Print 52 comment(s) - last by Emryse.. on Oct 23 at 7:18 PM

More painful cuts come, as expected; Yahoo blames bad economy for its misfortune

DailyTech reported earlier this month that Yahoo was contemplating job cuts.  Faced with sagging growth and market share loss to Google, coupled with the possible loss of the Google ad partnership due to regulatory headaches, Yahoo had few other options than to make cuts.

Yahoo co-founder and CEO Jerry Yang, under pressure by some investors of late to resign, gave a statement describing the cuts, stating, "We have been disciplined about balancing investments with cost management all year, and have now set in motion initiatives to reduce costs and enhance productivity.  The steps we are taking this quarter should deliver both near-term benefits to operating cash flow, and substantially enhance the nimbleness and flexibility with which we compete over the long term."

At least 10 percent of Yahoo's workforce will be slashed, meaning that at least 1,520 will lose their jobs.  The company hopes that the cuts will help it to reduce costs, while not significantly reducing its profitability. 

The cuts were the second for Yahoo this year, with the company letting 1,000 employees go this last January.  In total, Yahoo has let go close to 16 percent of its workforce since the start of the year.

Yahoo will also be relocating offices and consolidating real estate to try to reduce costs.  Mr. Yang stated in a conference call, "We are identifying ways we can operate more efficiently."

Yahoo's revenue for the quarter was $1.79B USD, up 1 percent from the quarter a year before.  Without the commissions it paid ad partners, the company pulled in $1.33B USD, slightly lower than the average analyst prediction of $1.37B USD.  Net income for Yahoo was $54M USD, down 51 percent from last year.  Profits excluding one-time charges were $123M USD, roughly in line with analyst expectations.

While the report contained some disappointing spots, it mostly was in line with analyst predictions, so some analysts hailed it as good news for the troubled search firm.  Sandeep Aggarwal, Senior Internet Analyst at Collins Stewart described the report as having "no more negative surprise beyond what we had already expected."  And Jeffrey Lindsay, senior analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein & Co said that the report "could have been a lot worse."

Mr. Lindsay praised the job cuts, stating, "If they really do take the staff numbers down for real, that will have a very beneficial effect."

Yahoo's management is blaming a weak economy for their company's struggles.  Yahoo Finance Chief Blake Jorgensen described in a statement, "An increasingly challenging economic climate and softening advertising demand contributed to revenues this quarter coming in at the low end of our outlook range.  While we are disappointed with our results, we're pleased that we continue to benefit from the aggressive cost management efforts we have pursued during the year."

Yahoo stock recently perked up after falling to the $11/share range, after Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer commented that Microsoft might still be interested in Yahoo or parts of Yahoo.  Microsoft had offered Yahoo $32/share, almost three times the current stock price, but Yahoo had rejected the offer, stating it was worth significantly more.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Only in America
By Gzus666 on 10/22/2008 12:01:11 PM , Rating: 3
I would be surprised if they actually trimmed from anything but the lowest of management. Managers are needed, too many managers aren't. I think managers think they are more important than they really are, that is why business degrees are a joke, and everyone who couldn't do something else has one. Most managers aren't that good at something that is arguably quite easy. Common sense is pretty much all that is really needed to do it well, and understanding of the business you are in helps streamline that.

I believe my favorite quote would be "I want to be a marginally intelligent monkey in a suit, I'm going to business school" -Futurama (the talking monkey episode where Fry and the monkey go to school together).

Employees could figure things out without managers if it really came down to it, it just wouldn't flow as smooth as having a central point of contact (manager). Managers on the other hand, you could have a company full of them, no work gets done without knowledgeable and productive staff.

Also, if the "bonus" is part of your contract, it is not a bonus, it is part of your pay.

RE: Only in America
By Spivonious on 10/22/2008 12:29:10 PM , Rating: 2
Just because it's in a contract doesn't mean it's not a bonus. A bonus is any extra pay that isn't guaranteed to you. Performance-based, for example.

RE: Only in America
By Gzus666 on 10/22/2008 12:36:15 PM , Rating: 2
Right, and if it is in your contract that you receive said "bonus" and cannot be taken away from you, then it does not fall under the definition of bonus. If it is guaranteed by a contract, it becomes your salary. Now if there is something in the contract (I still can't believe they enter into contracts with employees, that is insane) that specifies they get a bonus only if they meet certain criteria, fair enough, it is a bonus.

RE: Only in America
By omnicronx on 10/22/2008 1:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Lets not dig too deep here, I don't need a reference to know what a bonus is and that this is a basic definition that does not apply to every situation.

A professional sports player for example can have performance bonuses IN their contract. If he/she completes whatever those goals are, he/she is paid that amount.

RE: Only in America
By Gzus666 on 10/22/2008 2:41:08 PM , Rating: 2
Right, and as I posted above you (that you of course didn't read) this exact situation makes it a bonus, cause you have to meet a criteria to get the bonus. Apparently you do need the dictionary. But your right, let's not get caught up in definitions of words or meanings of things, instead let's use made up definitions you happen to apply in a situation to make yourself right.

RE: Only in America
By omnicronx on 10/22/2008 4:45:35 PM , Rating: 1
I read your post, and I am not making up definitions, you are using a very bad source in which is a very generic definition from

An Agreement that stipulates a bonus hardly ever means that you get a finite amount, what it means is it is still totally based upon your/your companies performance, but they can not take it away from you. Whereas if a company decides to stop giving out bonuses, those who do not have it in their control are shit out of luck. It is not considered part of the salary because you do not receive a finite amount, you could en up with nothing.

I only called out your source because frankly is unrealiable and dubbed down.

Here are other sites listing the business definition of bonus. "Business Dictionary: Bonus

1. Compensation paid to an employee or employees for achieving a particular sales goal or organizational objective. This is above and beyond either a Commission or a Salary. A corporation achieving a 10% increase in profits may distribute part of the earnings as a bonus to its employees.

Merriam Websters Online

something in addition to what is expected or strictly due: as a: money or an equivalent given in addition to an employee's usual compensation

"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki