative flamefests full of
               | assumptions of the receiving party. Thus, mods try to
               | dampen it from getting too negative and toxic.
               | 
               | > So why is it any surprise that every startup company
               | has precisely the same back-patting culture?
               | 
               | They are different because presumably coworkers are
               | people you at least personally know in passing, and are
               | not anonymous usernames.
               | 
               | We should be gracious to strangers but more critical to
               | those whom we do know.
        
             | zionic wrote:
             | You're doing the same thing now.
             | 
             | Valid, level-headed criticism isn't "shitting on someone".
        
               | chrsig wrote:
               | > You're doing the same thing now.
               | 
               | My wife does call me her favorite hypocrite :)
               | 
               | My statement was certainly an oversimplified assessment.
               | 
               | > Valid, level-headed criticism
               | 
               | This is a good clarification to make, thank you.
               | Ultimately this is what I'm longing for more of in the
               | world. "shitting on" either yourself or someone else
               | isn't helpful.
        
           | tshaddox wrote:
           | There's a big difference between the people in control of a
           | company back-patting everyone when employees' livelihoods are
           | actually in danger, and back-patting an individual for
           | sharing their personal projects and experiences in good faith
           | even if they have a lot of room for improvement.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | iforgotpassword wrote:
           | > "maybe you were a shit employee and were fired for it and
           | your employer isnt in the wrong?" or "your Show HN really
           | isn't that impressive". We're not allowed to say anything
           | critical of other HN users without being downvoted or
           | reprimanded by dang.
           | 
           | These things absolutely can be said on HN, _if_ you list some
           | points that make you think so. If OTOH your comment ist
           | literally just that one sentence then I don 't see why it
           | shouldn't get downvoted and flagged. This is not the YouTube
           | comment section.
        
             | the_only_law wrote:
             | > These things absolutely can be said on HN, if you list
             | some points that make you think so.
             | 
             | Only if what you say doesn't oppose the current zeitgeist
             | of the thread. I've seen some of the most well thought out
             | and level headed comments get flagged to death while some
             | insult floats to the top.
        
               | Apocryphon wrote:
               | HN cannot escape the group dynamics that are universal to
               | all gatherings of human beings, this is likely to have
               | been true throughout the history of this site, even if to
               | different extents.
        
           | mk89 wrote:
           | I don't know if this was the meaning of the OP's message, but
           | the way I read it tells me that he dislikes the "everything
           | is fine" BS that some companies keep on doing, not the fact
           | you still need to criticise constructively, which "your show
           | hn isn't that impressive" clearly doesn't do.
           | 
           | Realistic, yes, but you don't have to be an ass, that's kind
           | of how I interpret it.
        
           | dan-robertson wrote:
           | I would not say that HN does this _constantly_ or agree with
           | much of what you write. In general I think written /upvoted
           | comments tend to be biased towards being critical[1] and
           | disagreeing with the comment/article being responded to.
           | 
           | In general, the guideline is for comments to be curious and
           | "maybe you were a shit employee" or "your Show HN really
           | isn't that impressive" do not sound to me like they are
           | curious. However I realise it is hard to describe in general
           | comments that would surely contain specific things.
           | 
           | An alternative strategy to the former general comment might
           | be to try to get curious about the details more. For example
           | one might discover that the likely cause was a breakdown in
           | communication leaving the employee unable to understand what
           | was actually wanted and being fired for failing to read minds
           | to meet expectations. However I think it can be hard to
           | actually be curious here rather than applying some kind of
           | smug-Socratic method[2] asking innocent-seeming questions
           | where the answers lead to one's unwritten hypothesis, though
           | perhaps the answers can give an opportunity to update. I
           | think it can be doubly hard to do these things in a kind way,
           | especially when, like in the general examples, the topics are
           | personal to one participant rather than a typical internet
           | discussion where parties may pretend to be disinterested.
           | 
           | [1] There are two common meanings of 'critical'. One is
           | related to 'critical thinking' or critiquing: looking
           | specifically and carefully at the faults or merits of
           | something. The other meaning is similar to 'disapproving'.
           | Generally the former kind is accepted here and the latter is
           | less accepted, though I think comments which are negative and
           | not particularly thoughtful or curious often do better than I
           | would hope. Further, the acceptance of the former kind of
           | critical discourse may sometimes be hidden behind for
           | comments that perhaps fit into the latter sense (when they
           | don't fit I would say it is because they are too mean to
           | really deserve to be called critical).
           | 
           | [2] I think this roughly corresponds to what the guidelines
           | call cross-examining.
        
