The article is missing a huge point. The companies mentioned in it did not lose anything at all, or an amount that is negligible.
They took advantage off the boom and made more money than they could in a normal situation.
They did not lose anything (at least the companies mentioned in the article) in my point of view.
They already knew they were going to fire the staff they hired. But they also knew that they had to hire more staff to take advantage of the situation.
Agree. Hindsight is 20/20. A conservative CEO who pulls back and doesn't lean into a growth cycle will be criticized even more for leaving money on the table.
Whether the entire economy should be structured to incenivize all this instability is a separate question. Don't hate the player, hate the game!
> They already knew they were going to fire the staff they hired. But they also knew that they had to hire more staff to take advantage of the situation
Exactly. People keep either saying CEOs are playing 5D chess or that they are fools... when reality is much simpler.
So much this, they didn't "over" hire, they hired who they needed at the time. That they don't need them anymore does not mean they didn't need them previously.
They took advantage off the boom and made more money than they could in a normal situation.
They did not lose anything (at least the companies mentioned in the article) in my point of view.
They already knew they were going to fire the staff they hired. But they also knew that they had to hire more staff to take advantage of the situation.