Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

“ Refuting events that occurred requires the mental gymnastics, not remembering them.”

So 1% then. I’ve not heard anyone with when and how many besides that.

It’s not on me to prove a negative. You prove the positive.

@2xp+1jt7d6hvf
blah blah blah... I'm not reading all that.

Believe what you want. Refuting events that occurred requires the mental gymnastics, not remembering them.

"Uncontrollable farter", and "super sh----r"?
I'm almost afraid to ask for more details. I loved having an office. Let 'er rip! Relatively silent, and hopefully not (too) deadly. (Damn, I hope I'm neither of them).

There was a guy in R who had a recording of a cacophony of farts that he'd play while others were in stalls. Is that the guy?

“ Hey, I thought that the point was that: "demonstrating how 1% layoff calculation works by using bullsh-t intentionally super it even remotely close incredibly low numbers" is stupid and intentionally misleading. Aren't you that guy? If not, you two should hang out. You have a lot in common.”

What? not going to try and decipher that.

“ There has been consistent downward pressure on directors with no direct reports, reorgs with no other purpose than to eliminate managers, and the super low-hanging fruit like the guy who used to uncontrollably fa-t in his office or the supershitter in R.”

Oh well why didn’t you say they got to the uncontrollable farter and the supershitter. Now you are starting to sound legit albeit in a tin foil hat kind of way.

"That about explains every conversation on this site in the past few years"

you drastically overestimate the level of conversations on here the past few years. kind of like you overestimate the level of "layoffs"?

“ It's almost as if you don't work at SAS at all, or haven't been paying attention.”

And yet I do. And I very much do.

@2wp+1jt7d6hvf
Hey, I thought that the point was that: "demonstrating how 1% layoff calculation works by using bullsh-t intentionally super it even remotely close incredibly low numbers" is stupid and intentionally misleading. Aren't you that guy? If not, you two should hang out. You have a lot in common.

Layoffs at SAS have been a constant background noise since before the pandemic. We just didn't call them that. There has been consistent downward pressure on directors with no direct reports, reorgs with no other purpose than to eliminate managers, and the super low-hanging fruit like the guy who used to uncontrollably fa-t in his office or the supershitter in R. That got the ball rolling, so to speak, because those people left the company and the only way anyone knew about it was through the grapevine or getting a bounce notification from a "Reply to All". Most people at SAS could understand why those happened, and weren't too worried that someone would come looking for them.

Then there were the "soft layoffs", where small groups of people were quietly let go, like the Education department, Pubs, the teachers at Children's House. Almost no one could understand why these happened, but most people at SAS weren't affected by them, and weren't too worried that someone would come looking for them.

But more recently, the "haha gotcha" layoffs, and some minor score settling. Everyone understands why these are happening. The testers were all senior people who were paid too much, others crossed some director with a "vision", whatever. Now everyone is worried that someone is looking for them, unless they're a career sociopath which, believe me, SAS has plenty of.

And through it all the most competent people, the ones with portable skills, left to work somewhere else. Some good people stayed behind to hopefully retire from SAS. Imagine what the past few years must have been like for them (and still are for some), waiting for the other shoe to drop and find out that their position has, regrettably, been one of those eliminated. That about explains every conversation on this site in the past few years. A few years ago the only interesting posts here were from Shabenbuggered, but SAS management, doing what it does best, breathed new life into it (at least the SAS threads).

It's almost as if you don't work at SAS at all, or haven't been paying attention.

1% of 13000 is only 130. Not impressive.

So I’m still hearing 1%.

If you have more announcements or layoffs outside 2023 say when and how many

In 2023, SAS publicly announced a 1% layoff.

SAS has had other layoffs. Therefore, 1% is a minimum.

I’ve tried to understand why anyone would call it a maximum.

It can’t be in their best interest to make such an obviously false statement.

The simplest explanation is that they actually believe what they say.

Good luck.

“When SAS announces a layoff, it is obvious to readers of this site.”

Umm ok. So as I said keep them coming. Someone mentioned 2023 announcement about 1%…

This site is about layoffs at SAS.



When SAS announces a layoff, it is obvious to readers of this site.

“I still don’t understand your motive in posting something obviously false.”

“obviously” false or demonstrably false? Big difference.
One is manipulative and subjective while the other isn’t.

“ I still don’t understand your motive in posting something obviously false. SAS publicly announced 1% layoffs in 2023 alone.”

Ok so there is 1%. ~120-130 people.

Keep going. Layoffs only. Voluntary retirement, quitting, fired don’t count.

“representations on here that make it seem like layoffs are big and constant.”

The statement was not that layoffs were “big” or “constant”. The statement was that layoffs are “continuous” — which they are.

“1% at the very max limit of number layed off currently.”