         | huijzer wrote:
         | Ben Horowitz talks about this somewhere near the start of his
         | book "The Hard Thing about Hard Things". If I remember
         | correctly, he said that it was very difficult for him as a CEO
         | to load the problems he had onto his employees because handing
         | the burden over felt bad. He was responsible for the burden. It
         | makes some sense if you think about it like that. Later he did
         | turn things around and share his worries and to his surprise
         | the employees weren't to worried and actually started to solve
         | some of the problems.
        
         | throwawaysleep wrote:
         | I think a lot of this is that nobody has long term incentives
         | and plenty of people believe "we are awesome" is truth.
         | 
         | As a developer, if I paper over problems and claim to have
         | resolved them, people will love me, trust me, and give me bonus
         | pay. If I bring up problems, people consider me a trouble
         | maker.
         | 
         | And when the bill comes due, I will just jump to another
         | company.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _experiences that untreated ADHD blessed me with was
         | routinely failing classes. That repeated exposure to undeniable
         | failure_
         | 
         | Huh. Never thought of this. In a balanced culture, this offers
         | no advantage. But in one still recovering from the self esteem
         | days, when even games were encouraged not to produce any
         | losers, I see how that awareness is competitive.
        
           | chrsig wrote:
           | I used the word _blessed_ somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I 'm not
           | sure I would call it an advantage, rather just a different
           | set of experiences than a large majority of the tech world.
        
             | zdragnar wrote:
             | I suspect most standup comedians are in a similar boat, so
             | to speak. You keep failing until you succeed. You can't
             | keep your audiences recycling only the same old jokes over
             | and over, you need to keep writing new ones, tuning them
             | over and over at small gigs so that you've got enough
             | material that works for the bigger shows.
             | 
             | More than just failing, though, I think the lesson is
             | learning to tolerate failure, and learning from it so that
             | you can try again.
        
               | chrsig wrote:
               | > More than just failing, though, I think the lesson is
               | learning to tolerate failure, and learning from it so
               | that you can try again.
               | 
               | This is the real trick.
               | 
               | From my own personal experience: I went through a period
               | of intolerance to failure -- "failure can't happen
               | again". hypervigiliance[0] is just as problematic as
               | negligence.
               | 
               | Accepting that failure will happen has allowed me to
               | unwind quite a bit, aided in finding more empathy for
               | others, and changed my focus to managing failure and
               | risk. Somewahat oddly I'd come to that spot in regards to
               | managing software in production earlier than I had been
               | able to apply it to my own psyche.
               | 
               | In a way, accepting that failure happens is an
               | optimization technique. It affords the room for curiosity
               | and forgiveness that is required in practice to have the
               | greatest reduction in incidents or impacts of failure
               | over time.
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervigilance
        
               | caminante wrote:
               | _> From my own personal experience: I went through a
               | period of intolerance to failure..._
               | 
               | tl;dr: "Perfection is the enemy of good."
        
             | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
             | It is going sound odd, but I mildly disagree. Long time ago
             | I listened a lecture of a Harvard professor, which went
             | something along the lines of and I am paraphrasing:
             | 
             | >> We did so well to get here and maybe we just have not
             | failed enough.
             | 
             | This really stuck with me, because in my eyes failing and
             | having to earn each 'win' is what gets job done. Yeah,
             | there is always someone smarter, but there are few people,
             | who can stick to something until it is solved. I am
             | actually saying ADHD may have been a blessing in disguise
             | since it forced you to work harder for things others take
             | for granted.
             | 
             | And that is apart from being able to see things in ways
             | majority of population does not.
        
         | johannes1234321 wrote:
         | I think people in an organisation are constantly confronted
         | with the problems and downsides. Engineers always know where
         | the problems in the code and architecture are. Sales people and
         | support always see the complaints from customers. CEOs see how
         | high-valur prospects always find new issues to lower the
         | negotiated prices and how features are delivered late. And so
         | on.
         | 
         | My interpretation is that the overly positive view aims to
         | drive the positive points forward and remind everybody about
         | the positive things and how well things work on a macro view.
         | If you stick small negatives in the message to cover "reality"
         | this is what sticks.
         | 
         | I can't stand these motivational speech, but I also don't see a
         | good speech for high level talks and not saying anything is bad
         | as well and for some kind of people that seems to give them a
         | push.
        
         | alecbz wrote:
         | Stripe had a few "official" principles that I really liked
         | along these lines: "We haven't won yet", "macro-optimism but
         | micro-pessimism".
         | 
         | They're no longer official principles though, and I'm not 100%
         | sure how much they were actually acted upon while they were (at
         | least during my tenure).
        
           | dsomers wrote:
           | > "macro-optimism but micro-pessimism"
           | 
           | This is an interesting idea, I have I feeling I know the what
           | they're getting at, but if you have any examples of how they
           | put that into practice I'd love to hear it.
        
             | deltree7 wrote:
             | AI will solve all humanity problems (Macro Optimism)
             | 
             | AI is currently shit (too resource intensive, too biased,
             | lots of details still to be worked on) (Micro Pessimism)
             | 
             | So, let's work on addressing each of this
        
           | Buttons840 wrote:
           | I like the book Crucial Conversations, which tells us to
           | avoid the "fool's choice" and be 100% honest and 100%
           | respectful at the same time. The fool's choice is when a fool
           | thinks something like "I can either tell the truth and be
           | fired, or keep my mouth shut". The book teaches that with
           | some thought you can find a way to tell the truth without
           | being fired, etc. This is advice for an individual, but not
           | an entire organization.
           | 
           | For organizations, they could at least hire a consultant /
           | speaker to do a presentation every year on how people can
           | effectively give negative feedback. The speaker could say
           | "you all see bad things happening at the company, things you
           | aren't happy about but don't want to risk speaking about,
           | here's how you can speak about those issues without any
           | risk". Teach people things like, studies have shown that
           | proposing a solution along with your complaint makes it more
           | likely to be accepted, etc. For the price of a speaker or
           | two, you could train your company to effectively deliver and
           | act on negative feedback. Too many people don't know how to
           | effectively express their problems.
           | 
           | If someone wants to start a consultants / speaking tour you
           | can have this idea.
        
             | dan-robertson wrote:
             | Part of me is imagining 'tell the truth and not be fired'
             | to involve some kind of _Yes Minister_ strategy like the
             | Rhodesia solution.
             | 
             | But more realistically, most modern tech companies are
             | going to want to not fire people for telling the truth or
             | more generally speaking their minds, and individuals can
             | often have a bigger impact than they would imagine. It
             | doesn't really make sense for a reasonably well run company
             | to ignore such things from employees they clearly think are
             | valuable.
             | 
             | That said, there are still exceptions, e.g. labour activism
             | in the US is probably a good way to get fired (with a nice
             | big severance), and if you work at Boeing and write some
             | email like 'this plane is designed by clowns and I won't
             | let my family fly in it' (or perhaps even just reasonable
             | concerns) that is also bad (because that email will show up
             | in court if there's an accident and you can't say 'we want
             | to have a workplace where all engineers can raise concerns
             | about the safety of our planes' - better to just not do it
             | over email, which is a bit of a silly incentive)
        
