Big Tech Stops Doing Stupid Stuff
This year it might be smart to invest in companies that think a little smaller
3 min
The era of moonshots is (mostly) over. This year tech companies are taking a more earthly approach.
Stock charts both explain the change in boardroom sentiment and tell the story following an epic Covid-fuelled rise and fall. The tech-heavy Nasdaq fell 33% last year—its worst performance since 2008. Big tech, which spent the past several years spending on big dreams, is starting to think smaller. Last year more than 1,000 tech companies laid off employees, resulting in over 150,000 lost jobs, a tally by layoffs.fyi shows. It is an eye- popping number that could actually get worse: More than 23,000 tech workers have already been let go this year as of Jan. 13, the same tracker shows.
Many of these workers were newly hired under the mistaken assumption that booming pandemic demand would become the new normal. But a good percentage were legacy employees working on projects that, given today’s market environment, range from fiscally irresponsible to projects that fall well outside their parent company’s wheelhouse.
Meta Platforms and Amazon.com are the most high-profile examples, having cut a combined 29,000 workers so far. Meta is still reeling from an online advertising slump and the many billions of dollars that Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg is throwing at a new virtual world dubbed the metaverse. Amazon is coping with a retail slowdown in part by scaling back spending in unprofitable business areas such as its Alexa-controlled electronics products.
Meta Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth said in an internal memo late last year that his company had “solved too many problems by adding headcount,” according to a recent newsletter published by the Verge. He reportedly added that headcount comes with overhead, which “makes everything slower.”
Despite its much-touted virtual ambitions, Meta said in a blog post last month that it is still devoting 80% of its total investment dollars to improving its own legacy business. In the Verge’s recent interview, Mr. Bosworth acknowledged that Meta is “changing our investment strategy” to the extent that some projects have to demonstrate value sooner to justify their high burn.
The ax also seems to be falling at the original moonshot factory: The Wall Street Journal reported that Google-parent Alphabet is laying off more than 200 employees at its Verily Life Sciences unit, plus another 40 at its robotics software company, Intrinsic. Both are part of Alphabet’s Other Bets segment, which racked up $5.9 billion in operating losses over the past four quarters while generating barely $1 billion in revenue.
Those cuts are unlikely to be the last at the Google parent, which added more than 30,000 new employees in the first nine months of 2022, even as its own advertising business started slowing.
Smaller tech companies are feeling the burn too. Redfin CEO Glenn Kelman told the Journal recently that if he could jump back in time 18 months, he would advise companies looking for profits to just “stop doing stupid stuff.”
He speaks from experience: The real-estate brokerage laid off 13% of its staff and shut down its automated home-flipping business late last year after deeming the operation too risky and expensive to continue. That followed a second quarter in which its so-called iBuying business had swelled to account for over 40% of its overall revenue. Channeling an old playbook for the new year, Mr. Kelman said in his company’s third-quarter report that Redfin “will have more cash and sell more properties” by focusing on its online audience and on better brokerage services.
Competitor Zillow gave up on its own iBuying business a year earlier than Redfin for similar reasons. It has since refocused on finding better ways to help its customers buy and sell other people’s homes. It is now using artificial intelligence to do such things as helping apartment hunters view available listings on New York City buildings they pass by and helping sellers generate floor plans for online listings based on photos. Zillow is also bundling its technology into an updated product to bolster traditional agents’ businesses.
A sector that has long worked to disrupt is now focusing on enhancing what already exists. In ride-share, Uber Technologies has now added taxi bookings to its platform in many cities, essentially feeding business to a competitor (but not without taking a small cut, of course). In Britain, Uber users can also book trains, buses and rental cars through its app. With Uber Explore, users across several cities can even book restaurant reservations and experiences.
Reinventing the wheel is so last year. The best tech investments of 2023 might be companies content to spend their coin greasing it.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
Chris Dixon, a partner who led the charge, says he has a ‘very long-term horizon’
Americans now think they need at least $1.25 million for retirement, a 20% increase from a year ago, according to a survey by Northwestern Mutual
Competitive pressure and creativity have made Chinese-designed and -built electric cars formidable competitors
4 min
China rocked the auto world twice this year. First, its electric vehicles stunned Western rivals at the Shanghai auto show with their quality, features and price. Then came reports that in the first quarter of 2023 it dethroned Japan as the world’s largest auto exporter.
