>>> Why is it that computer programming takes specialized expertise, the legal profession requires specialized expertise, but the financial profession is open to anybody who can memorize a few acronyms? <<<
Business people will be professionals when they have a code of conduct, an oath of duty, minimum standards for entry, and the other accoutrements of professionalism. CPAs, for instance, are professionals, due to the oath to protect, their duties, the difficult exam, and so forth.
Other accountancy types are not. Sadly, this applies to software 'professionals' as well. Some of us belong to organizations that have performance oaths and ethical standards, but most do not, and there is no enforcement anyway. Nor is there a bar exam, though there should be... And many a clown in way over his head writes software, or directs its writing.
Forgive me, but I have been on that particular hobbyhorse for a generation now, and I have no intention of getting off. It's very difficult to make progress on this because the schools don't want a bar exam for CS and IS grads. Because they are mostly incompetent to actually practice upon graduation, and need considerable further training which they do not normally receive.
On the other note you mentioned, I have noticed that market evaluations of Internet stocks may well use the methods that result in justification for such great multiples, but when one company pays for another, they don't bankrupt themselves by paying from any such formula. The prices paid reflect realities of assets and income, more so than the market anyway. It's 'show me the money' time.
And on further reflection, the price paid for Netscape still is pretty speculative. They will have to work hard to turn that into cash. Especially with all the Netscape employees floating their resumes around town. Working for the infamous AOL is not a popular idea there it seems.
Cheers,
Chaz |
