Often it doesn't make sense. They need to cut, so they cut. They need to spend, so they spend. They need to hire, so they hire. Is this usually consistent? No. They acquire companies and later shut them down. They hire tons of people then fire them, then later have to hire back people and start up projects that duplicate what they bought but later killed and then realize that the competition is in that market so they start it up again, but in a worse way. They allocate time and money into major moonshot projects and internal efforts and later kill off those projects they invested tons of time and money into. Startups are sociopathic in many ways.
As I learned long ago, don't expect venture-backed and post-IPO startups to act "logically". It's all a big hustle and a scramble for market share and whatever other metrics. There's a lot of collateral damage along the way, employees and customers be damned.
Startups aren't a "meritocracy" and management teams don't operate by best ideas win. Markets are brutal, management teams are opportunistic and often self-serving, investors are focused on growth at all costs and hitting metrics, and companies don't operate in ways that suit logic. They suit the needs to capture markets or do whatever they do to get ahead. Sometimes ethically, sometimes not.
As I learned long ago, don't expect venture-backed and post-IPO startups to act "logically". It's all a big hustle and a scramble for market share and whatever other metrics. There's a lot of collateral damage along the way, employees and customers be damned.
Startups aren't a "meritocracy" and management teams don't operate by best ideas win. Markets are brutal, management teams are opportunistic and often self-serving, investors are focused on growth at all costs and hitting metrics, and companies don't operate in ways that suit logic. They suit the needs to capture markets or do whatever they do to get ahead. Sometimes ethically, sometimes not.