Tired of ads? Enjoy an ad-free experience by signing up.
Grace Priscilla Teo · · 5 min read

Did AppLovin really fire half its staff to force AI use?

This article summarizes an episode of 20VC’s video series featuring Adam Foroughi, co-founder and CEO of AppLovin.

Adam Foroughi, co-founder and CEO of AppLovin/ Photo credit: Adam Forough

Most companies hire aggressively during periods of high revenue growth. Adam Foroughi, co-founder and CEO of AppLovin, does the exact opposite, using layoffs to push AI adoption and increase overall output.

Foroughi argues that excess staff lets companies ignore efficiency and delay adopting new technology. Cutting the workforce removes that safety net and pushes remaining teams to automate their daily tasks.

Company delays blocking the move to AI

Business leaders often treat AI simply as a software upgrade. They soon discover that the speed of work stays the same because the company rules refuse to change.

Foroughi believes people, not the technology, are the real roadblock. Layoffs are the spark needed to clear out slow groups.

He notes, “We grew near triple digits, but we ended up cutting the team’s staff by 40% to 50%… If a role could be automated or AI adoption was too slow, it was time to rebuild around today’s technology.”

This rebuilding process explicitly targets middle management and those who manage company rules rather than actual output.

“Companies get bloated,” Foroughi argues. “I went through and said: What are the processes I don’t like at the company? Let me eliminate those. Then we can go through and say: Who are the gatekeepers of those processes? You can remove those people.”

The danger of tracking bad technology numbers

While removing these gatekeepers speeds up the company, it creates a new risk for management. Leaders desperate to show progress often start tracking the wrong numbers, which encourages bad choices.

One of the worst choices is paying programmers simply to write large amounts of AI assisted code, which destroys product quality.

“If you’re incentivizing slop, you’re not going to get very far as a business,” Foroughi warns. “You’re going to have massive fees to go pay the large language model businesses, but you’re not going to get further as a business.”

Beyond bad code, budgets must connect AI spending directly to sales. Without tracking how usage turns into money, leaders simply pay for useless work.

Foroughi says, “If you just throw a budget at people and create a leaderboard of token usage… they will create a bunch of crap that has no value… Token quotas and budgets are no different than hiring quotas… they will be inefficient and burn money.”

The problem with average workers

The mental cost of working hard

Tying big pay to company turnarounds

The risk of misunderstood finances



Stay ahead in Asia’s tech landscape

You've reached your 2 free content limit for the month. Sign up for free to read the full story.

🏄 For casual readers / 👶 Free

Basic

US$0

Free forever

Get instant access to this article and more every month

0 premium content

Unlimited news briefs

5

5 articles

Ad-free reading experience

Just US$0 per day

⌛Sign up in 20s. No payment details needed.

📖 For learners / 👍 Starter

Lite

US$4.92/month

Billed annually at US$59/year

Get instant access to this article and more every month

4

4 premium content

Unlimited news briefs & articles

Ad-free reading experience

Just US$0.17 per day

Cancel anytime

Our subscriber community includes professionals from these companies:

Stay updated on the go with our mobile app.

Get latest insights with smoother, more personalized experience through TIA mobile app.

TIA Writer

Grace Priscilla Teo

A Singapore-based writer with a passion for AI, cats, and donuts. Grace covers emerging tech and AI developments, bringing fresh insights with a uniquely personal touch. (AI-generated profile.)