Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: i-node who wrote (869827)	7/2/2015 4:29:39 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) of 1578611

Sure. But the reason why HP was having tough times was because of decisions that she made. Primarily the acquisition of Compaq. By that time, the profit margin on desktops and laptops were razor thin because of competition from Dell. Dell was a formidable competitor because, as it turns out, Intel was making secret payments to Dell to stay exclusively Intel. This was proven in court later when Dell was forced to go back and restate their earnings for those years in a shareholder suit. So Dell was operating on a zero percent margin on computers and Intel was supplying what was declared as profit. It didn't hurt that Intel was also doing their R&D and manufacturing motherboards and even entire systems for Dell. So essentially doubling HP's presence in desktops and laptops was a very bad decision. Their main competitor was essentially the retail arm of Intel, their major supplier of processors. We won't mention the decision to spike the excellent Alpha line of processors and servers in favor of, you guessed it, Intel supplied Itanium processors. Which Dell was also using. Granted, not everything she did was bad. She did handle the already in progress spinning off of HP's instrument business, now called Agilent, in a very satisfactory manner. But that isn't what drew the ire of the employees. Not everyone saw acquiring Compaq as a bad move. Many of the negatives came out after the fact, although Carley had more information to evaluate the business case than a regular employee. What did it was she went on a firing and cost-cutting binge so she could meet her numbers and get her bonuses. In many cases those cost cutting measures damaged the long term viability of the company for short term earning gains. So the employees were being sacrificed, not for the good of the company, but to pad out Carley's bank account. That is why the fury. And she didn't even try to gloss this fact over. It was her due. And it is this focus on her personal benefit rather than the entity she is the head of that makes her a poor choice for president.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next