Ancestry lays off 6% of staff(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
Ancestry lays off 6% of staff
https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/05/ancestry-lays-off-6-of-staff-as-consumer-genetic-testing-market-continues-to-decline/
69 comments
The market here in Utah is bananas. I could walk down the street and get a 30-60% raise easy. Indeed there have been a few layoffs in the last month or so, but the companies aren't really a surprise and the market is still blazing. New companies are moving in literally daily.
SLC has been a great underground tech market for a long time, but word is getting out. California companies can't get away from the intractable chaos out there fast enough, and SLC is just an hour's flight away. New companies are pouring in much faster than we can handle 'em.
If you're a good tech worker in SLC, first, get in touch with me because I like meeting cool people, and second, if you've been affected by these layoffs, chin up, go to the next building over, and there's a realistic chance you'll have a better job in a matter of days.
SLC has been a great underground tech market for a long time, but word is getting out. California companies can't get away from the intractable chaos out there fast enough, and SLC is just an hour's flight away. New companies are pouring in much faster than we can handle 'em.
If you're a good tech worker in SLC, first, get in touch with me because I like meeting cool people, and second, if you've been affected by these layoffs, chin up, go to the next building over, and there's a realistic chance you'll have a better job in a matter of days.
> I could walk down the street and get a 30-60% raise easy.
So what is stopping you?
So what is stopping you?
The fact that it is hyperbole. The developer job market here is strong, but unless you are currently grossly underpaid, you aren’t going to swing that kind of increase. Compensation ranges aren’t wide enough for that to be an “easy” thing.
Yeah, it's a tad hyperbolic, but mainly with regard to the proximity. It's likely that more competitive employers will not be in walking range, especially not in this week's weather! ;)
It also depends on how long you've been at your current employer. Conventional wisdom is that once you're somewhere ~2 years, you're automatically leaving 10-15% on the table, because most companies are very stingy with raises. In an overheated market like SLC, that estimate is probably quite low.
Here's an anecdote: recruiters are so desperate that one of them spammed myself and several associates for a specific role, and this particular solicitation contained an apology that the base was "only" 135k. I know that's "just out of school" rate in SF/LA, but in most of the country, that's considered pretty darn good. And this recruiter is here pre-emptively apologizing to every stranger she spams for the "low" rate.
I got a lot more anecdotes, most of which are substantially better than that, but that's a quick simple one indicative of the kind of market we're in right now.
At a recent-but-former employer, we routinely hired in new people at +40% more than their peers who'd been there for >3 years, simply because the market wouldn't accept anything less and HR was hyperskeptical of any raise >2%.
My advice to anyone unhappy with their current compensation or employer is to go out and ask for the most ridiculous number you can think of. You may be surprised.
It also depends on how long you've been at your current employer. Conventional wisdom is that once you're somewhere ~2 years, you're automatically leaving 10-15% on the table, because most companies are very stingy with raises. In an overheated market like SLC, that estimate is probably quite low.
Here's an anecdote: recruiters are so desperate that one of them spammed myself and several associates for a specific role, and this particular solicitation contained an apology that the base was "only" 135k. I know that's "just out of school" rate in SF/LA, but in most of the country, that's considered pretty darn good. And this recruiter is here pre-emptively apologizing to every stranger she spams for the "low" rate.
I got a lot more anecdotes, most of which are substantially better than that, but that's a quick simple one indicative of the kind of market we're in right now.
At a recent-but-former employer, we routinely hired in new people at +40% more than their peers who'd been there for >3 years, simply because the market wouldn't accept anything less and HR was hyperskeptical of any raise >2%.
My advice to anyone unhappy with their current compensation or employer is to go out and ask for the most ridiculous number you can think of. You may be surprised.
Presumably they make enough right now that the marginal increase wouldn't offset other things they would be losing by making a move.
30-60% isn't a marginal increase, that's just a solid raise. I'd call 5-10% marginal.
