Coinbase is cutting 14% of its staff. Some interesting info from the X post below...

They are piloting "one person teams" - a single individual wearing three hats: engineer, designer, and PM. Basically a team of one, powered by agents. This change has long been predicted and is now happening. Designers and architects will win these jobs, not code slingers.

No more pure managers: every leader has to actually be doing the work themselves, not just overseeing others.

Leaders are now expected to handle 15+ direct reports. The old cap was around 6. This can't be done without AI.

The workplace is changing...

This is an email I sent earlier today to all employees at Coinbase:

Team,

Today I’ve made the difficult decision to reduce the size of Coinbase by ~14%. I want to walk you through why we're doing this now, what it means for those affected, and how this positions us for the…

— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) May 5, 2026

We've seen this several times already. Use AI to weaken the impact to stock price while laying off from bad management practices. They have lost 50% or their market cap in the last year.

Who do you think architects, and engineers are, if not "code slingers"? Sure, you probably won't be lighting up interviews with your html skills nowadays, but we have seen this before.

I think the real takeaway is that Coinbase remains below its pre-IPO valuation five years later because it is basically a commodity business that is highly regulated, has a very volatile revenue model, and lacks the scale necessary to compete in most every new growth venture is targeting.

It has already pulled out every rabbit from its hat trying to satisfy investors so now they try the AI excuse for cutting heads.

There is a reason the stock is down on this news. Uninvesting to growth usually never works.

All that being said, maybe the relative desperation of companies like this do unlock different staffing models.

It is also going to be interesting if the regulators hit them for something the AI agent did.

SteveA said:

---

We've seen this several times already. Use AI to weaken the impact to stock price while laying off from bad management practices. They have lost 50% or their market cap in the last year.

Who do you think architects, and engineers are, if not "code slingers"? Sure, you probably won't be lighting up interviews with your html skills nowadays, but we have seen this before.

---

So having trad structure and hierarchy is bad management practice? So they are lying about these changes? What do you base that on?

Those capable of doing design and architecture will win the jobs; pure code slingers will not. To use an analogy: those framing homes and swinging hammers aren't needed anymore. The architect that designs the home can frame it now too.

Bookkeeping department 1960's.


Bookkeeping department 2000:


Bookkeeping department 2027:

"Mr. Controller. I know based on our earnings restatement last quarter that I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in our financial reporting capabilities. And I want to help you."



AI is just the next iteration of efficiency tools, nothing more.

Logos Stick said:

---

SteveA said:

---

We've seen this several times already. Use AI to weaken the impact to stock price while laying off from bad management practices. They have lost 50% or their market cap in the last year.

Who do you think architects, and engineers are, if not "code slingers"? Sure, you probably won't be lighting up interviews with your html skills nowadays, but we have seen this before.

---

So having trad structure and hierarchy is bad management practice?
.

---

Absolutely.

Corporate America is designed poorly.

Way too many "chiefs", who bring no intrinsic value to an organization.

BigRobSA said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

SteveA said:

---

We've seen this several times already. Use AI to weaken the impact to stock price while laying off from bad management practices. They have lost 50% or their market cap in the last year.

Who do you think architects, and engineers are, if not "code slingers"? Sure, you probably won't be lighting up interviews with your html skills nowadays, but we have seen this before.

---

So having trad structure and hierarchy is bad management practice?
.

---

Absolutely.

Corporate America is designed poorly.

Way too many "chiefs", who bring no intrinsic value to an organization.

---

Over my career, fewer than half of my direct managers were effective - that is added value. I don't think I was an exception.

I was younger, but I would say that the exception for me was the military. I worked for a lot of leaders who could walk the walk.

Logos Stick said:

---

Coinbase is cutting 14% of its staff. Some interesting info from the X post below...

They are piloting "one person teams" - a single individual wearing three hats: engineer, designer, and PM. Basically a team of one, powered by agents. This change has long been predicted and is now happening. Designers and architects will win these jobs, not code slingers.

No more pure managers: every leader has to actually be doing the work themselves, not just overseeing others.

Leaders are now expected to handle 15+ direct reports. The old cap was around 6. This can't be done without AI.

The workplace is changing...

---

ha ha. Bad idea.

I will watch Coinbase crash and burn because of their idiocy. You cannot mix skills so far apart and expect people to excel in them all. A product UX designer is different from a software engineer. Designers is a visual job (many women do this). Software development is cold logic and men love this. You cannot just ask Steve to do everything by handing him "agents" and expect the result to be good.


Coinbase grabbed the headlines for sure. Now let's watch them execute. If I am proven wrong in 1-2 years and if they are successful, I will acknowledge it here and say I was wrong.

The stock has been flat in a year so the CEO wanted a gimmick to juice it up. They are -48% since going public. Wow.

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha. Bad idea.

I will watch Coinbase crash and burn because of their idiocy. You cannot mix skills so far apart and expect people to excel in them all. A product UX designer is different from a software engineer. Designers is a visual job (many women do this). Software development is cold logic and men love this. You cannot just ask Steve to do everything by handing him "agents" and expect the result to be good.

