Ok ... a long day out of the way ... now I have some time to catch up (oh ... while I'm installing NetWare for a Thursday briefing ...) on the days events. I apologize that my responses might be spaced between work days ... I don't believe I should spend time during the business day to work on this. But I hope to keep learning and contribute where possible!
> Hi Scott, I'll give it a try. I spent almost 10-years as VP of a
> small Healthcare VAR in Michigan, selling, installing and
> maintaining Novell networks.
Sounds like a good "hands-on" background. I'll assume that you've used NetWare a long time ... we've been through a lot!
> I then started investing amongst other
> ventures, and invested in the no-brainer Novell, best LAN products
> on the planet. Ever since, the stock basically crashed...NOVELL HAS
> MY MONEY. Remember that in recent years, most Novell investors have
> been BURNED.
Well ... I'll start by saying OUR money. I too am a shareholder ... since 1987! The largest portion of my portfolio is in Novell stock and I have to say that my "retirement" has been cut short by recent happenings!
> Like Joe, my case is well documented over the last year or so on
> this thread, but I will list some thoughts/facts. I'm sure many
> other folks can add to and elaborate.
I have actually followed the thread (even before subscribing to contribute) and have followed Novell since 1985/1986 while working for an OEM in Silicon Valley.
I appreciate your time in responding!
> 1. What are the problems at Novell?
> -No permanent chairman or CEO.
To start with, I would like to suggest that this is a condition ... not a problem. I know that having this position filled, permanantly, would make many people feel more comfortable, however this alone is not a problem. It is simply a condition.
> The company has been poised to take off since last September when
> we finally got through the Noorda mess. Instead of lighting the fuse
> with a clear slate, Frankenburg was canned with no explanation, a
> temporary CEO, Chairman and President are announced, along with
> a promise of a new CEO in six months. HOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN THIS?
As I recall, in September Mr. Frankenburg had been driving for sometime. I'm not sure of the particulars, however I feel that Bob did his job, restructured much of the business, and began the re-alignment of direction. I have a great deal of respect for someone who would jump into the company in the state that it was.
As for explaining, I'm not sure what you are looking for here (Hey! I thought I was asking the questions! ;-)
> A perceived dying company cans their CEO, and announces no
> permanent leadership for four to six months. Now of course, we're
> hearing up to another month and a half...then I expect JY to say
> "nottt, we like what Joe has done........", you know the rest.
In my feeble attempts to learn more about the business world I have come to find that corporate culture is what makes or breaks a company. I think that there are many different considerations that must be made when choosing a new leader (heck, we just lived through over a year to pick a president of the US!) and it's not and easy task. The leader must be able to explore and understand the "inner-workings" of the company and determine which managers are worth keeping around, etc. I don't know that I have seen either a lack of "testing the waters" with Joe M, or a lack of searching for the right leader. I'm sure that the board would welcome suggestions for the position (and I think I saw other messages mentioning that such a list was going to be forthcoming.)
> In the meantime, we have these temporary executives opening the
> vault, ready to spend our money. I have never heard anything like
> it. I'm all ears.
Wow! I'm shocked at this point if this is true. I'm not sure that I have been privy to the "opening of the vault, ready to spend our money." I'm surprised that the public has such knowledge of this! If it is true something should be done. However I'm not sure that I believe that there has been public disclosure (or even internal disclosure) about what and where any money will be spent. I'm sure that in pursuing a strategy there are some aquisitions that are being evaluated to determine if they would strenthen our position in the market. If this is true I will trust their judgement. As for the general public finding out about it, I think that will happen in time. If more information is needed by shareholders, then I'll assume that they could be disclosed under proper conditions ... but would that then make any stock trades insider trading? Maybe someone here could provide input on that?
> -Joe Marengi is the tough guy...above us investors.
> Bob Frankenburg used to respond to investor email...Joe won't give
> us the time of day. What does that tell you alone. It's the feeling
> that Marengi is getting the job, and that the end of the most recent
> 6 months of agony is apparently being dragged out up to another
> 6 weeks, coupled with the madman with his hand in our cash that has
> sent me through the roof. JY and JM have repeatedly stated they were
> on track with the CEO announcement. Not meeting that deadline is the
> straw that broke my camels back.
I'm not sure what type of problem that is at Novell ... atleast for the customer, the company, or the market. I know that it sure seems to frustrate some people here on this list, but how much time should the CEO spend responding to individual shareholders? I think that this is one of the criteria you should set for the new proposed board. Article x - All board members and executive staff should spend {y} hours a day responding to shareholder e-mail. I guess that we should include phone and voice mail also. Is there a criteria for response time? Should the company cover the cost of overseas responses? I as a shareholder feel that this should be very specifically defined.
> -Severely damaged image.
Yes ... and I can see this continuing ...
> Many folks believe that Novell has damaged their image so badly that
> the only hope is fresh blood through a buyout or new CEO. It started
> with the end of the Noorda era, then the channel clearing, then the
> CEO situation, all the while allowing MSFT to just roll you right
> over.
When you state that "Novell has damaged their image" can you tell me who Novell is? Is it Joe M? Is it the BOD? Who is it that I need to talk to about this?
Also, as someone fighting in the trenches I'm not sure that I like the indication of "all the while allowing MSFT to just roll you right over." I put in a large number of hours here ... and do many other employees. I, as a shareholder, decided to come back to Novell (for my third time!) and do something about it! I have seen the discussion s on this thread about the number of job openings here ... I would invite you to come and help me make a difference. I would love to see more people such as yourself here trying to make a change.
> The MSFT pressure of course has continued to mount, with very
> little, if any rebuttals from Novell. This bashing has seemed almost
> daily. Under Joe Marengi's reign, Novell continues to refuse to play
> the game.
