[MW Forums]

AOL will lay off about 20 percent of its workforce in the coming months. more

[pmbx]

I don't know what the company spokesman has been sippin' on, but he's clearly not all here. Any company that begins to bleed personnel resources is NOT a growth company.

[jughead]

AOL never had a future. They were training wheels for the internet. Once the masses figured out they didn't need AOL, it was over.
The surprising part is that Wall Street should have figured this out five years ago and for the most part, didn't.

[MacTel]

Quote:

---

AOL never had a future. They were training wheels for the internet. Once the masses figured out they didn't need AOL, it was over.
The surprising part is that Wall Street should have figured this out five years ago and for the most part, didn't.

---

I wouldn't say that. I had AOL in 1992 before the Internet became popular around 1994-ish with IE and Netscape. Even after people jumped on the Internet AOL was thriving, hence their buy-out of Time Warner in the late 90s. Their downfall can be attributed to broadbands climb over dial-up. AOL hasn't made the transition very well and all the while they've been losing out to cheaper competitors like Earthlink, NetZero, and PeoplePC for dial-up access.
AOL needed to adapt quicker and I believe the Time Warner wrangling tied them up.

[tomtom]

I commenced legal proceedings against AOL this week.
I cancelled the service in 1999 and have been playing cat and mouse ever since. I cancel from a debit card subscription (in Europe we uses debit cards much). Two months on AOL collects "arrears" and continue billing. I cancel again. Get the cycle?
My bank changed my account details twice to prevent AOL collecting (new a./c numbers, card numbers - can't happen again - AOL finds me and bills "arrears" and continues again.
On two occasions my bank account has been subject to fraudulent transactions. AOL is the suspect source of leak of information.
Two month's back, my bank reversed all of the billing since 1999 and guess what? AOL has sent in a debt collector and still continues to bill. My bank manually intercepts and denies payment.
All of this is for a lousy 15,99 ($32 US) per month dial up service.
I know of other folks in a similar situation including an old lady (80 ish) who cancelled ber dial up to go with BT broadband for less cost. She was threatened and shifted her service back to AOL broadband and had to pay BT a cancelation fee.
I am sorry, AOL and Time Warner by implication, are a (VERY - edit) crooked organization. When I try to find out the organization to take action against the only clue I have to go on is a Luxembourg VAT code in 7pt print at the foot of letters. Communications are on photocopied sheets with only the AOL logo and no contact details.
If only we had class action in Europe? With others, I could even drag Time Warner to its knees.
If you are in any doubt, check my posts and ask yourself how I can be outraged to make such a statement.
Quantum Computer Services - the early AOL and AOL in the beginning did a great job. The failing was in not recognizing the Internet had come to stay and that unfortunate situation for Time Warner.

[tomtom]

No way - AOL's mail system was a rip off - GE's Quick Com and Business Talk. AOL even insisted that all Time Warner folks used AOL Mail. This was the built in quarrel that started the demise.

[TheCount]

look at the 3 year AOL chart..it tells the whole story....

[Schneb]

The good news, AOL will make it easier than ever to leave the building.
Attention AOL: Easier isn't always good.

[macFanDave]

I can just see it now. . .
One-fifth of the AOL staff gets to work tomorrow, fires up their computers and gets, "You've got mail! Hey, check out the pink one!"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[RhymingDesigner]

Quote:

---

I wouldn't say that. I had AOL in 1992 before the Internet became popular around 1994-ish with IE and Netscape. Even after people jumped on the Internet AOL was thriving, hence their buy-out of Time Warner in the late 90s. Their downfall can be attributed to broadbands climb over dial-up. AOL hasn't made the transition very well and all the while they've been losing out to cheaper competitors like Earthlink, NetZero, and PeoplePC for dial-up access.
AOL needed to adapt quicker and I believe the Time Warner wrangling tied them up.

---

This is a good analysis. I worked for AOL before, during, and after the Time Warner merger. Our member (i.e., customer) base climbed steadily to 35 million before it began its quick downward spiral. If you don't think the future was rosy, multiply 35,000,000 x $24 a month. The problem was failure to adapt the old business model. During the days of the Time Warner acquisition (which is what AOL was calling it back then), the arrogance was off the charts.
The merger didn't kill AOL, it was the whole culture. The company had its customer's credit card and a sense of entitlement. Management came and went through the revolving door every few months. And with each change came reorganization and, ultimately, layoffs. Employees were shipped by the busload to large pep rallies called "all-hands meetings" where upper management would put on display its denial of reality. And let me tell you that none of the little guys were about to break the news to the goose that laid the golden egg. Not that they would have listened anyway.
So AOL is going to lay off 20% of its workforce? You can bet the employees are bracing for another round of nervous laughs and sweaty palms. The joke at AOL is that there's a bullet out there with your name on it. It's just a matter of time.

[rgonzalez]

it is about time everyone realizes that it is ridiculous that AOL still exists !!!

[tomtom]

I have heard from affected folks that mass firing via e-mail does happen in the Computer Service and Banking industries.
We have come to rely on the facelessness of e-mail so much.

[tomtom]

Moving headquarters, an old trick, will reduce force rapidly and for no cost.

[Mac007]

Companies like AOL don't die over night. There's too much invested in the company both in money and ego. This is going to be one long slow death.