Readit News logoReadit News
mikeevans · 16 days ago
Describing it as a “party” feels misleading. It was a company-wide offsite for an essentially fully remote organization.

Was it necessary? Probably not. But I found the in-person time valuable, especially with teammates I’d never met face to face.

Source: I was there

darth_avocado · 16 days ago
And was the in person time more valuable than not having those people you met in your team moving forward?
guywithahat · 16 days ago
I will say, to his credit, he has tried to make it clear the cuts weren't about money but do to tech and organizational shifts. https://x.com/jack/status/2027129697092731343?s=20

He phrases it as due to redundant overhead for cashapp and square, plus a move to smaller, flatter teams as a result of AI. Not saying he's going to be right just that they're profitable and I believe this isn't a money thing.

upmind · 16 days ago
How did they manage to spend 68M on it? Genuinely asking or is the number not accurate as it is clumped together with other stuff?
mikeevans · 16 days ago
I don't know what event planning costs but running an event for ~10k people that includes flights, hotels, food, event space, etc. is expensive I guess.
thesurlydev · 16 days ago
Like any good company off-site. Strippers and steaks
dang · 16 days ago
Ok, we've taken the party out of the title above. Thanks for the first-hand information.
croes · 16 days ago
What does the wording matter?

The crucial point is, was it an unnecessary expense?

ta9000 · 16 days ago
Were you laid off?
darth_avocado · 16 days ago
I’m going to take a wild guess that the answer is no
happyopossum · 16 days ago
You can call it a 'party' if you want, but a company-wide in-person event is a) valuable, and b) expensive.

Calling an all-hands a party without any supporting evidence feels willfully negligent.

baq · 16 days ago
$68M/10000 employees = $6800/1 employee

A lot? Not a lot? Don’t know anymore.

mmcclure · 16 days ago
It's on the high side, but...honestly not absurd? "Party" implies one night rager, but the source says "in-person company event." That seems more like a multi-day company onsite to me, and the total bill per person there probably includes travel, accommodations, food on top of any overall event costs.

Bringing a remote employee to SF just to work out of an office for a few days can easily cost a few grand.

mpeg · 16 days ago
I've been to all hands where it probably cost that much just in travel: business class LHR to SFO, hotel for a few nights, dinners, drinks, entertainment, venue, guest speakers, and on and on.

It doesn't seem excessive, the networking in these things is often really worth it

layer8 · 16 days ago
At the cited $340000 salary, it amounts to around the same as one extra week of vacation for everyone.
dangoor · 16 days ago
Seems plausible. Travel (some international), hotels, taxis, venues, food, and entertainment. It adds up. Probably not a single day event.
Aurornis · 16 days ago
For an event where many employees have to be flown in and stay at hotels in an expensive city? That's normal.

Hosting in-person events for 10,000 people is expensive even without having to transport and house anyone.

nerdsniper · 16 days ago
That actually sounds pretty reasonable.
darth_avocado · 16 days ago
Maybe it’s just me, but I think being able to retain more employees is more valuable than flying the entire company for an in person event.
frde_me · 16 days ago
One could argue a smaller number of employees that are more motivated and feel connected to their coworkersis better than a more employees that are all isolated and "meh".
Hamuko · 16 days ago
Can it be that valuable when 40% of the participants aren't?
layer8 · 16 days ago
Maybe it served to find out which of them weren’t valuable. ;)
Aurornis · 16 days ago
The $68M number comes from a statement that says their General and Administrative expenses were up year over year and the growth was primarily driven by an in-person company event.

The Tweet extrapolates to assume that the entire difference was due to the event and calls it a "party"

Even if we assume 100% of the increase was due to the event, that's about $6800 per employee, or about a week or two of pay for developers.

This includes flights, lodging, and food for remote employees. That adds up fast.

This is just Twitter ragebait.

Hamuko · 16 days ago
>"General and administrative expenses were up 14% year over year on a GAAP basis, driven in part by an in-person company event. Excluding this expense, general and administrative expenses remained roughly flat year over year in the third quarter."
Aurornis · 16 days ago
> roughly

I did the other math assuming it was 100% for the in-person event anyway.

npilk · 16 days ago
Just because G&A was up $68m doesn't mean it was all spent on that one party...

Edit: never mind, the report clarifies that without the party expense G&A would have been flat YoY.

Deleted Comment

throw03172019 · 16 days ago
There is a big difference between a single party and a company wide offsite. Those can get quite expensive (airfare, hotels, food, etc)

Side note: I have no idea what Block does and why they need 10,000 employees anyway.

aitforalll · 16 days ago
laying of 50% of your workforce is the obvious solution. next year the party will only be $34 million. repeat that 4 more times and you get down to just over $4 million.
johnnyanmac · 16 days ago
Kinda how it worked for my last full time job. Full on all-hands which flew all the remote workers in, and my lead made 2 guesses: "Either we've been acquired or the IP has been cancelled". I guess the sad part is that an acquisition wouldn't guarantee I wouldn't be laid off anyway.
andersmurphy · 16 days ago
I'm curious how much they lost in the bitcoin crash.
rwmj · 16 days ago
Lost $234 million on that according to https://archive.ph/09kZr (link goes to FT.com)
Scoundreller · 16 days ago
That’s the mark-to-market change, no?

Since they bought bitcoin while their stock was worth ~2-4x what it is today, I’d say the “arbitrage paper certificates for digital 1s and 0s” play worked out pretty well overall.

Bought btc for $10k and $51k (about 60/40 respectively) and it’s trading for $65k 5 years later. Dunno what other buying/selling they may have done.

From Wikipedia:

> In October 2020, Square put approximately 1% of their total assets ($50 million) in Bitcoin (4,709 bitcoins), citing Bitcoin's "potential to be a more ubiquitous currency in the future" as their main reasoning.[52] The company purchased approximately 3,318 bitcoins in February 2021 for a cost of around $170 million, bringing Square's total holdings to around 8,027 bitcoins (equivalent to around US$500 million in 2021, around US$481 million as of July 2024).[53]