Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 2bitencryption 2745 days ago
> The New York-based company has been looking at cutting costs as it ramps up investment in its next generation 5G network, which is expected to fuel growth.

"we're about to grow a ton, better cut 10k jobs to maximize those gains."

that just sounds so... weird to me.

7 comments

The company is laying off 10,400 employees. According to the article: The company said it had 152,300 employees at the end of the third-quarter ending Sept. 30.

That's a significant chunk of their workforce! I suspect Verizon will quietly be hiring thousands of people from places where they can legally pay them less than these 10+ thousand.

That's pretty much the modus operandi of every telco around the World.

The working conditions in call-centers or guys doing installation & maintenance tend to be absolutely horrendous across the board.

Contractors. With crappy benefits and less oversight. As long as terrible employment practices are "out of sight and mind" then it's OK for Verizon's board and management. Bonuses all around for getting the job done for cheaper!!
Yeah you are probably right, these 10,000 can probably be outsourced.
> "we're about to grow a ton, better cut 10k jobs to maximize those gains."

It makes perfect sense. T-Mobile basically bought up all the spectrum in the last round of bidding because they got a $4B breakup fee from AT&T as part of AT&T's failed acquisition. That has put all the other U.S. carriers on the defensive, because if they can't win a significant percentage of the 5G spectrum then they're going to be out of business.

Wait, Verizon doesn't have access to $4B? Verizon surely has significantly more net income than Tmobile. And therefore also has access to more leverage. $4B would not make that big of a difference.
Verizon makes about $4 B in quarterly net income, but they only have about $2 B cash on hand and have investors who expect a $2.4 B dividend each quarter.

So yeah, this is a hard purchase for them, especially since they also have $209 B in liabilities already.

No way. You don't miss out on 5G because you couldn't come up with $4B and your smaller competitor could. If it were $40B, sure.
That's definitely correct, $4 billion is meaningless. If it were $40b to corner 5G, Verizon and AT&T could come up with it and T-Mobile couldn't.

For significant business purposes, both Verizon and AT&T could borrow $40b easily. Whether for an acquisition or critical spectrum buy. They both have plenty of borrowing capacity despite being highly leveraged (it'll very likely end badly one day in the future).

As I understand it(as of last year)...T-Mobile's "5G" is radically different than ATT/Verizons. The former using low band for coverage and penetration, and the latter using high band cell sites. So one has greater reach at the risk of congestion, and the other will have much less congestion but little reach. Which is better is to be seen...
I assume it's just their way of working "5G" buzzword into every press release.
It doesn't say what growth – perhaps it's revenue growth, but my interpretation would be network/bandwidth/user/devices growth. The unfortunate thing with these huge service providers is that the number of people they staff to operate their infrastructure grows in conjunction with their network/bandwidth growth. Their operations simply doesn't scale as compared to the web-players who manage their global network with 10-20 people. Cutting costs and automating is something that is long overdue at these companies, and will be imperative when moving to mass-scale 5G networks. I'm not so sure the gains are to be "maximized" as you say, I think actually being able to make a profit will be hard enough in the coming years.
A businesses’s goal isn’t to increase expenses.
The need to hire a UI team for their tv gui. Comcast, of all companies, has out-innovated them in this area.