Maybe they're holding out for something larger, like 300%,
Maybe they're holding out for something larger, like 300%,
Everything is "marginal" at a certain point. The more you make, the less a ~50% salary bump matters in terms of quality of life.
A 50% salary increase alone definitely wouldn't interest me at this point. What I'm working on and who I'm working with matter a lot more to me.
A 50% salary increase alone definitely wouldn't interest me at this point. What I'm working on and who I'm working with matter a lot more to me.
Concerns of getting laid off in a volatile market perhaps.
SLC also has lots of US citizen foreign language speakers. As well as those with experiences of other cultures.
Really handy for foreign companies expanding.
Send a founder and hire a local VP who can translate to American customers and Employees. Plus close to SV.
I'm surprised Utah isn't in the council of American States in Europe. Or otherwise looking for inward investment.
Really handy for foreign companies expanding.
Send a founder and hire a local VP who can translate to American customers and Employees. Plus close to SV.
I'm surprised Utah isn't in the council of American States in Europe. Or otherwise looking for inward investment.
Every-time a PR comes out like this I see this sort of comment. Is there any evidence that layoffs are engineering based? I always assume the first to go are marketing/admin/etc rather than developers.
Yes it was I’m one of the ones affected. I’ve done mobile engineering both iOS and Android for around ~5 years.
If anyone’s looking :)
If anyone’s looking :)
I'm hiring remote mobile developers. Send me an email and I can send you some details.
Sorry to hear that, hope you find something soon!
If you’re interested in crypto currencies, I know that Coinzoom, based in Holladay, is looking for mobile developers.
That sucks man, and by the way the Ancestry app on Android works quite well even though the small screen doesn't help with that all that info to show up.
All of the various layoffs I’ve been aware of have included a decent number of engineers. Often it is changing direction or giving up on certain products, so entire product teams get let go. Plus, we’re usually the most expensive.
A lot of managers still operate under the assumption that software has a "build phase" and a "maintenance phase" and that they can get rid of most developers for the later. Aside from the obvious problems when they still want new features there's a correlation between the head count used to build something and the head count needed to effectively maintain it, 1 person won't be able to handle the enterprise mess that 100 people create.
So I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was engineers being let go a lot of the time. Especially at non software shops where marketing is bringing in money and the engineers are a cost.
So I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was engineers being let go a lot of the time. Especially at non software shops where marketing is bringing in money and the engineers are a cost.
Well it kind of does.
They forget the agile cycle moves from maintenance back to development again.
Makes more sense just to offer devs more holiday and less pay.
They forget the agile cycle moves from maintenance back to development again.
Makes more sense just to offer devs more holiday and less pay.
People always report on the layoffs and not the hiring drives. I wouldn't worry too much.
> Instructure just let go of 10%
Off topic, but indeed they did. Lots of people leaving, too. Things are not going to end well there.
Off topic, but indeed they did. Lots of people leaving, too. Things are not going to end well there.
Yeah, that one has been sad to watch. I worked there several years ago and thought it was a great place, but it seems like things have gone downhill a bit lately.
It’s not just Utah they have headquarters in San Francisco as well lots of people let go here too.
Companies seem to have a really difficult time taking a moment to acknowledge or thank the workers being laid off. Would be nice to see that change in these corporate layoff announcements. This came close, but it's almost like pr and executives are allergic to expressing actual gratitude.
My last company had a couple rounds of layoffs last year (including me eventually), everyone in the executive leadership kept referring to it in such a roundabout way. They'd always call it, "the reorg" and the people laid off were people, "impacted" by it.
So you had to fire a bunch of people for no fault of their own. I get it, that's business sometimes when the times aren't good. But just say it. I do believe our CEO is genuinely a good person and did not feel good about doing it, so maybe there's a component of protecting one's own emotions in there as well by speaking around it.
So you had to fire a bunch of people for no fault of their own. I get it, that's business sometimes when the times aren't good. But just say it. I do believe our CEO is genuinely a good person and did not feel good about doing it, so maybe there's a component of protecting one's own emotions in there as well by speaking around it.
