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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (67606)	4/14/2005 7:59:48 AM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Well, R&D is VERY different. Offshoring software development is a lot easier to make profitable. Offshoring R&D is tantamount to giving away the country's crown jewels. I think it is plain stupid for companies like Intel, Cisco, and other biggies who rely on intellectual property for their high margins, to give it away to China and India for free. Because make no mistake, when you do R&D in those countries, you are giving your IP away for free. If that is what Lizzie and Amy are talking about, then I wholeheartedly agree with them. I can't emphasize enough how incredibly stupid offshoring R&D is. It's plainly a short term gain/long term loss scenario. Again, my company does offshoring for a living. So I'm in the know on this one.

To: Elroy who wrote (67606)	4/14/2005 3:36:30 PM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 77400

Elroy, RE: "It can't be both a long term trend and not cost effective. If it isn't a superior method, companies will revert to the old method. If it is a superior method, then the complainers are wrong." The most superior method is one of flexibility. There should be no blind rule. Businesses need to be flexible, fluid and smart. You do what makes sense when it makes sense. If you want to pin me down on stating a long term trend, yes, follow-the-directions coding has gone the way of manufacturing, to India, Russia and to a certain degree China, where the math talents are top but reasonably low cost. But with raises as high as they have been, the low cost advantage is becoming smaller and smaller, especially as USD devalues. China doesn't experience USD devaluation, but the raises over there are awfully high due to the shortage. With the other countries, throw in a USD devaluation of 30% and then add to that the high overseas raises, together that translates into a rather large decline in initial advantage. You got to love how some of the firms now are running head first into the back of a tail wind. The architectural designs continue to predominately originate from the USA. But I see Lizzie's point, which is, if your new innovation only amounts to startups already offshoring coders, you have to ask yourself, what new innovation has replaced this? Historically, startups were the source of new innovation and thus new jobs. But Lizzie's point is, where are the new jobs? This is a question that should be addressed by our country, but it's not. McJobs aren't new jobs. We need innovative new jobs. Here's my belief: we need to fund startups in biotech and stem cell research, because that would create the "next level" of engineering jobs for anyone that was displaced. In fact, some of the biotech inventions will eventually require coders, most likely in the US (given a long list of reasons that I won't get into here.) story.news.yahoo.com "Calif. Cities Vie for Stem Cell Center Wed Apr 13, 7:08 AM ET Health - AP By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer SAN FRANCISCO - San Francisco emerged as the early front-runner to land California's new $3 billion stem cell headquarters after its incentive-laden bid scored the highest marks among the four cities named to a short list of contenders. " We better win this, otherwise Silicon Valley is at risk. Regards, Amy J