When it's clear at the top that core strategy needs to change (as in this case), this usually doesn't impact the company in bits and pieces — it all comes at once. That's because making a major change at a large company requires coherent planning, and you don't get coherent planning by only saying "we need to reduce opex across the board, we're running out of money". You get it by making a new top-down plan with entirely new goals and a new P&L.
As a result, 140 people got laid off all at once, rather than in waves. Had it been done in waves there would have been mass confusion, low morale, and an inability to buy into the new plan because there wouldn't have been a new plan yet.
And for the same exact reason plans to roll out to Manhattan, which were surely started many months ago and enshrined in yearly and quarterly goals, were axed abruptly.
It's possible it was a cynical ploy for fundraising, but I really doubt that. It's very hard to pull off momentum games at GoodEgg's size — investment scrutiny is much higher, and decisions are based more on spreadsheets. Not that hype doesn't factor into it, but it's not going to float you if your core economics are busted.