> At the same time, the market in which we operate has undergone profound change over the last 6 months.

I guess this is the "reason" but obviously they aren't elaborating. It's odd they picked "6 months" - what changed in "the market"?

Despite what they're saying, I'd guess it's the totally-not-a-recession that's happening and they foresee people cutting luxury expenses (ie patreon subs) and they're trying to get ahead of it.

Locally at least, luxury services are booming. Patreon probably isn't a "luxury" in the traditional sense, but it's certainly a luxury for the lower/middle class. Agreed on the "totally-not-a-recession" reasoning - I'm just always curious which businesses are insulated from this type of economic headwind.

What market is Patreon even in – the "facilitating crowdfunding for anyone looking to create things" market? There's not much competition there and I can't imagine it's profoundly changed in the last 6 years, let alone months.

Six years ago was a long time — summer 2020.

Substack is a huge competitor that has grown dramatically in that time. Beehiiv is another competitor that just launched a bunch of new features. Porn and sexy content is now on Onlyfans, which was just becoming mainstream during the pandemic.

More recently, some podcasts have started focusing on YouTube and may be less interested in the paid-elsewhere subscription model.

> stating no reasons whatsoever

It does under reason for reduction, quoting: At the same time, the market in which we operate has undergone profound change over the last 6 months.

> giving reasons why there's no need... Patreon’s core business is healthy and strong

Actually that's the reason. It says Patreon's core business is strong i.e. everything else isn't? You don't state the obvious unless there's a gotcha.

You usually do lay offs because finances aren't doing so good, so you do it to stop the bleeding. Especially if you're a publicly traded company this tells investors you're doing SOMETHING, but for private companies, it's really up to you when and how you do it. I imagine companies with a reasonable war chest that are private try to hold on as long as possible.

This isn't true. You usually do layoffs when you anticipate financial won't be good in coming quarters. If you wait until they aren't good then you're too late and the damage is done. This is why layoffs happen so frequently during "good" quarters.

It's wild how there isn't officially a recession but many companies are acting like there is

Recession isn't the driving factor. Many companies will actually increase staffing during recession to "grow" out of it. My former company used to go on merger and acquisition sprees during deep recessions so they would be well positioned when it was over.

People really need to look at this stuff more strategically. The knee jerk reactions are not productive.

Generally you’re right damn dude 20% of their staff? They needed to stop the bleeding a long time ago clearly.

Depends on jurisdiction, in many European countries a company with more than 300 employees can't do these kind of layoffs without giving a concrete reason, and if they do they need to close down a whole office location (e.g. we're closing our LA office, only SF office remains).

I think that they must teach in business school or something that you never, ever, EVER acknowledge or admit that things have ever or will ever go bad in your business.

I’ve worked for startups that will show massive customer churn, tell us that this is “actually a good thing”, do massive layoffs the next week because of the churn, and even while talking about the layoffs say that they’re stronger than ever.

I’ve been doing this long enough that I am mostly used to the gaslighting, and have just accepted that business people have neither the ability nor desire to ever be honest about anything.

Business schools teach advertising, not business management. In modern business it is a crime to tell the truth about the dire situation a business is in, unless a CEO is starting anew to fix a situation left by another, and even then it rarely happens.

Same with dentists

> have just accepted that business people have neither the ability nor desire to ever be honest about anything

Another plausible explanation is survivorship bias: if businesses that are publicly honest when things are going poorly are less likely to survive then eventually surviving businesses are more likely to be dishonest irrespective of the "abilities" or "desires" of individual business people.

> say that they’re stronger than ever.

Well let’s play out the alternative then: a CEO comes out and says everything is not ok and you’re laying off people because you are in dire straits. I admire the honesty, but what do you think happens next?

A society that doesn't value honesty deserves to be deceived.

This assumes that it’s always a lie… The point is you’re supposed to say that it’s a hard time, but you’ve made the necessary changes and you’ll come out stronger (hopefully), because otherwise why would you have made them?

I just don’t think causing a panic is the same thing as honesty. You don’t have to freak everybody out about the health of the company or completely lie about the state of things.

I just don’t feel like the faux optimism actually works for anyone who has worked in the corporate world long enough.

I, along with a lot of people I know, have developed a certain amount of cynicism around the entire corporate world, and so when I hear this kind of corporate doublespeak and refusal to talk to me like an adult, it generally feels anywhere between “infantilizing” to “gaslightey”. This kind of language worked for well enough for me when I first started my career but now I never assume any significant level of honesty from anyone high-up enough at a company.

I am not sure what the optimal way to run a business is, and I am not even 100% sure I care. “Making a business successful” doesn’t imply that I have to like how they do it. Maybe the only way to run a business is to always pretend every fucking thing is sunshine and rainbows, but I still think it’s very annoying. Instead of them being real with me, I have to decrypt a secret subtext and determine if I have to start updating my resume.

If it’s faux optimism then by definition it’s deceptive so we’d be in agreement there. But that’s not what I’m talking about.

“Faux” might not be the right word.

“Forced” might be better. Sort of like the aggressive happiness you see in TV shows for very small children.

Panic may only exist in a company that is already lying about its true situation. If managers were telling the truth about what is going on in a company, everyone would be Ok with new updates about its financial position.

Speak for yourself lol if my company leadership just delivers bad news and then fails to give me hope for my job tomorrow I’m dusting off my resume and starting to apply elsewhere. If they don’t believe things can be corrected why on earth would I?

I assume it is legal reasons.

Patreon is founder-led.

My comment about legal reasons was legal reasons surrounding employee law suits from being laid off. At will employment in most US states allow you to state no reason, that's safer than offering any reason at all. A specific reason for a layoff can be litigated.