This is an interesting area. Again, in my ignorance I must say that I'm not sure I understand the "game." I'm trying ... and I'm getting very good at it ... but there are some very good players out there. Bill Gates and Microsoft are very good. But good players make for a good game. Games normally cause a continuing situation of win and loss. But I was once taught that winning is something that only lasts a short time. Winning is not forever ... the game never ends.
> 2. How will changing the board fix things?
>
> From my perspective, the dwindling board and temporary CEO are
> responsible for this mess. Dosen't take a rocket scientist.
(On a side note, I would suggest using "brain surgeon" since rocket science is getting down right simplistic these days ... remember the gulf war?)
I'm not sure I understand your answer here. Your statement seems to point blame, but doesn't detail how the new board will fix things. I'm sure that the new members would love a list of "things to fix" when they gain control so that they can get right to work. I understand your frustration, but i was looking for helpful suggestions that would specifically address the problems you listed above. (i.e. what do you do about the image?)
> 3. Who will want the position with the current attention?
>
> I think I speak for many of us that we feel we may have been scammed
> on this entire issue. I don't believe there is, or ever was any
> intention to replace Marengi. Instead, it seems like the same old
> predictible Novell, wait for this, wait for that, and in the end
> disappoint.
Again, I understand frustration, but I didn't see an answer in the paragraph above. I was hoping for a descriptive profile of the person who would want to come in. Again ... trying to build an outline that could be a real assistance to solve the "problems."
> 4. If compensation is changed as suggested who wants the job?
>
> I'm leaving this one along for now...I agree it needs to be
> structured in a manner that is mutually beneficial.
I agree completely!
> 5. If you get what you want, and if it happens, who on this list is
> willing to assume personal and financial liability?
>
> Sorry Scott, but I no longer consider this my problem, nor did I
> ever.
I thought you did consider this a problem due to the involvement in the effort for a new BOD ...
> Whose gonna assume responsibility for the madman...you?
I'm not sure that going after other shareholders will work. I have to say that i am not very "well to do" currently and the burden of responsibility is not one that i would currently accept.
> I want MY MONEY BACK. You pay me...I'm outta here. Where were you
> six months ago? Four? Two? C'mon, it's unlikely it could get any
> worse.
Yes, I too wish that I could recoup some of my "less desirable" investments from the past. I'm not sure how I all of the sudden became the target of payoff. All I asked is who should I talk with a year from now ... it could be for thanx ... it could be that I would be upset. I'm just curious about accountability ... everyone here seems to have a very clear view of who is accountable and to me it's a little fuzzy.
As for six months ago, etc. I have been here working. Sometimes 50-60 hours a week. Sometimes weekends. I want to see this thing happen and I want to contribute to the success. And I agree ... "it's unlikely it could get any worse."
> 6. How is your "Novell bashing" making Novell appear in a better
> light?
>
> Scott, it can't get much worse. I realize that Novell has many good
> employees and a lot of talent, and fantastic products, but in all
> honesty, at this point, I want my money back!
When we all figure out how to accomplish the "money back" mission I want to apply it to NetManage ... they're killing me!
> We have been
> waiting...this then that, now a crazy man at the helm, ready to open
> the vault and start throwing money around...a company with no
> permanent leadership, that is supposedly on the verge of replacing
> it's CEO!
Wow. Again I'm surprised that this is the external view of Joe M and Novell. I know that some of your descriptions are slightly streched with frustration, but a "crazy man at the helm?" Is this Joe or Jon? I haven't seen this behavior.
Throwing money around? Please let me know where! I too, as I mentioned above, am very concerned if this is true. I have seen very conservative planning being discussed ...
> Novell has had time to right itself and has made some
> ABSOLUTELY UNCOMPREHENDABLE MOVES. Up until a month or so ago, we
> all tried to maintain faith, but after so long of a silence on the
> part of Novell, lack of news on the CEO, lack of any feed back from
> Joe Marengi, and very limited feedback from your investor relations
> folks, what would you expect to happen?
I'm not sure what moves you are talking about. I was thinking that the issue was the lack of moves ... is this what you mean? Or is there a list that can be produced for the new BOD so that they are not repeated?
> I don't trust Young or
> Marengi...it appears most of the investment community dosen't
> either. They need to be stopped before we own Apple.
This is a serious situation. Trust must be the root of any relationship. Without trust there is no relationship. I have not yet had any action cause me to distrust either of the gentlemen that you mention. I was actually thrilled when I heard Mr. Young speaking at Novell in Provo ... some of his statements showed a true understanding of the seriousness of his job. I am trusting that the delay in picking a CEO indicates a real intention to pick the right person. I'm not sure that i have any indication of work not being done. (P.S. I'm not sure the Apple purchase would be a good one, although i have a lot of respect for Steve Jobs ... I like a free-thinking rebel attitude!)
> 7. Why Cisco?
>
> I'm not partial to Cisco...many other companies will do, Intel,
> Oracle, Sun, Lucent, one of the phone companies...as long as the
> price is right. The element of surprise would probably be all it
> takes to turn the situation around alone. Just some big noise, and
> permanent leaders.
This statement also concerns me greatly. It seems that what you are after is a quick blip of the stock price, probably to bail-out and you don't really care about the long term viability of the company. I'm afraid that is the exact concern that the BOD has. It's there job to make sure that long term shareholders get long term returns. (Well ... I think this is the case ... please correct me?) And I have to say that looking at my own future as an employee I'm not sure that jamming two companies together with out the appropriate due diligence is a good business practice. I was hoping that someone here would provide detailed analysis of why Cisco.
Well ... I apologize for the long winded response ...
Scott C. Lemon |
