SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (39970)8/7/2001 5:16:38 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
More on Chambers and what is saying...

Message 16180281

Best Regards,

Scott



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (39970)8/7/2001 6:36:35 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 65232
 
Another sign that the we're in tough economic times...
_______________________________________________________

Consulting firms pulling no-show on MBA campuses

Tuesday August 7, 1:24 pm Eastern Time

By Jeffrey Goldfarb

NEW YORK, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Nattily attired business school graduates toting pedigree sheepskins and seeking lucrative consulting jobs next year could be getting all dressed up with no place to go.

Many of the top consulting firms have told their summer interns -- typically MBA candidates working between their two years of graduate school -- not to look for their recruiters on campus come autumn.

With the economy slumping, big companies are not relying as much on consulting firms. And start-up tech companies, no longer flush with cash to hire expert management advice, are fighting for their own survival.

Top firms like Accenture (NYSE:ACN - news), Deloitte & Touche and KPMG Consulting Inc.(NasdaqNM:KCIN - news) have started deflating their bloated staffs. And all that is hurting the latest crop of MBAs, especially ones from the top 25 business schools, which graduate about 14,000 students a year. Usually, anywhere from one-third to one-half of them find jobs in consulting.

'A BRUTAL YEAR'

``It's going to be a brutal year on MBA campuses,'' said Gautam Rao, a second-year MBA at the University of Michigan Business School and president of the Consulting Club there. ``The reality is that there's going to be a large number of talented people who just will not receive offers.''

Only days after PricewaterhouseCoopers warned of another round of layoffs, the firm told summer hires that its management consulting unit ``is not bringing in new full-time hires at this time, nor are they planning any fall campus recruiting activities for this year,'' according to an internal memo dated August 2 and obtained by Reuters.

Not too long ago, second-year MBAs entertained a variety of tempting offers many months before graduation. Now, without a summer stint at a top-flight firm, students may have no other entry to a full-time consulting spot.

The rumors have filtered out to MBA candidates across the country and a small panic is setting in as students reassess career options and ponder the immediate value of their $100,000 education.

Booz Allen & Hamilton's commercial division is not expecting to recruit second-year MBA students who haven't previously worked for the firm. That pool usually makes up about 30 percent of the commercial division's annual hires.

A.T. Kearney has similar plans.

``What we've told the summer associates is that we expect to meet all hiring needs in 2002 from among this group,'' A.T. Kearney spokesman Paul Raab said. ``We don't expect to have any on-campus recruiting for full-time 2002 positions.''

UNPRECEDENTED BAILOUT

Campus career development offices confirmed consulting firm cancellations for the customary October-to-December visits and warned of scaled-back hiring from those who plan to show up. Most said they couldn't remember such a big firms bail-out before.

``Even the ones who are coming, if they used to hire five people, they are probably only going to hire half a person, if that,'' said Erin Cochrane, director of career services for the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth.

Last year, Tuck placed nearly half its graduating class into consulting jobs that paid on average $100,000.

``This definitely has been an unusual year,'' said Ann Browning, associate director for the career consulting center at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.

``Obviously we're disappointed, but if they don't have any opportunities, it's better that they're not coming to campus to recruit for jobs they don't have,'' she said.

Just two years ago, consulting firms wooed MBAs with fat signing bonuses and fancy cars to compete with the high-tech firms poaching their mainstay candidates. Now that dot-coms have turned into dot-bombs, grad students are back in line for high-paying consulting jobs.

However, even experienced consultants who once chased after the Internet rainbow's promised pot of gold are now staying put. As few as 5 percent of consultants are leaving their jobs these days, down from 15 to 25 percent just a few years ago, the firms said.

Many 2001 graduates who expected to begin work this summer have had their start dates deferred for three months to a year.

One MBA candidate's consulting career was over before it began. David Leibowitz said the summer internship offer he got from Towers Perrin in February, was rescinded a week before he was supposed to start in June.

``They let us down,'' said Leibowitz, 29, a second-year student at the Anderson School at UCLA. ``I'm not very hopeful that I'm going to get a job in consulting.''

Part of the problem stems from consulting firms accepting larger groups of interns this summer than in past years. That has increased the pool of available hires from within, eliminating the need to seek more elsewhere this year.

