Thread regarding Broadcom Corp. layoffs

Working at Broadcom

(My previous post somehow didn’t show up, maybe it’s taking time, so trying again with incomplete draft and memory 😀)

Former (laid off) employee here and these are my personal opinions. Your experience obviously may differ so apologies if it hurts your feelings.

Hock runs Broadcom as a private equity company in the disguise of a public company. Profit first, period. He has been a great operator, investor & steward of the shareholder and bondholder capital. Anyone who can read financial statements knows this & consequently the stock performance over many years since he took over is undeniable evidence of it.

However he is not stupid, he will not get rid of a person or group or product that is indispensable, profitable & aligns with the long term vision.

Obviously he cannot decide who to get rid of all through the company, that’s the job of the management chain. If it is up to a manager, they will layoff every employee before themselves. Who would not? Basic human nature. Food on the table of your family or your report?

That said, “generally speaking”, people who get laid off (in a group that’s kept for sustenance or investment) are people whose loss the group can bear.

As an employee & a manager, I hate stacked rankings (it’s not fair as perfectly good people get canned just because somebody is slightly better, manager has too much power & it’s demoralizing to the team) but that’s one thing which is almost always used in deciding the layoff candidates. FWIW, think of these rankings as order of your value to the company (lowest rank most dispensable, highest rank, least dispensable). Most of the times it works as intended, on very rare occasions, they may end up rehiring a person whose value they miscalculated. So the game is to remain as high ranked employee as possible for as long as possible. The group, business unit or overall company are things whose performance you cannot control. Yours, you can.

People who really are assets to the company, belong to a indispensable group, product or solution AND continue to develop sustainable competitive advantage for themselves, their group, product or solution rarely leave because 1. rarely any other company can match what they make at Broadcom, 2. Believe it or not, they also love working for Broadcom (not due to financial reasons alone) and 3. They have seen Hock’s style and growth better than newcomers and many actually like it.

Broadcom is very competitive environment, only the fittest survive (ignoring occasional ranking or product execution gaffes) but those who do for 5-10 years, usually end up with a very sizable nest egg. If you can & want to, you will have plenty of time to decide the next phase of your life, without worrying about the money part.

My two cents. employee here.

Hock runs Broadcom as a private equity company in the disguise of a public company. Profit first period.

However he is not stupid, he will not get rid of a person or group or product that is indispensable, profitable & aligns with the long term vision.

Obviously he cannot decide who to get rid of all through the company, that’s the job of the management chain. If it is up to a manager, they will layoff every employee before themselves. Who would not? Basic human nature. Food on the table of your family or your report?

That said, “generally speaking”, people who get laid off (in a group that’s kept for sustenance or investment) are people whose loss the group can bear.

As an employee & a manager, I hate stacked rankings (it’s not fair as perfectly good people get canned just because somebody is slightly better, manager has too much power & it’s demoralizing to the team) but that’s one thing which is almost always used in deciding the layoff candidates. FWIW, think of these rankings as order of your value to the company (lowest rank most dispensable, highest rank, least dispensable). Most of the times it works as intended, on very rare occasions, they may end up rehiring a person whose value they miscalculated. So the game is to remain as high ranked employee as possible for as long as possible. The group, business unit or overall company are things whose performance you cannot control. Yours, you can.

People who really are assets to the company, belong to a indispensable group, product or solution AND continue to develop sustainable competitive advantage for themselves, their group, product or solution rarely leave because 1. rarely any other company can match what they make at Broadcom, 2. Believe it or not, they also love working for Broadcom (not due to financial reasons alone) and 3. They have seen Hock’s style and growth better than newcomers and many actually like it.

Broadcom is very competitive environment, only the fittest survive (ignoring occasional ranking or product execution gaffes) but those who do for 5-10 years, usually end up with a very sizable nest egg. If you can & want to, you will have plenty of time to decide the next phase of your life, without worrying about the money part.

