Economy Nokia slashes 14,000 Jobs as a major cost cutting XMAS present

[Snubnoze707]

Thought they already died off when analog cell phones died off...

 

[ShadowRun]

Bidenomics

 

[cincymma79]

2 wrongs don't make a right. Our country will never change until we stop pretending starting a business is a positive thing that helps people.

Not everyone can be an oppressor. The idea that just telling the oppressed they have the chance to be the oppressor is not going to work for most people.

Jesus Christ you’re lost

 

[moosaev]

In less than half a dozen posts Sherdog traversed:

European-headquarted private company's revenue craters due largely to 5G infrastructure demand waning as the telecom market reaches cost/effective saturation for 5G coverage --> Company lays off ~5% of its workforce to compensate --> US Government (technically not, but the Federal Reserve) is deliberately sabotaging its own economy to create a brutal recession for _________ [reason unspecified]

Never change, Sherdog.

The reason for tanking the economy is because the Fed is terrified it’s been running so hot that the wheels will come off. Too much money in the system, they don’t wanna end up like Turkey. What they don’t get is things are already organically cooling off.

 

[Madmick]

The reason for tanking the economy is because the Fed is terrified it’s been running so hot that the wheels will come off. Too much money in the system, they don’t wanna end up like Turkey. What they don’t get is things are already organically cooling off.

They control things like that through interest rates. The US Fed has zero say in Nokia's choices concerning its workforce.

 

[moosaev]

They control things like that through interest rates. The US Fed has zero say in Nokia's choices concerning its workforce.

Who said they have a direct role in work force choices of Nokia? The Feds explicit interest is in driving unemployment up, they’ve been unambiguous about that. Interest rates are merely the lever by which they do that.

 

[Madmick]

Who said they have a direct role in work force choices of Nokia? The Feds explicit interest is in driving unemployment up, they’ve been unambiguous about that. Interest rates are merely the lever by which they do that.

Explain to everyone how the interest rates are responsible for sales-- chiefly orders of 5G equipment-- dropping 40% in the US in the most recent quarter? Do you not think this is more sensibly explained by a slowdown across the industry where other major telecom corporations that don't even do the bulk of their business in the USA, like BT Group and Vodafone, are making similar cuts?

You have 2+2 in front of you, and you're pulling out a protractor to make sense of the numbers.

 

[moosaev]

Explain to everyone how the interest rates are responsible for salles-- chiefly orders of 5G equipment-- dropping 40% in the US in the most recent quarter? Do you not think this is more sensibly explained by a slowdown across the industry where other major telecom corporations that don't even do the bulk of their business in the USA, like BT Group and Vodafone, are making similar cuts?

You have 2+2 in front of you, and you're pulling out a protractor to make sense of the numbers.

1. If Nokia were in a near zero (or low) interest rate environment the ability to borrow money for free would’ve essentially meant that they could’ve ridden out even a steep slump in sales via capitalization with no need for layoffs, this is why Fed policy has a direct line to company decisions on layoffs

2. the fact that Nokia’s competitors are also doing layoffs isn’t necessarily proof that layoffs were inevitable, but it is a signal that they likely won’t get penalized by the market and therefore they are incentivized to do layoffs while their competitors are also doing layoffs, so the internal reasons behind layoffs aren’t always clear and companies obfuscate all the time.

3. your framing assumes that sales, interest rates, the Fed wanting to drive up unemployment, etc. are all independent and isolated variables, the reality is that all these things are interconnected, so even if Nokia did these layoffs due to poor sales, it does not mean that Fed policy didn’t help cause the layoffs as well, both can be true at the same time.

Bottom line, the Fed’s explicit policy is to create a macro environment that encourages layoffs, when layoffs predictably happen you can’t say “has nothing to do with the Fed, they just had bad sales”. Makes no sense.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Looks like the Fed is gonna finally get what they want, a brutal recession in 2024.

In addition to what Mick is telling you, note that the monthly job-growth numbers we see are net gains. The gross number is like 6 million new jobs, and 5-point-something million lost. So one company cutting (or adding) 14K doesn't tell you anything at all about trends in the overall economy.

And obviously the Fed doesn't want a recession.

 

[moosaev]

In addition to what Mick is telling you, note that the monthly job-growth numbers we see are net gains. The gross number is like 6 million new jobs, and 5-point-something million lost. So one company cutting (or adding) 14K doesn't tell you anything at all about trends in the overall economy.

And obviously the Fed doesn't want a recession.

The fed doesn’t want a recession persay, they want to cool down what they perceive is a dangerously overheated economy. They’re willing to live with a recession as a consequence of managing that process. But if a recession is almost a guaranteed outcome of those methods it becomes a distinction without a difference. And of course the Nokia job cuts aren’t connected in a straight line to Fed policy, but it is related to the micro climate the fed is helping to create. The Fed is unambiguously trying to raise the unemployment rate, they’ve been blunt about that.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The fed doesn’t want a recession persay, they want to cool down what they perceive is a dangerously overheated economy. They’re willing to live with a recession as a consequence of managing that process. But if a recession is almost a guaranteed outcome of those methods it becomes a distinction without a difference. And of course the Nokia job cuts aren’t connected in a straight line to Fed policy, but it is related to the micro climate the fed is helping to create. The Fed is unambiguously trying to raise the unemployment rate, they’ve been blunt about that.

They don't consider the economy dangerously overheated now. They're watching closely, but it's tentatively looking like we're getting a soft landing (and actually extremely strong growth this quarter).

 

[forum poster]

rip Snake

 

[moosaev]

They don't consider the economy dangerously overheated now. They're watching closely, but it's tentatively looking like we're getting a soft landing (and actually extremely strong growth this quarter).

The speed & degree of the rate hikes over the last year have been unprecedented, I’d say that’s because they considered the economy dangerously overheated. The “soft landing” is possibility at least partially because they reacted very aggressively.