I still don’t understand your motive in posting something obviously false. SAS publicly announced 1% layoffs in 2023 alone.

“ I do not understand. What's your motive?”

My motive is to counter the overly dramatic representations on here that make it seem like layoffs are big and constant.

They are and they aren’t.

Will they be in the future? Maybe.
But 1% at the very max limit of number layed off currently. And probably WAY less than that.

Does it su-k to be in that group? Sure.

But y’all make it seem like end of days level cuts.

@2hq+1jt7d6hvf You know that only SAS HR has such detailed information.



We all know the internally announced layoffs, of Global Sales, Testing, Retail, R&D, etc. Many of us also know of smaller layoffs, unannounced.



Why anyone would pretend these layoffs are not continuous, I do not understand. What's your motive?

@2fc+1jt7d6hvf Lay out the dates and numbers of these layoffs. For someone so sure of themselves you must have these data points right?

I’m eagerly awaiting the data you are going on.

"'continuous layoffs'

You are delusional."

I’m amazed that someone on this site believes SAS is not having continuous layoffs. How could anyone hold that view?

Gavin Day = Class Act

“ continuous layoffs”

You are delusional.

"It is a morale hit, but would you cancel it in front of an IPO? That would be awful publicity."

10+ years of no revenue growth. What do we have to show for that? Easy answer: 1) continuous layoffs and 2) one potential buyer that did not pan out. That is awful publicity.

@185+1jt7d6hvf
Let me fix that for you:

24% of $100.00 is only $24.00
Not impressive

20% of $100.00 is only $20.00

Not impressive

It is a morale hit, but would you cancel it in front of an IPO? That would be awful publicity.

I'd probably do as SAS is doing, publicize Viya's percentage growth, even if from a low base.

"If we get a recession, that will hurt big-ticket sales like Viya. But Viya never moved the needle up, so probably won’t move it down."

Viya has had a decade of varying economic conditions to move the needle. It hasn't. It should be clear by now that Viya is not the elixir to cure what ails SAS.

Is there anything at SAS where the company invested more and got less ROI than Viya? That alone ki-ls morale.

‘Day will oversee “IPO readiness,” the $3 billion company said… Day said the plan is still to go public — it's only a matter of when. He acknowledged the volatility in the market, but said SAS isn't in a rush.’

That means more of the same, for at least a couple more years: slowly declining revenue (after inflation), hence slowly declining headcount.



If we get a recession, that will hurt big-ticket sales like Viya. But Viya never moved the needle up, so probably won’t move it down.

A recession will accelerate customer moves away from V9 toward open source, but such changes take time.

SAS was always a safe place to hide during recessions. Steady renewals, even though declining, make it safer than most.

Good luck to all.

Only incentive left for working at sas is the health insurance. which isn't very attractive to younger employees so they need to promote them more and pay them more. they're not interested in m&ms and free soda pop.

For some, its pretty easy to coast, lay low, retire in place...but for anyone 50 or younger ya, move on.

"SAS offered minimal salaries for a minimal workweek —35 hours for most employees. That’s a fair deal."

Yeah but.... SAS broke that deal years ago. They want to continue to pay peanuts but are now expecting much more than 35 hours per week. There are also regular layoffs, which really wasn't a thing a few years back. I honestly don't what the incentive is to work at SAS anymore unless you are REALLY into politics, amateur leadership, bad pay, and working on outdated technology.

40-50 hours a week. Fairly compensated…

“SAS offered minimal salaries for a minimal workweek —35 hours for most employees.”

FWIW, in Product Management we were expected to work a minimum of 40 hours per week. Still, I believe I was compensated pretty fairly.

No one is getting fleeced. SAS, like most large companies, does not offer any path to riches.

SAS offered minimal salaries for a minimal workweek —35 hours for most employees. That’s a fair deal.

Startups in Silicon Valley do offer paths to riches — but they expect 60-hour workweeks. That’s a fair deal also.

SAS doesn’t owe us anything. We knew the terms of the deal we accepted, and we are each responsible for the choices we make.

"With Midway Airlines, there was no equity distribution. Employees were given options to purchase the stock at a discount."

This will be the equity plan. Fleece the su-kers working for you.

A succession plan defines what happens if the owner retires or dies. It’s insurance in case either event occurs unexpectedly.

If the company is sold or IPO’d, new owners make their own succession plan. So the SAS succession plan is real; it’s just unlikely to be used.

With Midway Airlines, there was no equity distribution. Employees were given options to purchase the stock at a discount.

If the discount is large enough, SAS stock might be a good short-term trade -- but not a way to get rich.

More truth has never been spoken on this forum, thanks! @sz+1jt7d6hvf

To quote Bill Gates on the Simpsons "I didn't get rich writing checks" paraphrase "I didn't get rich making employees rich".

