[l33t7332273]

> Are these CEOs really so irreplaceable that when they bet incorrectly they can't be replaced?

That’s the thing though, another comment nailed this perfectly. If they made a +EV decision to hire more people, but the preverbal roulette wheel landed on 00, maybe it’s not a bad bet that they should be fired for.

[cma256]

It needs to be repeated until its acknowledged: "risk management" wasn't the reason given for the layoffs.

The explicit reason given was "economic headwinds" and bad organizational structure. If in your role as CEO you have left the company in a poor position to handle normal, cyclical slowdowns then you are a failure. If in your role as CEO you have produced an org chart which burns money and slows progress then you are a failure. You should be replaced. Period.