---

Well, you are right - but for the wrong reasons. Using gender is just a lazy stereotyping of people.

Its about role separation and human nature. This is basically the same as forcing developers to qa their own code taken to the extreme. In this case what you'll get is a bias for whatever historical role a person has had and then amplify that into other roles that person now has to handle.

So now lets say you start off with a coding architect - you'll have him do the design work (with an emphasis on ease of coding instead of usability) and the estimating/planning/prioritizing as well (which will end just as badly).

It can work - but your pool of candidates that can pull this off gets rather small. AND you are choking off the training of his future replacements as well. You also end up with the case of "no redundancy". If that 1 guy leaves you are SOL.

Windy City Ag said:

---

I think the real takeaway is that Coinbase remains below its pre-IPO valuation five years later because it is basically a commodity business that is highly regulated, has a very volatile revenue model, and lacks the scale necessary to compete in most every new growth venture is targeting.

It has already pulled out every rabbit from its hat trying to satisfy investors so now they try the AI excuse for cutting heads.

There is a reason the stock is down on this news. Uninvesting to growth usually never works.

All that being said, maybe the relative desperation of companies like this do unlock different staffing models.

It is also going to be interesting if the regulators hit them for something the AI agent did.

---

Agree 101%

javajaws said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha. Bad idea.

I will watch Coinbase crash and burn because of their idiocy. You cannot mix skills so far apart and expect people to excel in them all. A product UX designer is different from a software engineer. Designers is a visual job (many women do this). Software development is cold logic and men love this. You cannot just ask Steve to do everything by handing him "agents" and expect the result to be good.

---

Well, you are right - but for the wrong reasons. Using gender is just a lazy stereotyping of people.

Its about role separation and human nature. This is basically the same as forcing developers to qa their own code taken to the extreme. In this case what you'll get is a bias for whatever historical role a person has had and then amplify that into other roles that person now has to handle.

So now lets say you start off with a coding architect - you'll have him do the design work (with an emphasis on ease of coding instead of usability) and the estimating/planning/prioritizing as well (which will end just as badly).

It can work - but your pool of candidates that can pull this off gets rather small. AND you are choking off the training of his future replacements as well. You also end up with the case of "no redundancy". If that 1 guy leaves you are SOL.

---

I fail to see why I am wrong from your post.

Design and Dev are different skillsets. I was a software engineer, not a product designer. I could mock stuff up and make a passable design but that was not my core comp. My current team at work has no dedicated design people, we are supposed to do it ourselves (all woman team, I am the only male on it!). I am also the only one with no design exp, but I have tons of engineering and architecture exp and the ladies do not.

To make one person do different jobs is a bad idea destined to fail. I think they will quietly go back to their old ways when this crashes.

Quote:

---

You cannot just ask Steve to do everything by handing him "agents" and expect the result to be good.

---

I mean, it would be great.

Uhhh.... We had to layoff because of... uh.... AI! Good times are comin' folks, we gotz dem AI!

Man these CEOs reveal themselves more and more everyday!


Coinbase logs second straight quarterly loss as crypto trading momentum fades
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/coinbase-logs-second-straight-quarterly-201533905.html

Quote:

---

May 7 (Reuters) - Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase Global on Thursday recorded a second-consecutive quarter of losses, as a crypto-driven market volatility sapped the company's trading volumes during a period of broad digital-asset selloff.

The company reported a net loss of $394.1 million, or $1.49 per share, for the quarter ended March 31, compared with a profit of $65.6 million, or 24 cents per share, a year earlier.

---

Now with all the layoffs and AI added in, can we expect an eleventy billion dollar profit next Q?

BusterAg said:

---

Bookkeeping department 1960's.


Bookkeeping department 2000:


Bookkeeping department 2027:

"Mr. Controller. I know based on our earnings restatement last quarter that I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in our financial reporting capabilities. And I want to help you."

AI is just the next iteration of efficiency tools, nothing more.

---

Unfortunately I think you're wrong. This is different.

Said the hay hauler to the wagon owner that invented the wheel.

javajaws said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha. Bad idea.

I will watch Coinbase crash and burn because of their idiocy. You cannot mix skills so far apart and expect people to excel in them all. A product UX designer is different from a software engineer. Designers is a visual job (many women do this). Software development is cold logic and men love this. You cannot just ask Steve to do everything by handing him "agents" and expect the result to be good.

---

Well, you are right - but for the wrong reasons. Using gender is just a lazy stereotyping of people.

Its about role separation and human nature. This is basically the same as forcing developers to qa their own code taken to the extreme. In this case what you'll get is a bias for whatever historical role a person has had and then amplify that into other roles that person now has to handle.

So now lets say you start off with a coding architect - you'll have him do the design work (with an emphasis on ease of coding instead of usability) and the estimating/planning/prioritizing as well (which will end just as badly).

It can work - but your pool of candidates that can pull this off gets rather small. AND you are choking off the training of his future replacements as well. You also end up with the case of "no redundancy". If that 1 guy leaves you are SOL.

---

The AI is doing most of the work. The person is mostly overseeing. If it works depends more on the AI team which also does alot of the QA