Dear kids -- Please don't fall for this. This story has been the same for decades. There will be no equity distributions. There is no succession plan. The Emperor has no clothes.

GD is the third person "groomed" in the last several years. There were probably others. Each gets to third, but never scores. They leave, and the position stays open until JHG finds a new sycophant to fluff. Rinse and repeat.

TRIANGLE BUSINESS JOURNAL

Jim Goodnight promotes new top deputy at SAS. What he says about IPO

By Lauren Ohnesorge – Senior Reporter, Triangle Business Journal

May 1, 2025

Story Highlights

• Gavin Day named COO of SAS, overseeing IPO readiness.

• SAS plans to go public but isn't rushing due to market volatility.

• CEO Jim Goodnight, 82, controls SAS equity and succession plans.

The longtime SAS employee charged with taking the company public has been promoted to the company’s number two spot.

Gavin Day has been named executive vice president and chief operating officer of the analytics and software firm based in Cary. The announcement Thursday comes as SAS continues to prepare for an initial public offering, a years-long effort complicated by a rocky market.

Day will oversee “IPO readiness,” the $3 billion company said. His previous role was executive vice president and head of a global division focused on core operations.

Speaking Thursday, Day said the plan is still to go public — it's only a matter of when. He acknowledged the volatility in the market, but said SAS isn't in a rush.

“Timing is something that we have the luxury of,” Day said. “We are a no debt company. We do not need capital. We do not have to pay back investors. We absolutely have the patience to wait.”

SAS co-founder CEO Jim Goodnight, who is now 82, controls the company, including its equity. But Day said there have been discussions about allowing for employee equity, which could put workers in position to profit from an IPO.

“We’ve provided options to him,” Day said of employee equity, noting that, “when the time comes,” Goodnight will make that plan public. Day said his job is to make sure SAS is “ready” when the IPO window opens.

“I want to get us in a position where Dr. Goodnight can make the decision because we’ve done the work internally,” he said.

In the meantime, SAS has to move quickly in order to keep up as artificial intelligence reshapes the technology sector.

“There is no more exciting time than right now to be in tech,” he said.

When asked if being COO puts him in position to someday replace Goodnight, Day said he is “absolutely focused” on being COO.

“There is absolutely a succession plan that Dr. Goodnight has in place and he will be the one to communicate that when the time is appropriate,” Day said, noting that Goodnight continues to be “very, very involved in the day-to-day business."

Goodnight was not made available for an interview, but did release a statement on Day's hire.

“As our technology, business and the way we engage with customers have evolved, and as SAS prepares to operate as a public company, Gavin’s move into the COO role provides greater alignment of revenue-generating business functions and the ability to serve our customers better,” he stated.

As for the promotion, Day learned about the opportunity a month ago when Goodnight came to his office “and kind of started talking about the role.”

A few internal discussions “and now I’m ready to hit go and get going," he said.

Day, a graduate of North Carolina State University who joined SAS when it acquired Dataflux, has had several former roles at the company, including executive vice president in the office of the CEO, senior vice president of corporate programs, senior vice president of technology and senior vice president of U.S. commercial sales.

Day is the first named COO since Oliver Schabenberger, a man who at one point was being groomed to someday replace Goodnight, left the company in 2020. Schabenberger was just one of several former SAS execs who, at one point or another, had been thought to be in line for Goodnight’s CEO seat.

Goodnight has not publicly named a successor. He cofounded the company in the 1970s at N.C. State.

The COO formula:

Tall, slender, white, male.

Like Dr. G himself.

OK, I take ZERO pleasure in the near-to-mid term implications of this …

If SAS has any “hope” for future growth and retaining brand identity then worldwide headcount must immediately be reduced to the 5000 best employees essential to robustly maintaining and extending the current legacy revenue stream.

After cash flow recovers from severance payouts, the net excess revenue should be reinvested in building highly integrated AI-rich data and analytics _solutions_ (not primarily tools) in a a handful of key markets. These new products should be designed, built and marketed by a NEW workforce comprised of top talent — talent correctly compensated and given equity.

The “long painfully slow goodbye” of not taking such action is precisely what is currently being witnessed.

"You would think with corporate revenues being stagnant for a decade, JG would maybe realize new blood and fresh ideas might be the way to go. I understand he has a ego, but is he really that imsular?"

The over commitment to Viya is puzzling. How many more years of not moving the needle until someone says "ditch it"?

"I wouldn't expect anything else. At this point, if you want to help SAS you have to recruit from outside. Not another mediocre SAS veteran whose reason for getting the job has more to do with the ability to stroke JG's ego than actual talent."

You would think with corporate revenues being stagnant for a decade, JG would maybe realize new blood and fresh ideas might be the way to go. I understand he has a ego, but is he really that imsular?