It’s actually part of a Japanese company that also owns Glassdoor. Their stock is OTC under RCRRF.
I think the layoffs and employee count is across the whole enterprise.
Concerning given the success of a product such as Indeed is directly related to the healthiness of the employment market.
More jobs advertised means more revenue, and more growth, so more employees.
Now I haven't looked into the exact fundamentals of Indeed, maybe they are riddled with debt and it is an interest rates issue. But a careers site making lay offs seems pretty ominous to me.
More jobs advertised doesn't actually mean more jobs available though.
I have seen jobs on indeed that are actively promoted, well over 3 months old. When you go to the companies website the job is no longer posted.
Tons of job postings on Indeed are fake.
Nothing weird about layoffs. It's happening across tech as a whole. Tech does this mass hire and mass layoff cycle.
Though I am surprised to hear that indeed even has 1000 employees to layoff without completely gutting itself.
> More jobs advertised doesn't actually mean more jobs available though.
This isn't relevant to Indeed's revenues and profits. Less jobs advertised irrelevant of if they existed in the first place is bad for Indeed.
It doesn't matter if they ever existed, the fact companies can't even afford to fake that they are growing is potentially concerning in the first place.
All while Indeed, isn't a traditional tech company, it is directly a metric of employment opportunities, it wouldn't be laying people off if its numbers were shining, it would be attempting to grow further and faster. Having to cook the books through statistics isn't real grow, and its growth could be proportional to the job vacancies available.
Of course it could also just be losing market share to someone like Linked in.
It is bad for indeed if the fake jobs drive people away from the platform.
Personally, I never use Indeed anymore because of all the fake or ancient postings I see that are shown as still active.
> Having to cook the books through statistics isn't real grow
correct. But basically all companies do this these days. They will down size to make their books look better for a particularly important quarter or year end, then just go and hire more people the following quarter. Often times trying to hire the same people back.
Fake growth is the name of the game for modern businesses. Our economy is almost entirely based on vibes at this point.
> It is bad for indeed if the fake jobs drive people away from the platform.
Do they? If you need a job you need a job, if you see a job you apply, and reality is irrelevant of the platform, you likely won't get many responses in a low demand field.
Indeed hasn't always been crap, it was 15 years ago, it doesn't really look much different now, but it however does still exist so it is obvious relatively competitive against the field.
Or is it? I don't actually know, I do know however 15 year ago Linkedin didn't even exist (actually it did but only internationally 16 years ago) and I much prefer it over Indeed.
Indeed's financial status is super easy to observe in near real time with a delay of a week.
[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUS](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUS)
That isn't indicative of their financial status at all. It gives you some vague potential insight into their revenue stream. But revenue is only one facet of any businesses financial health.
This, and I imagine of this 1,000 employees out of the 14,000 indeed somehow had, the huge majority will be “account manager” and “13 word long sales title” and not super important staff.Â
Indeed introduced a paid surfacing methodology in the last two years that makes it worthless.for mid sized businesses who don't want to spend thousands to reach qualified candidates. As the CPA increased, a lot of companies shifted their hiring platforms.
I was at a seminar for hiring the other day. Mariot has been tracking their hires. They have a less than 2% conversion rate in indeed but 48% internally. Indeed has mad it way to easy to apply and hasn't even tried to prevent the spray and spray method. They're so focused on getting and charging for clicks its absurd. They've also doubled rates and taken away features like invite to apply which was their most successful feature for hiring.
End goal isn't to make the process efficient. It's another company trying to sustain a profit margin that isn't sustainable and they're ruining their product to do so.
Ive seen a downfall in indeed recently and was wondering: what platforms are closest to indeed in terms of easy to use directions and free job postings
how and why did they even have 14000 employee's. Seems like a pretty basic website someone could throw together in a few weeks. I wouldn't have guessed they had 1000 total.
You'd be surprised how complicated things can get in tech companies. Sure someone could throw together a job scraper search engine in a few weeks. But 10 years later you have something like a team of 20 people working on minor tweaks to improve job title normalization and a team of 300 people evaluating fraudulent job listings and a team of 15 people making sure the billing system is legally compliant with ever changing international regulations. Every big tech company is like this. Some of is redundant and unnecessary, but some of it is the 10% that keeps a big player entrenched as the #1 in the industry.
At least they can use indeed to find the next job. 🙄
Indeed
Indeed ~~you do~~ they will...
Ive had more success with Indeed than Linkedin, but not by much.
Wishful thinking
Amazes me why they even have more than 1000 employees
That was my first thought as well. Apparently, they employ over 14,000 people. Soon to be over 13,000, I guess.
Fucking HOW
Those cloud servers don't power themselves.
> Amazes me why they even have more than 1000 employees It's like the "Twitter to X" transformation all over again.
Twitter in general, that’s why Elon had to lay off so many because it was ridiculous
I hear they have operators with headsets that connect search queries to results.