               | Buttons840 wrote:
               | > most modern tech companies are going to want to not
               | fire people for telling the truth
               | 
               | I agree. I gave that as an extreme example of "the fool's
               | choice". More realistic examples include "I can tell the
               | scrum master he talks to much in retrospectives and he
               | will dislike me, or I can be quiet about it". Truth is
               | you can probably find a good time and way to tell him
               | that will not hurt his opinion of you.
               | 
               | As for raising safety concerns at Boeing (for example),
               | maybe that's not a "fool's choice", but simply a choice.
               | Are you going to do the right thing or not? Sometimes the
               | "if I speak up, bad things will happen" mindset is the
               | unfortunate truth, but not as often as many think.
        
             | infinite8s wrote:
             | What if you don't have a solution to the complaint?
        
               | Buttons840 wrote:
               | Still make the complaint, I never said it was required.
               | In fact, I heard of a company where management said not
               | to complain unless you had a solution and it really
               | bothered me; sometimes you don't know the solution, but
               | the complaint still needs to be made.
               | 
               | You can still do something like offer to help or
               | proposing a meeting as the "solution", or at least the
               | start of a solution.
        
               | pas wrote:
               | leave?
               | 
               | also, the complaint can be perfectly valid and important
               | without having any solutions for it. many times employees
               | don't have the knowledge needed to know what are the
               | possible solutions.
               | 
               | but individually their solution is to go where their
               | needs are met (as much as possible of course)
        
           | hbrn wrote:
           | It's still on their website, not sure if it's public though:
           | https://stripe.com/jobs/culture
        
           | pjot wrote:
           | I like the saying, "strong opinions, loosely held" which I
           | feel hits in the same vein.
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | I really think this just comes from the fact that most startups
         | are either:
         | 
         | 1) from California
         | 
         | and/or 2) have founders that worked in California
         | 
         | and/or 3) raised money from VCs in California
         | 
         | I'm all on-board with it being better to be an optimist than a
         | pessimist, and also on-board that destructive criticism doesn't
         | really "serve" anyone.
         | 
         | But there's just this rampant over-optimism like nowhere I've
         | experienced.
         | 
         | The culture of "we are awesome" to me - is culture of
         | California.
         | 
         | I prefer California culture over doom and gloom and pessimism -
         | but a little more reality, I think, is welcome.
         | 
         | The thing that rubbed off on me about California that I'm
         | really grateful for is to always start with the positive. I'm
         | definitely a happier person from getting absorbed into that
         | culture.
         | 
         | But I think when you get to the point where you just completely
         | ignore or don't speak about the negatives, it's not really
         | helpful anymore. It's just delusion.
        
           | drstewart wrote:
           | I like how you mention California 6 times but somehow fail to
           | realize this company was founded and based in Sweden
        
             | Apocryphon wrote:
             | Wonder how similar Sweden is to the North American west
             | coast, culturally speaking. It is the center of
             | Scandinavia's tech scene, after all, and has birthed many
             | companies.
        
               | avarun wrote:
               | Not at all similar.
        
             | morelisp wrote:
             | It's a Swedish company but it's definitely one of the most
             | hardcore California Ideological companies in Europe.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | A comment from when I knew theater and film people in SF: "In
           | New York, they tell you when you suck. In Hollywood, they
           | don't call you back when you suck. In San Francisco, they
           | don't tell you that you suck. So you can suck forever."
           | 
           | (Yes, SF once had a film scene. Mostly because there was
           | cheap warehouse space South of Market usable for production.)
        
           | georgeecollins wrote:
           | Interesting point, but the example here is HQ'd in Ohio. I
           | think some of what you talk about in California is true but
           | you could say that about New York, or once upon a time Hong
           | Kong. Places where ambitious people come to breed a certain
           | mindset. California is a big state and very rural parts
           | California arre like Idaho (I'm not talking exurbs).
        
