Comment by ausudhz
5 years ago
Is definitely a personal move.
Go on their website, they operate in 4 countries.
US: 40 people
Portugal: 70 people
Ukraine: 1700 people
India: 70 people
Classic American company delocalizing everything and now crying because all the engineering is based in Ukraine.
You put all the eggs in one basket and now you complain that they broke? Ukraine is in a conflict with Russia not from yesterday, it has been years from the Crimea case.
The CEO of this company never had a thought about de-risking his over reliance on Ukrainian talent to run his company? Or was just too cheap to keep the location there and pocket the difference in added value created by these talents?
Why should NameCheap have done anything differently? The idea that they should have run their company differently so that they could keep doing business with a hostile country presumes that it's more desirable for them to do that than hire Ukrainians.
Yes that's how business works. Have you seen Microsoft being hit by this for example?
From a business and operational point of view is just a silly move to have your business in one country, especially when you claim to be a "US business"
To me look like that of US here you've only a pool of directors, is more a Ukrainian company to me. Many Ukrainian companies have been hit as well, but they're not multinational businesses and don't use HN to voice their concern.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not justifying the war or anything. But from a business point of view, if I were the CEO I would've opened another office somewhere else and transfer know how from the Ukraine branch given that the situation with Russia has been tense for a decade now.
I hope this explains it
Are US businesses even going to be able to keep doing business with Russia? Is it a mistake for any businesses to be based in the US when there's a risk of losing access to Russia? Is it a mistake for businesses to be based in the US when they've already lost access to North Korea and Iran?
It's not surprising that wars cause fractures in international dealings. That seems like the exact kind of thing they would bring. The problem is the war itself, not that every participant of the international economy isn't a perfectly-neutral profit generator.
I can see why someone might want to run their own business as a perfectly-neutral profit generator but I can't imagine others faulting someone else for not doing so.
3 replies →
It's definitely personal. But it's people you care about being bombed kind of personal, not asset risk.