> They couldn't do a massive layoff in the past because it would get them bad rep
Forget about "bad rep", it was a bad economic decision: why let go a slight underperformer (a now-known 0.8x engineer) that you hired in 2015 at pay X, if in exchange you hire a "expected normal 1.0x engineer", but at a price of 1.8*X in 2021 due to crazy escalation of SWE salaries in that period.
(Assuming you have a perfected/more picky hiring process that knows the median hire will be a 1.0x engineer)
Now in 2023, the situation is different: you can hire a "expected normal 1.0x engineer" but at pay 0.8*X (adjusted for inflation - ratios all made up)
Forget about "bad rep", it was a bad economic decision: why let go a slight underperformer (a now-known 0.8x engineer) that you hired in 2015 at pay X, if in exchange you hire a "expected normal 1.0x engineer", but at a price of 1.8*X in 2021 due to crazy escalation of SWE salaries in that period.
(Assuming you have a perfected/more picky hiring process that knows the median hire will be a 1.0x engineer)
Now in 2023, the situation is different: you can hire a "expected normal 1.0x engineer" but at pay 0.8*X (adjusted for inflation - ratios all made up)