Is it a shock to anyone when a company whos business model does not allow for return customers suddenly find themselves less in demand?
I agree but I also want to point out that they do have subscriptions. My mom is a subscriber just to get access to the real-time family trees.
I presume most people are not returning though.
I presume most people are not returning though.
Once you've made the tree, isn't that the end?
A relative of mine researched our family tree. After 2-3 years she presented it to everyone. Most people weren't really interested for more than 10 minutes, but tried to respect the effort she'd put in to it.
Now we all have less/no future need for an ancestry service.
A relative of mine researched our family tree. After 2-3 years she presented it to everyone. Most people weren't really interested for more than 10 minutes, but tried to respect the effort she'd put in to it.
Now we all have less/no future need for an ancestry service.
You can always fill out more of the tree going back further and out more. My dad loves this stuff and is always talking about the people he's paying to research vital records from churches in Slovenia to fill out more of our family tree.
There are enough people who do it for a hobby and/or religious purposes that it seems like a pretty viable subscription model.
There are enough people who do it for a hobby and/or religious purposes that it seems like a pretty viable subscription model.
Can you tell me more about that? I am only using a local database (with GenealogyJ) and I don't have any experience with online databases like ancestry.com. How is your dad using it? Do the people he's paying directly enter the data online?
Not OP but the payment bit sounds like when you pay a local records custodian to do a "search", ie look for all the Djikstra family members in the period 1700-1800. They then look through books (BMD - baptisms/births, marriages, deaths/funerals) in the church building (or wherever) and compile a list of the data.
Often novices can't read the writing, and when the records are in another country/region it's easier to pay someone. Also, many records can only be searched this way, the public don't have access.
Often novices can't read the writing, and when the records are in another country/region it's easier to pay someone. Also, many records can only be searched this way, the public don't have access.
Sorry, don’t know a lot more than I already posted. If you want, email me (contact info in profile), and I’ll ask him when I see him this weekend.
I've used ancestry off and on over the past decade. I don't think any family tree could ever be considered 100% complete. It's a bit addicting to see how far back you can go. And the fact that the number of ancestors increases exponentially as you go back each generation means that there's a lot to research.
I tend to subscribe for a few months and then try it again year or two later to see if there's any new gaps I can fill in. There's often new information added periodically, either from a new set of data they've digitized, or user-added content from a distant relative that happened to have some unique information about a common ancestor.
I tend to subscribe for a few months and then try it again year or two later to see if there's any new gaps I can fill in. There's often new information added periodically, either from a new set of data they've digitized, or user-added content from a distant relative that happened to have some unique information about a common ancestor.
Yeah, no idea. I need to ask her why she keeps paying but I know that you get new daily DNA matches, that I guess you can keep adding to the tree.
Probably the same reason why I had to buy every house in GTA and get every armour in Skyrim... we all have our delightful obsessions!
> business model does not allow for return customers
How's that?
How's that?
You map out your ancestry. That's great: records found, tree built, work complete. Business relationship over.
But it's not over, because the Ancestry.com UI is the only place most of that information is usable and navigable. This necessitates an ongoing subscription for access.
In addition, there's almost no "records found, tree built, work complete." It's always pulling additional "leaves" as more records are digitized.
In addition, there's almost no "records found, tree built, work complete." It's always pulling additional "leaves" as more records are digitized.
The core info can be downloaded in GED format into a free genealogy program such as gramps. There will be some extra proprietary extensions but the basics will be there. Their selling point is that it indexes everyone's tree and it will offer hints when it spots overlap. Can be very time saving, but also misleading. Check everything against official BMD records if possible.
True, but: there's maybe a billion potential customers, I feel those companies are reaching only a small percentage with a pretty bad service.
Would you buy the same DNA test a second time from the same company?
