LinkedIn made nearly $6B in ad revenue last year. Not enough to prevent a second round of layoffs, another 700 roles cut, this year.
In 2022, for its 310M active monthly users, each brought the company about $5/wk from views and clicks alone.
But the tech giant make more off of their premium recruiting and job tools.
If you paid for Premium, or your business relied on them for talent, you know none of their services are cheap.
And possibly, marginally valuable.
For the average professional, scrolling social content is a sufficient-enough time suck. But as a talent service, LinkedIn lacks.
Not because they’re incapable, but because their strategy has been to remain gatekeepers and monetize anything actually helpful.
That’s fine, as long as your base value isn’t impacted, or maybe you’re testing your model.
But LinkedIn is a mature org that has rarely been considered innovative.
LinkedIn not only has the resource advantage, it owns the professional networking space, and has been doing so for 20 years.
Where talent companies big and small like Indeed, Monster, CareerBuilder, etc. have plenty of data about JDs, talent, or hiring, they don’t have the what LinkedIn has, not to mention it’s community.
They aren’t backed by Microsoft either.
Plenty of revenue, plenty of active users, and an immutable value proposition….there aren’t many people denying the future of networking or jobs.
So why does it need to cut again?
They choose to optimize, not to invest. Not to embolden the network with remarkable, AI-backed tools, or an unparalleled understanding of talent.
They cut engineering, product, finance, and talent folks, citing “shifts in customer behavior and slower revenue growth.”
Yet the result is a promise for more buggy apps, dark patterns, overpriced premium features, and an average career tool attached to a profile.
But here we are…
#layoffs #tech #workforce #product
SDE 3, Node js
3wslack copy