           | aledalgrande wrote:
           | Nah the Vancouver scene is the same. Maybe it's a West coast
           | thing?
        
         | garrickvanburen wrote:
         | > failure is the default. If you're not constantly fighting
         | against failure, you're failing.
         | 
         | This. Any success, let alone wild success is highly unlikely.
         | Just assume you'll work on interesting problems and at some
         | point you'll realize either you or the problem will change in a
         | way that makes disengaging the right answer.
        
         | rubyist5eva wrote:
         | > The self congratulatory back-patting (even if it's just
         | "everything is fine, we're doing great") is treating success
         | like an achievement. Success requires vigilance. Excellence is
         | not an achievement, it's an activity.
         | 
         | I used to wonder why friends of mine would get gifts for things
         | like graduating elementary school or even high school. I asked
         | my father for something because I was graduating highschool on
         | the honour roll, and he told me completely stoned faced "i am
         | not going to reward you for things that you are just simply
         | expected to do". That sticks with me 20 years later and I apply
         | that to everything I do in life, especially work.
         | 
         | If you aren't succeeding, you are failing - and I was expected
         | and taught to succeed by default.
        
           | throwawaysleep wrote:
           | It comes from a time when it was not so mundane. My
           | grandfather on one side was the first in his family to truly
           | read and write well enough to have a job involving it.
           | 
           | That is a big deal and far from a default.
           | 
           | Yes, now graduating high school is not an achievement, but it
           | used to be quite one, especially for the average person.
        
           | djmips wrote:
           | I feel sorry for you that your father never got you that gift
           | for graduating high school. My father got me an HP calculator
           | and it's still one of my treasured possessions. It has had no
           | negative impact on my success.
        
             | the_gipsy wrote:
             | You can still get gifts but that comes from love, not as
             | reward for something mundane.
        
             | rubyist5eva wrote:
             | My father has gotten me plenty of gifts, for a variety of
             | reasons and sometimes for no reason at all. Don't get me
             | wrong, I love my dad very much and he is a very generous
             | man :)
        
           | msie wrote:
           | > If you aren't succeeding, you are failing - and I was
           | expected and taught to succeed by default.
           | 
           | That sounds messed up too. Maybe you need a break now and
           | then from trying to succeed all the time.
        
             | rubyist5eva wrote:
             | I work 9-5 and have 6 weeks of vacations on top of
             | government mandated holidays, I do pretty good :)
        
           | icegreentea2 wrote:
           | > If you aren't succeeding, you are failing - and I was
           | expected and taught to succeed by default.
           | 
           | Nitpicking, but you were expected to succeed by default, and
           | also taught to strive for success by default (and presumably
           | also taught the tools and approach to maximize likelihood of
           | success). People cannot be taught to "succeed by default",
           | anymore than someone could be taught to "win the world series
           | by default".
           | 
           | And then that unpacks the challenge of this particular world
           | view (and points at why the 'self-esteem thing' is a thing),
           | is that learning to strive for success, and learning the
           | tools and methods to achieve success does not mean you will
           | actually reach success (this would just be a variant of the
           | just-world fallacy). The challenge is how do you create the
           | motivating factors and structure for as many people as
           | possible (hopefully everyone) in your society/culture to
           | earnestly strive for success, but not crack apart when they
           | encounter continued failures.
        
             | rubyist5eva wrote:
             | I've had my fair share of failures that's for sure. I'm do
             | not expecting to actually succeed every single time, but I
             | am putting in the best effort to at least try to succeed
             | instead of just trying to coast along or shrug it off being
             | like "meh, just wasn't in the cards". I also don't expect
             | massive celebrations when I actually do succeed - success
             | is what is expected. If I'm supposed to make the big sale,
             | I don't get a party after I just move on to the next big
             | sale. It's what is expected, not exceptional.
        
