Most large fast going tech companies "predicited" this but that doesn't mean they really believed it. The alternative at the time was to say..."we grew 100% in the last two years but with covid restrictions limiting etc wr think that growth will be more like 80% and revenue down x%" that would have sent massive shocks to investors and stocks would have dropped overnight as companies like Meta had been setting a long precedent of "beat and raise" with their earnings calls. Essentially everyone was hoping it would continue as they didn't want to see equity and comp and valuations down. What's funny is that it all happened anyway over the course of the year. Believe me from first hand experience there were many people in these companies raising flags late last year that it can't continue but were essentially ignored. Hope is not a strategy!
I run revenue planning for a large-ish public SaaS company. We knew all of these factors were a risk this year but they were immediately shot down when brought up or part of models. "Focus on what we can control" "Usage and growth is so high there are no signs of slowdown". Whenever we used data to show that macro factors might be artificially driving up usage and demand it was dismissed. Politics plays a large role here as senior leaders want to take credit for all the growth. What's funny is now when it's all trending down of course macro is the factor and rarely anyone's fault.
I'm sensing a marketing academic. I agree with some points and the echo chamber is very real
However, while I wish there were more people reading peer reviewed journals and debating the full spectrum of marketing, the literature is unfortunately 5 years behind what's actually going on in businesses and online (we are talking about SaaS here).
Research and empirical work takes time but consumers move quickly, especially online, so by the time reports and data are published it's out of date. The only half decent way to keep up with developments is to buy into some of these "neologisms" or you will be left behind.
Were the ideas for new features and improvements all internally generated? Did they not have some method for actual users to suggest and vote on features?