DNA tests are a relatively new part of Ancestry’s business. I don’t have info about what percentage of their revenue they make up, but it’s certainly not a foregone conclusion that their the most important part of their revenue model. The other (and older) part of their business is subscriptions to their genealogy database and related software.
Yep my mother researched all of her familiy history, it took months and years. Then when she ran out, she researched my Dad's family history (even though they're divorced). Now she researches family history for friends or random local people. I'm assuming she's an outlier because she's a total history buff, but she's been subscribing for years.
And once you have looked into you family's past and saved what info the was to find, what benefits does Ancestry offer to keep customers around?
Genuine question, because I know very little about this stuff.
Genuine question, because I know very little about this stuff.
You keep going. It's no coincidence that Ancestry's in SLC; saving your ancestors through baptism by proxy is a bit of a big deal for the Mormons/LDS. It's nice that they can make a buck off of the basic curiosity of outsiders, but the real money happens when you can make it off of people's deeply held religious beliefs. (And it is possible to believe that you're genuinely helping people with one side of your brain while taking advantage of them with the other.)
It beats going through microfiche copies of census records in a church basement, that's for sure.
That is fascinating. It’s like they’re selling a do-it-yourself indulgence kit.
[deleted]
>once you have looked into you family's past
I think you are severely underestimating how much time this takes. I've seen people go down this rabbit hole. It can literally consume your entire lifetime. Most people seem to underestimate how many ancestors they have - and that's not even including those that are so far back that there are no records.
I think you are severely underestimating how much time this takes. I've seen people go down this rabbit hole. It can literally consume your entire lifetime. Most people seem to underestimate how many ancestors they have - and that's not even including those that are so far back that there are no records.
I bought form a company that lets me delete my data, I forgot the name though, but they regularly send me an email wanting to sell me a deeper dive.
I also routinely get spammed by people who want to connect with me because they have some extended family tree subscription and can see people they are like 1-3% related to.
It hasn’t worked of course, I haven’t logged back in since they told me I was 99,8% Scandinavian. Shattering the family myth is that we had that one gypsy great grandmother.
I also routinely get spammed by people who want to connect with me because they have some extended family tree subscription and can see people they are like 1-3% related to.
It hasn’t worked of course, I haven’t logged back in since they told me I was 99,8% Scandinavian. Shattering the family myth is that we had that one gypsy great grandmother.
Everyone should read "The End of the Beginning" by Ben Thompson [1].
[1] https://stratechery.com/2020/the-end-of-the-beginning/
[1] https://stratechery.com/2020/the-end-of-the-beginning/
That was great, but I don't see the connection to Ancestry's recent layoffs.
> The web didn’t bridge Microsoft’s moat — it went around, and made it irrelevant.
Reminds me a bit of how generals are always fighting the previous war.
Reminds me a bit of how generals are always fighting the previous war.
[deleted]
I'm hoping the next phase would be having the cloud literally in your pocket, able to seamlessly integrate with any interface you want.
Your phone. Your keyboard/mouse/monitor. Your TV. All talk to one computing device.
Your phone. Your keyboard/mouse/monitor. Your TV. All talk to one computing device.
I hear they are trying to make it more of a family business.
My wife subscribes to their service. I can say, you pay a lot for what you get.
It's always seemed really expensive for what it is. I've looked up some family members, and all they really have is badly digitized scans of public documents that some library made available.
How little of this type of thing exists in any searchable format other than driving to a library and finding somebody who knows how microfiche works is very frustrating.
How little of this type of thing exists in any searchable format other than driving to a library and finding somebody who knows how microfiche works is very frustrating.
I suspect some of the recent layoffs may be related to the overall economy.
For example the global debt crisis Dalio talks about.
For example the global debt crisis Dalio talks about.
What did they expect? They don't really offer a valuable service besides a one-off test + results. At some point you're going to hit everyone who wants to use the service, they'll use it exactly once, and you'll have no more market.
Still seems like there is a shortage of developers here and most people should find new work pretty easily, but it is always a little unsettling to have a bunch of layoffs in quick sequence.