               | icegreentea2 wrote:
               | That's fair. And to be honest, I have a very similar
               | mindset - so I'm super not judging.
               | 
               | Just making an observation that scaling this up to a
               | population level is tricky. Easy to mangle up the nuances
               | when trying to impart this to children. I suspect you
               | need a relatively stable environment for this to really
               | take hold as well. And finally, you do actually need to
               | be able to feed the child some degree of external success
               | to get them to actually buy into this.
        
               | throwaway98797 wrote:
               | that's bleak
               | 
               | why not have some joy?
               | 
               | you might say you do have joy, but I'll say it doesn't
               | look like it and so to bring it back I wouldn't want to
               | work for you
               | 
               | This is why companies are always pushing the "winning"
               | narrative.
               | 
               | to be clear I'm only commenting on how your philosophy is
               | perceived vs how it actually feels, since I can't know
               | that.
        
               | rubyist5eva wrote:
               | Maybe I'm not articulating myself correctly because I
               | certainly do not want to imply or say that there is no
               | joy in my life. I guess the "joy" in my life is just
               | intrinsic rather than extrinsic? I get immense
               | satisfaction out of my work itself and "succeeding" in
               | and of itself is motivating. I also find
               | mentoring/helping others succeed to also be extremely
               | rewarding. The greatest joy I get in life is seeing how
               | my actions have improved the lives of others in some way.
               | 
               | I also feel very fulfilled from my personal
               | relationships, family and lifestyle that my "success"
               | affords me.
        
           | puchatek wrote:
           | I hope that your definition of success is healthier than your
           | definition of failure.
        
         | mhuffman wrote:
         | >We all believed that we were awesome and would continue
         | growing and winning.
         | 
         | Hilarious since Klarna has one of the worst customer service
         | experiences I have ever witnessed.
         | 
         | Their real monetization strategy seems to be to get your mobile
         | information. It is not necessary to micro-finance through them,
         | just to do anything at all after that!
         | 
         | They actually have a website, which you might think would be an
         | alternative way to manage your account, however it also
         | requires your verified mobile device (not a phone number) to
         | access.
         | 
         | Now, they never tell you any of this and none of the people
         | that work there seem to know that this is policy and are
         | shocked that you can't do things like check your balance, pay
         | off your balance, basically anything you might want to do.
        
           | hulitu wrote:
           | If it works for Google, shall work also for them.
        
           | humaniania wrote:
           | Do they get a tracking pixel or something on all the checkout
           | pages where they are a payment option? They get to embed
           | code?
        
         | CharlesW wrote:
         | I worked for a company where the C-suite used the phrase
         | "drinking our own champagne" instead of "eating our own dog
         | food". To me, this just oozed insecurity about the product and
         | the company.
        
           | highwaylights wrote:
           | "Drinking our own champagne"
           | 
           | I feel like I need to take a shower because of how vomit-
           | inducing that statement is.
        
           | parkerhiggins wrote:
           | sure let's replace a daily life sustaining activity with a
           | celebratory product
           | 
           | total disconnection and bastardization of the point of the
           | phrase
           | 
           | rare level of yuck here
        
             | elvis10ten wrote:
             | Why did we (as an industry) go with "eat your dog food"
             | instead of just "eat your own food"? I find the former
             | disgusting each time I hear it.
        
               | blantonl wrote:
               | I think this term started in the enterprise software
               | space, and was probably coined because subconsciously,
               | enterprise software sales and management people realized
               | that their products were on par with dog food - ground up
               | mystery stuff that is just barely edible except for
               | animals that will practically eat anything. But package
               | it up in nice marketing and sales efforts, and away we
               | go!
               | 
               | This is coming from someone who spent WAY too much time
               | in the Enterprise software space.
        