How is China in contention to lead the world’s most lucrative and prestigious consumer goods market, one long dominated by American, European, Japanese and South Korean nameplates? The answer is a unique combination of industrial policy, protectionism and homegrown competitive dynamism. Western policy makers and business leaders are better prepared for the first two than the third.
Start with industrial policy—the use of government resources to help favoured sectors. China has practiced industrial policy for decades. While it’s finding increased favour even in the U.S., the concept remains controversial. Governments have a poor record of identifying winning technologies and often end up subsidising inferior and wasteful capacity, including in China.
But in the case of EVs, Chinese industrial policy had a couple of things going for it. First, governments around the world saw climate change as an enduring threat that would require decade-long interventions to transition away from fossil fuels. China bet correctly that in transportation, the transition would favour electric vehicles.
In 2009, China started handing out generous subsidies to buyers of EVs. Public procurement of taxis and buses was targeted to electric vehicles, rechargers were subsidised, and provincial governments stumped up capital for lithium mining and refining for EV batteries. In 2020 NIO, at the time an aspiring challenger to Tesla, avoided bankruptcy thanks to a government-led bailout.
While industrial policy guaranteed a demand for EVs, protectionism ensured those EVs would be made in China, by Chinese companies. To qualify for subsidies, cars had to be domestically made, although foreign brands did qualify. They also had to have batteries made by Chinese companies, giving Chinese national champions like Contemporary Amperex Technology and BYD an advantage over then-market leaders from Japan and South Korea.
To sell in China, foreign automakers had to abide by conditions intended to upgrade the local industry’s skills. State-owned Guangzhou Automobile Group developed the manufacturing know-how necessary to become a player in EVs thanks to joint ventures with Toyota and Honda, said Gregor Sebastian, an analyst at Germany’s Mercator Institute for China Studies.
Despite all that government support, sales of EVs remained weak until 2019, when China let Tesla open a wholly owned factory in Shanghai. “It took this catalyst…to boost interest and increase the level of competitiveness of the local Chinese makers,” said Tu Le, managing director of Sino Auto Insights, a research service specialising in the Chinese auto industry.
Back in 2011 Pony Ma, the founder of Tencent, explained what set Chinese capitalism apart from its American counterpart. “In America, when you bring an idea to market you usually have several months before competition pops up, allowing you to capture significant market share,” he said, according to Fast Company, a technology magazine. “In China, you can have hundreds of competitors within the first hours of going live. Ideas are not important in China—execution is.”
Thanks to that competition and focus on execution, the EV industry went from a niche industrial-policy project to a sprawling ecosystem of predominantly private companies. Much of this happened below the Western radar while China was cut off from the world because of Covid-19 restrictions.
When Western auto executives flew in for April’s Shanghai auto show, “they saw a sea of green plates, a sea of Chinese brands,” said Le, referring to the green license plates assigned to clean-energy vehicles in China. “They hear the sounds of the door closing, sit inside and look at the quality of the materials, the fabric or the plastic on the console, that’s the other holy s— moment—they’ve caught up to us.”
Manufacturers of gasoline cars are product-oriented, whereas EV manufacturers, like tech companies, are user-oriented, Le said. Chinese EVs feature at least two, often three, display screens, one suitable for watching movies from the back seat, multiple lidars (laser-based sensors) for driver assistance, and even a microphone for karaoke (quickly copied by Tesla). Meanwhile, Chinese suppliers such as CATL have gone from laggard to leader.
Chinese dominance of EVs isn’t preordained. The low barriers to entry exploited by Chinese brands also open the door to future non-Chinese competitors. Nor does China’s success in EVs necessarily translate to other sectors where industrial policy matters less and creativity, privacy and deeply woven technological capability—such as software, cloud computing and semiconductors—matter more.
Still, the threat to Western auto market share posed by Chinese EVs is one for which Western policy makers have no obvious answer. “You can shut off your own market and to a certain extent that will shield production for your domestic needs,” said Sebastian. “The question really is, what are you going to do for the global south, countries that are still very happily trading with China?”
Western companies themselves are likely to respond by deepening their presence in China—not to sell cars, but for proximity to the most sophisticated customers and suppliers. Jörg Wuttke, the past president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, calls China a “fitness centre.” Even as conditions there become steadily more difficult, Western multinationals “have to be there. It keeps you fit.”
Chris Dixon, a partner who led the charge, says he has a ‘very long-term horizon’
Americans now think they need at least $1.25 million for retirement, a 20% increase from a year ago, according to a survey by Northwestern Mutual
