Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

@3p0 did you get the offer? Need an update!

I'm interviewing with Google right now. If they make an offer, it'll probably be a 20% pay cut which I would accept.

The executive leadership at this company are not capable in any capacity.

Did a painting fall on you? Who hurt you?

Injured driving into a mountainside that was painted to resemble a tunnel. Haven't been the same since and still hold a grudge.

Any buyer would take the planes over the secret love children. At least the planes provide some utility.

The buyer of SAS will buy it for the legacy $3B ARR. JMP may not fit their business model. For this reason, SAS has made JMP independent enough to be easily sold.

SAS has done the same with Innovation Air, because the buyer of SAS may not want the airplanes.

The company is structured to facilitate a sale. Beyond that, there is no reason to make subsidiaries more independent. It makes financial sense to share resources.

@28e They don’t…

@219 I agree that sharing resources make good business sense. What doesn’t make good accounting sense is assigning 100% of the cost of such resources to the parent company.

@25p Try medication. Or achieve something so you don’t have to be jealous.

@219 - “Financial efficiency” - Like bundling your secret love children conservatorship payments into a job that pays an allowance and health insurance. I hear it’s great work if you can get it. No accountability or results required!

@20g I respect that you have no axe to grind and are being genuine.

However I don’t think you understand how businesses work. Of course they are going to share where it makes sense for financial efficiency.

Not somehow a SAS thing. It is common in the parent subsidiary relationship. Especially when the two are physically located in the same place.

@1zt Not to put words in someone else’s mouth, but I think the point regarding JMP is that it’s classified not as a SAS product but as a SAS company. In light of that, my point would be that to say JMP is a profitable company when on its own, it lacks several of the components of a company, is disingenuous at best. At worst it’s untruthful accounting, taking credit for the revenue but ignoring some of the costs that make that revenue possible.

Note: I’m a retired SAS employee (VRBP 2021) and in the course of my 35+ years at SAS I had many positive interactions with JMP and JMP employees. Which is to say, I have no axe to grind here.

@1zt And true of many corporate subsidiary relationships out there.

"...what does JMP spend on it's office space, it's use of the campus facilities? Does it have its own health insurance and benefits?... What about their network and IT resources? ... If JMP were on its own truly, it would be... far more constrained, and leaner."

This is true.

It's also true of every other product at SAS. So what's the point?

@dh Did a painting fall on you? Who hurt you?

Many of the same common complaints, advice, etc. A few of my observations:

JMP is a subsidiary, with its own blah, blah, blah...which it has built out, but JMP still defers to and relies on SAS Legal and Finance since JMP's resources in those area are much smaller, limited and not entirely separated from the mother ship. And what does JMP spend on it's office space, it's use of the campus facilities? Does it have it's own health insurance and benefits (and HCC) w/out piggy backing on SAS? What about their network and IT resources? Not to belittle JMP, and they've done very well for themselves - but they are relatively tiny and rely on SAS (still) far more than often acknowledged. It JMP were on its own truly, it would be a very company - far more constrained, and leaner.

BH back to work message, you could say what took so long. Ideally, and when you have a tight group, you can just suggest things (like suggest at least 2-3 days) but unfortunately, people start abusing it and it ruins it for everyone. If nearly everyone hybrid had been coming to campus regularly 2+ days we'd prob never have this conversation. SAS needs planning - and you need expectations to manage the plan and your outcomes (not suggestions). On top of that, you have the external tide moving in that direction, and we have a new CFO who is trying to get more control and mgmt of finances.

SAS is a job - it is a transaction, and a relationship. Ultimately, you always ALWAYS have to look after your end of the deal. Manage your own career, you should always ensure you are learning and making yourself more valuable. If opportunities aren't coming your way, start looking for them internally or externally. Carve out 10%+ of your time for increasing your knowledge, skills, value - for YOU.

@qx I left a bad manager. But also, I had bounced around the company for years, and failed to find any position building a high quality product. I gave up on doing good work at SAS. A lot of my managers couldn't tell the difference between good work and bad.

I left was during the pandemic stimulus, when it was easy to find a better job. I left in sadness, for the unrealized potential, but like you I never regretted it.

I went to work for a company that had only R and Python. Most of the people there were young. Some of them knew SAS, but they didn't want it.

Mark Cuban's pharmacy doesn't list the one medication, and the other is 3x what I'm paying now. Can't check the prices at Costco, but GoodRX points to Harris Teeter as having the best prices.

That any of this word combination is even possible is an indictment of the out of control capitalist pharmaceutical, insurance, and medical industries in the United States.

Why don't we just use individualized pricing or, better yet, auction medicines off to the highest bidders.

(OMG, I need to go see if rxauction.com is a taken domain.)

@ph "are you checking Mark Cuban's pharmacy and costco and similar to price-shop your meds? Have you asked to see if cash pay without going through insurance might be less expensive? Sometimes it is."

Those are good suggestions - I hadn't looked at them. Mark Cuban's pharmacy doesn't list the one medication, and the other is 3x what I'm paying now. Can't check the prices at Costco, but GoodRX points to Harris Teeter as having the best prices.

@rc I feel like I've heard of most billion dollar companies that have been around for decades. Not to mention the companies that represents a fairly major programming language.

@qy In all fairness there are a lot of big companies that few have ever heard of.

If you went back to the SAS hayday it would have been the same thing.

@pp I work at a FAANG and not even 1% know what SAS is (aside from SaaS). Not even on any competitive radar.

@df I didn’t leave a manager, I left a company who I felt did not have direction or any strategy. It took me two years to find something else. I do not regret leaving one bit.

One thing I found quite interesting and surprising about job searching is how few companies nowadays even know what SAS does.

With the exception of local employers, most will ask something like: "You work at S-A-S (they spell it out)? What do they do?". I'm like, seriously? I usually ask them if they are familiar with R programming and let them know that SAS is a programming language similar to R/Python. The response is typically: "Wow that's interesting, I'll have to look that up".

Or, some will think it's "SaaS" and then will ask: "Ok but what is the company name?".

So, at least if you apply to a company that hasn't been around for decades, the name is no longer very helpful. Is anyone else experiencing that?

@kt+1kks91tqs are you checking Mark Cuban's pharmacy and costco and similar to price-shop your meds? Have you asked to see if cash pay without going through insurance might be less expensive? Sometimes it is.

Left nearly a decade ago when the writing was on the wall then with regard to open source and cloud ( but not for LLMs). Was a good job market. Out here in the real world, the benefits are good, maybe not as great. Pay is perhaps slightly better. Overall comp for me is perhaps comparable. Management seems rational and more empowered, reviews are quarterly, but many, many things are difficult and dysfunctional. Bureaucracy by its nature helps create both efficiencies and inefficiencies.

As another thread pointed out, a lot of the fantastic work/life benefits we had in the good old days were probably due to reducing the pains and inconveniences of on-site work. Private offices, beautiful buildings and landscaping, on-site child care, medical care, cafeterias with good and affordable lunches and a piano player, snacks, coffee, W/L office and seminars, gym, pool, massage, yoga, tai chi, sports, etc.. I think most of us thought it was all amazing. When doing WFH or even hybrid, you don't need or do not fully take advantage of all those benefits and perks.

"I keep seeing posts saying hiring is picking back up. Then I see people with 5 YOE, strong portfolios, and good schools applying to 300+ jobs with 2 callbacks. LinkedIn reposts of job listings that get 800 applicants in 48 hours. Hiring freezes at companies that were supposedly stable."

https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/1rewske/is_the_tech_job_market_is_recovering_narrative/

@ky What how could someone from SAS get hired anywhere else? Schmuck among schmuks no doubt…

@kt You mean the benefits are mediocre to 1% of the world population. The other 99% would find that assertion disturbing.

Two friends recently got hired, so it is possible -- for those experienced with AI.

But Amazon laid off 30,000 in the last six months, and Meta is planning another 20,000. As long as the FAANGs keep laying off, the job market will remain challenging.

@fr The benefits are indeed mediocre now, except for possibly the health insurance. I took the last buyout and am on Medicare now, and my medication costs are six times what they were when I was at SAS for the exact same medications.

@kp

That’s quite a defensive response about the experiences of others that you may or may not know.

I’ve known many capable people who, when their time at SAS came to an end, so did their careers.

@ka Thats a lot of generalizations about anonymous people you may or may not even know.