               | scrollaway wrote:
               | Why make something up when the answer is a googlensearch
               | away?
               | 
               | https://www.centercode.com/blog/dogfooding-101
               | 
               | The sibling comment got it right, it started with a dog
               | food company. Which makes more sense than a company
               | deciding their product is shit, no?
        
               | jsty wrote:
               | IIRC there was an ad involving a dog food manufacturer
               | feeding their own dogs the food they made. "Dogfooding"
               | then became synonymous with using your own product.
        
         | polote wrote:
         | Nothing matters as long as a company is growing. You don't have
         | to improve or have the best tech or the best sales or do
         | everything right or have the best culture. The only thing that
         | matter for a company is to grow.
        
           | peyton wrote:
           | Clearly something did matter since Klarna grew a lot and will
           | probably continue growing. What matters is access to capital.
        
             | hef19898 wrote:
             | Ah, those nasty cash flow questions. Who would have thought
             | that positive net cash flow excluding outside investment
             | would actually be important.
        
           | doktorhladnjak wrote:
           | I'd say it even goes beyond that to how you treat employees.
           | Poor raises? Long, demanding hours? Unethical practices?
           | Burning people out?
           | 
           | If the business keeps growing and the stock keeps going up,
           | it papers over a lot of those problems.
           | 
           | Of course, when the growth stops suddenly, all the skeletons
           | fall out of the closet.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | I worked at a place where the executives constantly sent out
         | company wide congratulations emails, to each other.
         | 
         | The HR director wrote "why it is a great time to work at X part
         | 1" and then we did some layoffs... and part 2 was sent out the
         | next day without missing a beat.
         | 
         | That company eventually stumbled and failed largely because
         | they wouldn't cancel a product that was clearly deficient (a
         | far superior product was available but wasn't invented by the
         | established engineering manager, so they killed that product
         | instead ).
        
         | jiggywiggy wrote:
         | I dealt with Klarna once, made a mistake. Gmail filtered out
         | all their invoices & reminders, had to pay reasonable extra
         | sum. No leniency, fine, but nothing special or awesome about
         | them, they are just a regular credit company. No special tech
         | or whatever, no special awesomeness, no special kindness.
         | 
         | Gmail filtering out invoices has been a big issue for my btw,
         | Im forcing the government to send me invoice in print, even
         | though they don't want to.
        
         | testing7787 wrote:
        
           | autophagian wrote:
           | Inability to focus when reading is often a symptom of
           | untreated ADHD.
        
             | aledalgrande wrote:
             | I think social media today makes you think you have many
             | conditions, when in fact you just have normal behaviors.
             | You don't need to have ADHD to get distracted, especially
             | if your brain is trained to pay attention to a thing for 15
             | seconds max by said social media.
             | 
             | Try reading paper books, or focusing your eyes on a candle
             | for 5 mins a day, your attention will improve.
        
             | Arcanum-XIII wrote:
             | No, it's not. Your focus will probably take a sharp turn to
             | another thing, but because you're not entertained. Here...
             | it's probably because ADHD doesn't mean you'll fail, even
             | if untreated.
        
           | chrsig wrote:
           | if you started replying there, you might have untreated ADHD
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | mise_en_place wrote:
       | These articles are a good reminder that everyone is expendable at
       | a company. Plan accordingly and remember that income is way more
       | important than net worth.
        
       | greenwithenvy wrote:
       | There's a reason why recruiters at Spotify jokingly referred to
       | Klarna as "our relocation agency". Klarna would relocate folks to
       | Stockholm who'd then leave within 6 months to a year once they
       | realised the shitshow they signed up for.
       | 
       | This was in 2015. They didn't value people back then or care to
       | treat folks with the tiniest amount of decency. Seems not much
       | has changed.
        
         | dcminter wrote:
         | There was a corresponding joke at Klarna that Spotify was part
         | of the natural promotion path.
        
         | d-trieu wrote:
         | Not just at Spotify, at both of my previous jobs we were joking
         | about picking up Klarna employees that has managed to
         | disconnect from the Matrix.
        