Not all the news is bad, however. Interns at consultants McKinsey & Co. and Bain & Co. said they've been reassured by their firms that job prospects remain stable.

``All of us are really hoping we get job offers because we don't want to face the prospect of going back to campus,'' said Anne Bailey, a Bain intern from the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania.

``Career services told us, 'Don't worry about it if you don't get a summer internship, there's going to be plenty more consulting jobs when you come back in the fall,''' she said. ``And now we get a message every week from career services that says we're going to have to manage our own job searches.''

Those who go back to school without an offer will be forced to battle the jobless throngs for the few remaining slots. With expensive tuition bills looming, MBAs could well spend more time hunting for jobs than doing their homework.>>

________________________________

When I was coming out of grad school about 5 years ago most of us had at least 3-4 good offers...Signing bonuses were big things...Now, we're clearly in a very different market -- it's a buyer's market and most buyers are VERY SELECTIVE at the moment (they lack the visibility that they need to expand).



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (39970)8/7/2001 9:21:04 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
No Bottom Yet for Cisco...

lightreading.com

Best Regards,

Scott



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (39970)8/8/2001 8:53:44 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
SoundView on Optical : Hearing from sources that SoundView says now is the time to buy optical stocks; cites inventory decline of more than 20%, more realistic street estimates, and the fact that large bandwidth buyers have begun to cut capacity deals and some multi-year buys. Reiterates STRONG BUY on: CIEN, DIGL, FNSR, JDSU, ONIS, TELM.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (39970)8/8/2001 8:59:09 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 65232
 
Tumbling Into the Telechasm

August 6, 2001
By George Gilder. Mr. Gilder, editor of the Gilder Technology Report, is author of "Telecosm: How Infinite Bandwidth Will Change Our World" (Free Press, 2000). He may own stock in the companies mentioned in this article.
_______________________________________________________
When Bill Clinton assumed office nine years ago, I predicted he would enjoy one of the greatest economic booms in the history of the world. Impelled by the spread of the Internet, the onset of fiber optics, and a tenfold increase in venture capital -- unleashed by the lower tax rates and deregulation of the Reagan administration -- the Clinton economy had it made. Moreover, until the election year of 2000, Mr. Clinton actually pushed the economy along with beneficent trade policy, an astonishing opposition to Internet taxes and restrictions, and a 30% capital-gains tax cut that yielded hugely more revenues than projected by demand-side models.

Devastating Crunch

The Bush economy, unfortunately, not only possesses no such immunity to bad policy, but also is gravely vulnerable to policy mistakes accumulating by the end of the Clinton term. A high-tech depression is under way, driven by a long siege of deflationary monetary policy and obtuse regulation that has shriveled hundreds of debt-laden telecom companies and brought Internet expansion to a halt.


The entire telecom sector -- what I term the telecosm -- is engaged in a heroic capital-intensive buildout of a communications infrastructure thousands of times more cost-effective than today's. Promising to make interactive video as pervasive as voice telephony today, such infrastructure projects create demands for funds that outreach the resources of venture capital. Just as some $200 billion of junk bonds from Drexel Burnham and others sustained the previous hybrid build-out of optics, cable and cellular, similar debt issues are crucial to the new infrastructure of all-optical networking. But there ends the similarity with the previous build-out, which emerged during a time of real supply-side tax cuts, OPEC tax collapse, deregulation, and general monetary stability, and was vindicated by soaring cash flows and equity valuations. By contrast, the far more promising new infrastructure is withering in the face of monetary, tax and regulatory blunders.

For debt-burdened companies, nothing is so oppressive as deflation -- a dearth of money -- which inflicts soaring real interest burdens, sinking asset values, and collapsing growth. The leaders of the telecosm have to pay off debt in appreciating dollars while cash flow and collateral declines, and banks deny the kinds of rollovers that saved the likes of MCI in the 1980s. Real interest rates are now drifting upward faster than the Federal Reserve can reduce them. Monetary economists prattle about too many dollars while the dollar soars against deflated currencies, such as the yen, with its interest rate near zero. From industrial staples such as steel (down 42% in four years) to the monetary tocsin of gold (down 40% in four years), commodity prices lie in a deep trough.

