Top
Best
New

Posted by dakrone 1 day ago

Elastic lays off 7% of employees(www.elastic.co)
220 points | 214 commentspage 2
maxloh 22 hours ago|
I wonder how much of the layoffs were caused by their license change in 2021.

They lost a lot of goodwill back then. Some of their potential customers migrated to OpenSearch and never looked back, even after they backed down and went open-source again under AGPL.

chopete3 18 hours ago||
Unfortunately Elastic lost -60.54% market value in the last 5 years. Negative net income every year since going public.

The underlying message is a lot clear - they are a public company. They have to do this and more show to net positive income to keep the market value from falling further.

Companies can keep the employees with market value drop but it gets hard with negative income. Salesforce also lost ~37% value in last 5 years but they still print billions in net income every year.

The same story with companies like Gitlab. They lost 75% market value and negative income since going public.

bigyikes 23 hours ago||
Why even bother with such a small layoff? Is there a reason to not just dial up your attrition for a while?
Legend2440 23 hours ago||
Your best employees are the most likely to leave via attrition, because they have the most opportunity elsewhere.

In theory, a small layoff can target the least productive employees.

georgemcbay 23 hours ago||
> Your best employees are the most likely to leave via attrition, because they have the most opportunity elsewhere.

But this remains true after a layoff and the layoff often acts a motivator for your best employees to start looking even if they weren't previously.

Usually they aren't thinking "well, glad I survived that layoff and now my job is safe forever", they are thinking "huh, is this a sinking ship? Maybe I should look around and see what else is out there..."

...speaking as someone that has been at several companies during layoffs...

rconti 22 hours ago||
yeah, it seems like it would have to be accompanied by a pay bump for the ones you really want to retain... which is challenging from an optics perspective.
wrs 22 hours ago||
Perhaps, but there are optics only when someone sees. It's not unusual to fund retention increases using some of the budget freed up by a layoff, but that won't be explicitly stated in a public announcement.
jollyllama 8 hours ago|||
7%? Small? 10 years ago, 5% was significant, and that was in a fairly mature sector.

Granted, in that context, you'd be laying off 5% every two-ish years until industry trends changed direction.

film42 23 hours ago|||
I've seen companies put a percentage of the team on a PIP as a "this is not a layoff but we do need to cut costs" situation. Hopefully Elastic is just being honest about it?
SpyCoder77 22 hours ago|||
In human terms, this is not a small layoff. Around 281 people's lives are being shaken up by this.
r-w 21 hours ago|||
I think that might be even worse for the mental health of the folks on the ground.
tonyedgecombe 9 hours ago||
The anticipation is worse than the event itself.
trgn 23 hours ago||
i dont understand this either. just dont hire for half a year or so, a generic globocorp gets to that 7% easily.
mh- 21 hours ago|||
One challenge is that when the market stops hiring as aggressively, voluntary attrition retracts as well.

Large companies model attrition in their financials, and those assumptions start to break when macro conditions around the job market shift like that.

Avicebron 23 hours ago|||
That doesn't boost the stock after the announcements, why would they do it?
trgn 23 hours ago||
i dont think this announcement will boost the stock either, for the same reason we are wondering here why 7% is noteworthy for a globocorp.
thayne 23 hours ago||
> Customer expectations are increasing and evolving faster than ever before

Wouldn't that suggest you need those workers more?

dirtbag__dad 20 hours ago||
> in some areas, especially customer-facing sales, we expect to keep adding to our teams to support future growth

Can someone help me understand why sales is immune to this strategy and still is employing the “more bodies” approach. I thought we were working smarter in 2026?

steelbrain 20 hours ago|
In the US at least, it is illegal to do unsolicited outbound sales with a bot. You have to have humans make these calls.
SoftTalker 20 hours ago||
Interesting. I'm in the US and I get half a dozen calls a day from AI bots. Where can I report this criminal activity?
steelbrain 20 hours ago||
I'm not from the US, but based on my knowledge of your culture, it may be worth it to write a letter to your state's Attorney General
alexk307 3 hours ago||
Sad but you unfortunately need to make a profit as a public company at some point. In 8 years since going public, they've had essentially one marginally profitable year surrounded by lots of losses while growing to 4000 employees. Easy to blame AI when the fault is really poor leadership.
delfugal 22 hours ago||
For the good of the company we are reducing force by 7% even though those people we fired were instrumental in helping us grow. Insensitive PR tripe.
vismit2000 17 hours ago||
They should layoff everybody, close down the company, and just use postrgres full text search
SpyCoder77 22 hours ago|
Saying 7% in this scenario is the wrong choice. It diminishes the absolute number of ~281 people who just had their lives shaken up by this.
More comments...