       | smashah wrote:
       | I tried to get a big-ticket item using Klarna. Had the money in
       | the bank, just thought I'd give it a go. It failed multiple times
       | without any sort of meaningful error message. Apparently each of
       | those failed attempts hit my credit score. I told them to close
       | my account multiple times through multiple channels
       | (chat/email/etc.) and reverse any damage done to my credit score.
       | 
       | Till this day I get monthly balance/statement emails from them
       | even though I have yet to use a single penny of their credit
       | facility. Too bad they don't use all that marketing budget on
       | competent customer experience/service.
        
         | antupis wrote:
         | Yup funny how big they growth becouse they pretty much dont add
         | anything to consumer experience and they are well know issues
         | like if you know social security number you can order stuff.
        
         | mlonkibjuyhv wrote:
         | Oh all the things I wish they would use their marketing budget
         | on. For instance they still can't correctly compute different
         | VAT classes in their merchant reports.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | I thought Klarna did a 'soft' credit check? That shouldn't show
         | up on your file? I think they need permission to do a hard
         | credit check.
        
           | smashah wrote:
           | After the third attempt I decided to chat with Klarna
           | support. They saw the attempts and told me to stop trying as
           | it would be damaging my credit score. What exactly is the
           | truth? I don't know. Klarna is a black box to me.
        
             | chrisseaton wrote:
             | My guess is you were accidentally using 'Klarna Financing'
             | - that's not their main product and not what most people
             | think of when you say 'Klarna' - it's a formal consumer-
             | credit loan. It's like getting a car loan, rather than
             | paying in instalments, as their main product is.
             | 
             | And yeah that'd be apocalyptic on your credit score -
             | equivalent of being rejected for a car loan multiple times
             | in a day!
        
               | smashah wrote:
               | It was the 0% Klarna option (the only Klarna option) on
               | the Google Store if that makes it any clearer. I stay
               | away from this stuff generally so I can't tell the
               | difference between these options when I'm trying to
               | checkout.
        
               | tedivm wrote:
               | It's not a big deal on credit scores at all actually.
               | FICO-8 and the other common credit score algorithms all
               | make the assumption that multiple credit checks in a
               | short period of time just means the person is rate
               | shopping, which is an extremely common thing. When I got
               | a car last year I had ten hard lookups in a single day-
               | this didn't do any more "damage" than a single lookup.
               | 
               | On top of that even hard lookups stop affecting scores
               | pretty quickly. They really exist to prevent someone from
               | taking out a bunch of loans without each other loan
               | company knowing about it.
               | 
               | I do know that things like the Vantage score, used by
               | credit karma and nerd wallet, put a higher weight on
               | these checks. This is, in my opinion, purely to drive
               | engagement to their website. FICO is what is actually
               | used by lenders, and tends to be more stable (in my
               | experience).
        
         | BonoboIO wrote:
         | Hit them hard with a GDPR request, forward it to your local
         | privacy organization.
         | 
         | In Europe this is popcorn time.
        
           | nibbleshifter wrote:
           | This is what I do with every single company I have even the
           | slightest negative interaction with regarding my data.
           | 
           | Its a lot of fun.
        
           | smashah wrote:
           | Good suggestion. I've now filed a complaint with the ICO and
           | sent them an email requesting for all the data they have on
           | me.
        
       | samcrawford wrote:
       | The same author has been reporting diligently on Pollen, and has
       | said he will do a write-up on the collapse there. I will be very
       | interested to read that.
        
         | SahAssar wrote:
         | Got some links? A quick search of the blog turned up nothing
         | besides a quick mention here:
         | https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/pragmatic-engineer-test/
        
           | tomduncalf wrote:
           | It was on his Twitter AFAIK, for some reason Twitter search
           | wouldn't find it but here is the thread! https://mobile.twitt
           | er.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1557841469674...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-14 23:02 UTC)