Meanwhile, the Bush "tax cut" degenerates into a ten-year gantlet of meaningless shifts and shuffles, the OPEC tax hike persists in its wanton gouge, and regulations strangle the broadband Internet.

Essential to the Internet economy is the expectation of a steady increase in the speed and capacity of connections. Nearly every dot-com was betting on it. The glitches and delays of dial-up modems abort 70% of all intended Internet transactions and bar the business plans of thousands of dot-coms and Internet service providers, not to mention vendors of streaming video, distance learning, video telecommunications and Internet malls.

The only reason for the so-called "fiber optics glut" is the near deliberate starvation of connections to homes and small businesses. It is a classic socialist famine, where the warehouses are full but the people are starving for lack of market distribution systems. Part of this is because of a few poor business decisions in the industry, but most of it comes down to intrusive regulatory policy in an era of deflation.

Typical of bad regulation is a Federal Communications Commission policy called Total Element Long Run Incremental Costs, or Telric, summed up simply as a price cap on what telephone companies can charge for links to homes and businesses. Designed in the late 1990s to prevent "monopoly rents," the cap is based on an estimate of costs that would apply in a fully competitive environment when bandwidth is a commodity.

But in dynamic technology markets such as Internet broadband, monopolies are inevitable, virtuous and fleeting. Every innovation creates a monopoly at the outset, and monopoly rents pay for financial risks and costs entailed in bringing innovation to market. Like any price-control scheme, Telric choked off supply, taking the profits out of the multibillion-dollar venture of deploying new broadband pipes.

Compounding Telric were "open access" and "unbundling" rules that require companies installing advanced Internet gear to share pipes with others. The goal was to stop monopolies, but what regulators did was to bar Internet investment by privatizing the risks and socializing the rewards. No entrepreneurs will invest in risky, technically exacting new infrastructure when they must share it with rivals. At first restricted to telcos, the open-access rules have since been extended to cable, where they balked Michael Armstrong's bold AT&T plan to compete with the Bell companies using cable TV plant.

The absence of broadband local loops also withers the optical Internet. The $44.8 billion write-off and $8 billion loss announced last week by JDS Uniphase signals the devastation of the most promising communications technology in the history of the planet. Treating JDS Uniphase as a budding monopoly, the Federal Trade Commission permitted its merger with SDL only on condition that it sell its Rushlikon pump laser facility to Nortel.

Some monopoly. Uniphase last week devalued its SDL pump laser acquisition by some $35 billion. The write-off -- the largest in business history -- was partly because of the collapse of last-mile traffic growth. But it was also because an efflorescence of new laser and amplifier technologies -- from such companies as NP Photonics and Princeton Optronics -- are already making conventional pump lasers obsolete. Regulators can't keep up.

Before the FTC attack on Uniphase, regulators casually destroyed the Internet strategy of WorldCom. Under Bernie Ebbers, Worldcom planned an attack on the real telopolies around the globe through the use of Internet for both data and voice. Suffering from mazes of conflicting connections, with each data packet making some 17 hops between routers before reaching its destination, today's Internet competes only fitfully with the telecom establishment. But by purchasing and upgrading the Internet facilities of MCI and Sprint, WorldCom planned to transform its portions of the Internet into a coherent broadband system.

Instead, upholding the fantastical view that WorldCom was becoming an Internet monopolist, U.S. regulators defended the existing monopolists against the WorldCom challenge, forcing the sale of MCI's Internet facility to Cable & Wireless in Britain and barring the acquisition of the Sprint network. By upholding a false notion of competition -- one in which no one can win or make any money -- the FTC largely wrecked WorldCom, the most aggressive monopoly buster on the planet.

Internet Sclerosis

As difficult as it may be for Republicans to acknowledge, they have become part of the Internet sclerosis. Led in Congress by regulation lovers such as Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, pressed by Republican governors such as Nevada's David Levitt to impose Internet taxes, and beset by conservatives who blame the Internet for pornography (rather than prosecuting pornographers), the party is imperiling the crucial expansion of the Internet economy.

Meanwhile, the president is preening for pollsters and junk science greens while hundreds of telecommunications companies tumble into the telechasm, choking on debt easily sustainable under favorable tax and regulatory conditions, but now rendered devastating by a global deflation.