Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Lucent Technologies (LU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: telecomguy who wrote (13113)	1/31/2000 2:15:00 PM
From: Techplayer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21876

telecomguy, heads have rolled. not all of them, but a few. Brian

To: telecomguy who wrote (13113)	1/31/2000 4:24:00 PM
From: Hagar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21876

and no heads have rolled. I don't know about that. Dan Stanzione, #2 man and formerly in charge of that part of the operation, was moved aside. The distinction between Marketing and Executive with respect to the OC192 decision is blurred. A decision was made that OC192 was not needed at the time. I find it hard to believe that McGuinn made a marketing judgement on the issue. I suspect he relied on Stanzione's input who in turn relied on the part of the organization under him that is responsible for determining the products that need to be developed (sounds like marketing). At some point the executives trusted the "marketing" input. If you belive in the "buck stops here" approach then blame McGuinn. Somehow I sense that you want to blame him in order to show that NT has superior management. I blame management anyway because Lucent, like virtually all high tech firms, tolerate and reward poorly run marketing organizations. In this case either Management was just blind to an obvious deficiency or was too absorbed in stock prices and year end bonuses.