Some of us have spent time in the outside world at bigger tech companies. Did just fine there also.

I know plenty that have left and are thriving at places like Google, Microsoft, NVidia, etc

I can only speak about the knowns. I don't know what you anonymous people are capable or not capable of.

You only know what you are capable of and to a lesser extent what people you actually know are capable of. Speak to things you actually know. Doing otherwise is the arrogance.

The movie “Company Men” is free on YouTube. It’s what I experienced after a layoff.

Those advising to leave and “find another job” don’t realize their arrogance. While you may believe you’re hot sh-t at SAS, the rest of the world won’t feel that way. You’ll be just another schmuck amongst many qualified schmucks fighting for resources.

@g7 The people expressing the desire to leave were likely saying/thinking the same things a few years ago when jobs were plentiful (great resignation). And yet they didn’t leave then either. So I say BS to it being a matter of being hard to find a different job.

Revenue per employee is not meaningless. A buyer will use that metric to help determine a reasonable value for the company. Then they'll ship most of the work overseas to maximize profit.

"No one, including the founders, will truly know profit per employee until GAAP is implemented"



Pretty sure they know their profit, and how many they employ.

@jk you said:"People on this forum focus on JMP and the Art Department. But they only represent ~5% of the company. Most of the fat is in the other ~95%".

Of course most of the fat is in the other 95 percent. Are you also implying that the fat in the other 5 percent should be protected from cuts? If so, why? If not, then do you support cutting fat everywhere?

"It's been posted and reposted here that the revenue per employee at JMP is higher than it is at SAS."

JMP revenue per employee is absolutely meaningless. Profit per employee is the meaningful metric. No one, including the founders, will truly know profit per employee until GAAP is implemented and that has unnecessarily dragged on and on for six years.

Maybe GAAP is dragging because the profit is not fit for bragging????

@jd

Show us where JMP touched you. Seriously, did you apply for a job at JMP and get turned down? You sound like someone with an axe to grind. It's been posted and reposted here that the revenue per employee at JMP is higher than it is at SAS. What reason is there to layoff anyone? There's no "reduce expenses because lower revenue" calculus there. Aaand... the company's executives have expounded, at length, on the changes to separate JMP from SAS. Don't you believe them? I wouldn't blame you, because they lie without end, but what specific evidence do you have that in five (going on six!) years of "GAAP adoption" they're made no progress to separate JMP from SAS? Even I find that hard to believe.

1. Unnecessary lavish give aways at JMP conferences.

I'll buy that. But it's true at SAS conferences also.

1. Multiple areas where JMP has duplication of effort (with SAS) such their own sales and marketing, etc.

JMP is a subsidiary, with its own Sales and Marketing, HR, Legal, and other staff.

One can argue that SAS should reduce this duplication to cut costs. SAS leadership disagrees. JMP was recently made into a subsidiary, because whoever buys SAS may not want JMP. Separating it into a subsidiary makes it easy to spin off, so makes the purchase of SAS more attractive to a buyer.

This also makes the revenues and profits of JMP more visible. Not as visible as GAAP, but more visible than the messy numbers from the rest of SAS. If JMP were "protected" and unprofitable, SAS would not want to make its numbers more prominent.

Regarding the Art Department, certainly it is "protected". One can argue that in other companies, Art would not be so well funded. But Art is a personal charity of the CEO and his wife. In America, they're allowed to donate to any causes they like -- and if we don't like their choices, we're allowed to leave.

People on this forum focus on JMP and the Art Department. But they only represent ~5% of the company. Most of the fat is in the other ~95%.

The fat in JMP is evident:

1. Unnecessary lavish give aways at JMP conferences.
2. Multiple areas where JMP has duplication of effort(with SAS) such their own sales and marketing, etc.

Others who also have an inside look at JMP can also elaborate.

There have been layoffs in every area EXCEPT the Art Department and JMP. Hmmm. JMP may or may not be profitable under the current duct tape and baling wire home grown non GAAP compliant accounting system. IF JMP is profitable under the homegrown accounting system, it may or may not still be profitable under GAAP. It is fair to concluse that GAAP will be more robust at capturing expenses than the current home grown system.

The Art Department and JMP are protected areas. To claim otherwise is disingenous.