My two cents.

by
| 2941 views | | 11 replies (last November 14, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1uKEZnvM

11 replies (most recent on top)

Salty guys are downvoting realistic comments.
Your RSUs are gone, while ours keep vesting. Keep crying, salty guys.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @Kciw+1uKEZnvM

OP again. Nice article on Broadcom in Fortune. Capturing some of what I alluded to 😀

So how did this quiet giant sneak into the highest reaches of tech royalty? Mostly by a combination of tech savvy and financial acumen. The company is a grandchild of Hewlett-Packard, which in 1999 spun off a company called Agilent Technologies, which in turn spun off a company called Avago to a pair of private equity firms in 2005. Avago began buying up semiconductor firms, in 2015 buying a big one called Broadcom and taking its name.

Broadcom’s PE ancestry has guided it ever since that spinoff. “Broadcom operates pretty much like a PE firm, where it invests in assets that can deliver quick returns,” says Naveen Chhabra, an analyst at the Forrester research and consulting firm. It’s “astute in terms of investing in firms where it can maintain or grow the revenue” and at the same time “can turn the company into a high margin business.”

A critical element of Broadcom’s success and its future is CEO Hock Tan, who was recruited to run the company when Avago was spun off in 2005. Now age 72, he was born in Malaysia and earned engineering degrees from MIT plus an MBA from the Harvard Business School. He has spent most of his career in tech companies, though he also held finance jobs at PepsiCo and General Motors—thus the company’s joint expertise in technology and finance.

Source:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstocks/an-803-billion-company-most-people-have-never-heard-of-just-knocked-tesla-out-of-the-magnificent-7/ar-AA1rJGQ1?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=31b3c69a9a314133b917cc55f968447d&ei=11

Originally at Fortune (Paywalled)

https://fortune.com/2024/10/05/broadcom-tesla-magnificent-7-companies-market-cap/

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6ujc+1uKEZnvM

You are a loser and we are the winners, nobody cares about a loser's opinion, this is Broadcom culture!
We'll have our next vesting soon!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ijh+1uKEZnvM
They have fired incredibly talented people.

Yep! There is no nuance, lots of flack hitting arbitrary targets. I’ve already seen several “indispensables” let go. Shocking and sad.

That talent will never be rehired or for that matter any new hire, no matter how talented. I will not suggest to any candidate to work at Broadcom unless they are in the most desperate of circumstances and I usually get pulled in to do these things.

For those at VMware that got huge retention RSU grants , you won the lottery so it is likely worth it to stay to sack away money at a much faster rate, in particular for those staring at retirement it’s a godsend. So I will su-k whatever Hock asks me to, so that I can retire 5 years earlier.

If it ain’t worth the $ to you, just leave.

The one thing constant in life is change.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mvt+1uKEZnvM

This is your OPINION, OP.

...and I must say, it is not a great one. I know for a fact that there are people who didn't get fired who literally have done nothing for years. One person has been doing nothing but interviewing at other companies.

So it is not 'survival of the fittest' but more of a personality contest - who has puckered up the most.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jax+1uKEZnvM

"...only the fittest survive..." is complete bullsh-t. They have fired incredibly talented people. If anything, there are a bunch of butt kissing, knuckle draggers who are still there (especially in 'leadership'). Looking at you Krish Prashad and Paul Turner.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ovr+1uKEZnvM

"Broadcom is very competitive environment, only the fittest survive "

lmfao

the fittest that can go up the hole...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xgn+1uKEZnvM

Nobody cares your opinion on Broadcom.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wke+1uKEZnvM

For those suffering under the current regime - get out. I took a long-term contracting gig and am now bringing home >$6k/week after taxes and retirement withholdings. There's plenty of ways to make a healthy living. Do you really want to zombie-walk thru another year or more of working in such a soulless black hole of a company?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1msi+1uKEZnvM

OP here. Two things. 1. The site somehow prepended my second post to my first post, ignore everything after “my two cents, employee here line”. 2. Ignore words “However he is not stupid”. My bad. No excuse. I should have phrased it as “However he is not omniscient”.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xih+1uKEZnvM

Post a reply

: