[ksj2114]

I've worked on many cost cutting projects in the past, in consulting and private equity where cost-cutting was the norm. These statements very easy to say in retrospect.

Many studies show that private equity owned companies, which typically run businesses the leanest, actually perform better.

[chucksmash]

For which measure of better?

[burkaman]

Can you link to any of those studies?

[ksj2114]

This is one of the most comprehensive studies: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_2019122.p...

[burkaman]

Yeah, that's the only one I could find. I definitely don't have the background to understand the whole paper, but it doesn't seem to paint a very positive picture. If you cut employment by 13% and grow labor productivity (output per employee) by 8%, aren't you worse off? At best, you're producing the same amount while benefiting society less and the owners more.

Also:

>Public-to-private buyouts involve greater leverage and bankruptcy risk but few advantages in financial returns, at least in recent decades. Private-to-private buyouts appear more likely to create value by relaxing financial constraints and improving management practices.

Public-to-private buyouts are generally the ones people get angry about, and it seems that they're economically bad in addition to the social consequences. I don't think people generally object to one private equity firm buying from another.