Rudedog:
Your post is so well stated that I hate to mess with it, but will anyway(hehe)
<<<<Michelle -
I think you are missing the momentum that Dell has to gain the dbms apps biz in the future
I agree with you a hundred percent here. I'm not missing this - on the contrary, I think that the model Dell built to service the corporate desktop market is ideally suited for the future distributed application server business, and they will do very well there.>>>
( I did not follow CPQ so have little info on what they did in the past, IMO they can never be as efficient a producer as Dell because they have to work with people trained in three different cultures, Tandem Dec, and Cpq, and their facilities are not as centralised, modern nor designed with efficiency as a major controlling factor. )
<<<< They have continually raised the bar by creating innovative delivery systems, customer information and cost management structures, and increasingly 'personal' systems which none the less don't involve a huge Dell staff. And they concentrated on operational excellence in each phase of this program. Customers notice.>>>
A beautiful summary. Business Customers will notice in particular the lower overall cost of ownership, especially in times like today when tighter budgets may be needed because of world
ecomomic conditions. The tougher and more competitive things get, the brighter Dell shines.
<<< The more serious problem is that growth within each category becomes increasingly difficult as share increases, and virtually impossible once you dominate the category.>>>>
As noted in a recent Dell article, they only have a small
presence in 8 of the 10 market categories, so the bridge to cross is in the future. Meanwhile, there is huge growth in the Web/internet
arena. Not to worry for several years
<<<Creating success is not a football game. It doesn't matter if Dell beats those guys, especially if that would mean a slowdown in their growth and a related drop in stock price. And I don't think Dell senior management spends a lot of time on that particular topic.>>>>
Here would be the major distinction between Cpq and Dell-
in management. Dell is the efficient producer, knows it very well,
and will continue to improve its efficiency in production, and is now working on efficiency in sales and service areas.
Its my guess that Cpq management will continue to struggle
with management responsibilities, personnel assignments, pricing structures for the 'channels', whether to close or modernize various plants, whether Dec or Tandem or Cpq types will do a particular job. This is not an efficient operation, and the result (measured in return to shareholders) is uncertain so I stay with Dell.
Analysts do not have the time to do the thorough research as is
done on this thread, having to lump two individually unique companies
under "boxmaker" category and compare them on basis of ROE, P/E,
etc.
They would do better to compare M. Dell and E. Pheiffer. Michael
has charted a course and presents it very clearly to the world and to the customers.That also makes it clear to all employees who can get on with the jobs required, and be well-rewarded.
Sig
|
