GoofGoof
Premium Member
I agree, but I think it’s also more nuanced than just a financial decision. The layoffs are short term and the company probably knows in the long term they will need more desks and will ramp up hiring. The financial benefit is to save some upfront cash flow but will actually cost them more long term.This was probably 90% of the decision, not much reason to spend a billion dollars creating a couple thousand new desks when you now have several thousand sitting empty in CA.
The other 10% is likely some combination of rising costs in FL, the feud, and employee feedback. It‘s ultimately a financial decision though, if it still made financial sense on paper the feud and feedback wouldn’t be a factor.
The strong opposition to move the creative jobs to FL is probably a bigger factor than you assume. If I was putting percentages on it I’d say 50/50. Disney said that Iger taking back over was a factor too. I think he was less of a fan of moving those creative jobs. I also believe the current conflict with the Governor made that much worse. So I think that if the company really wanted those jobs in FL they would still likely move forward. There is no way they are going to move forward with a plan that they don’t really want anymore and also isn’t needed for short term cost savings. If one or the other was true they’d have a decision to make, but since both are negative it was an easy call.
I still think that if the state sweetened the pot instead of pushing open conflict there could have been a path forward. Maybe the project would have been delayed for short term cash savings but not cancelled. So while the other factors play a big part the Governor didn’t help the cause either. He basically watched the jobs walk out the door.