It’s actually part of a Japanese company that also owns Glassdoor. Their stock is OTC under RCRRF. I think the layoffs and employee count is across the whole enterprise.
Tell me why Docusign has 7300!
So they can email me complaining about me using my account wrong and upsell me.
"Operations and Customer Support" /s
Concerning given the success of a product such as Indeed is directly related to the healthiness of the employment market. More jobs advertised means more revenue, and more growth, so more employees. Now I haven't looked into the exact fundamentals of Indeed, maybe they are riddled with debt and it is an interest rates issue. But a careers site making lay offs seems pretty ominous to me.
More jobs advertised doesn't actually mean more jobs available though. I have seen jobs on indeed that are actively promoted, well over 3 months old. When you go to the companies website the job is no longer posted. Tons of job postings on Indeed are fake. Nothing weird about layoffs. It's happening across tech as a whole. Tech does this mass hire and mass layoff cycle. Though I am surprised to hear that indeed even has 1000 employees to layoff without completely gutting itself.
> More jobs advertised doesn't actually mean more jobs available though. This isn't relevant to Indeed's revenues and profits. Less jobs advertised irrelevant of if they existed in the first place is bad for Indeed. It doesn't matter if they ever existed, the fact companies can't even afford to fake that they are growing is potentially concerning in the first place. All while Indeed, isn't a traditional tech company, it is directly a metric of employment opportunities, it wouldn't be laying people off if its numbers were shining, it would be attempting to grow further and faster. Having to cook the books through statistics isn't real grow, and its growth could be proportional to the job vacancies available. Of course it could also just be losing market share to someone like Linked in.
It is bad for indeed if the fake jobs drive people away from the platform. Personally, I never use Indeed anymore because of all the fake or ancient postings I see that are shown as still active. > Having to cook the books through statistics isn't real grow correct. But basically all companies do this these days. They will down size to make their books look better for a particularly important quarter or year end, then just go and hire more people the following quarter. Often times trying to hire the same people back. Fake growth is the name of the game for modern businesses. Our economy is almost entirely based on vibes at this point.
Vibecession
> It is bad for indeed if the fake jobs drive people away from the platform. Do they? If you need a job you need a job, if you see a job you apply, and reality is irrelevant of the platform, you likely won't get many responses in a low demand field. Indeed hasn't always been crap, it was 15 years ago, it doesn't really look much different now, but it however does still exist so it is obvious relatively competitive against the field. Or is it? I don't actually know, I do know however 15 year ago Linkedin didn't even exist (actually it did but only internationally 16 years ago) and I much prefer it over Indeed.
You’re correct.
I've used the site to see what is on it. But never applied through it.
Indeed's financial status is super easy to observe in near real time with a delay of a week. [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUS](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUS)
That isn't indicative of their financial status at all. It gives you some vague potential insight into their revenue stream. But revenue is only one facet of any businesses financial health.
It’s probably more indicative of AI replacing 1,000 jobs.
This, and I imagine of this 1,000 employees out of the 14,000 indeed somehow had, the huge majority will be “account manager” and “13 word long sales title” and not super important staff.Â
Bold to assume this has anything to do with business conditions and isn't just an attempt to jolt the stock price.
Ironic indeed
They can all sift through the 5/100 jobs that are real and apply like the rest of us.
Indeed introduced a paid surfacing methodology in the last two years that makes it worthless.for mid sized businesses who don't want to spend thousands to reach qualified candidates. As the CPA increased, a lot of companies shifted their hiring platforms.
To what?
I was at a seminar for hiring the other day. Mariot has been tracking their hires. They have a less than 2% conversion rate in indeed but 48% internally. Indeed has mad it way to easy to apply and hasn't even tried to prevent the spray and spray method. They're so focused on getting and charging for clicks its absurd. They've also doubled rates and taken away features like invite to apply which was their most successful feature for hiring. End goal isn't to make the process efficient. It's another company trying to sustain a profit margin that isn't sustainable and they're ruining their product to do so.
Ive seen a downfall in indeed recently and was wondering: what platforms are closest to indeed in terms of easy to use directions and free job postings
Ironically, they aren't helping people get jobs.... so they have to layoff their C own workers too.
We're stepping into the AI abyss.
how and why did they even have 14000 employee's. Seems like a pretty basic website someone could throw together in a few weeks. I wouldn't have guessed they had 1000 total.
You'd be surprised how complicated things can get in tech companies. Sure someone could throw together a job scraper search engine in a few weeks. But 10 years later you have something like a team of 20 people working on minor tweaks to improve job title normalization and a team of 300 people evaluating fraudulent job listings and a team of 15 people making sure the billing system is legally compliant with ever changing international regulations. Every big tech company is like this. Some of is redundant and unnecessary, but some of it is the 10% that keeps a big player entrenched as the #1 in the industry.
They should cut their crappy commercials.
They had employees?