It seems silly to “restructure” and then “return to growth” though.
Like, the restructuring is mainly an exercise of managing layers of pointers. Why don’t they ever move around the pointers and keep the people? Save the garbage cleaner process till the very end.
Presumably people who cleared these interview processes are amongst the best and could easily re-train to fit different roles.
It’s for these reasons LLMs are going to chip away at silly subscriptions. When many projects get 70% of what the user needs and the maintainers aren’t willing or able to address what paying customers want…why bother paying anymore when you’ll soon be able to have just those bespoke features/fixes/integrations built yourself?
It seems to often boil down to the fact that paying customers are paying to solve a problem so they don’t need to deal with it. Whereas developers are more interested in writing code than solving said problems for customers.
Smartest folks in the room. Greatest capital allocators we have. Maybe that’s what happens when systems not only permit but encourage and reward failing upwards.