>I also am under the 'broad brush rule' of disclosure, or non-disclosure, if you will.
>Having said that though, Ricky's absolutely correct. The distraction factor will be minimal..
It won�t be a distraction, it will be an obsession. Product lines don�t just come and go �every six months�. There are service and parts and long term contract issues that are nearly intractable. What do you tell a customer that�s one year into a three year deployment.. that the machine they want to deploy is gone in 90 days? You don�t have any idea of the intricacies of enterprise sales. Customers would have to go through costly and time consuming requalification, software testing, integration testing, training. The costs of these factors is generally larger than the equipment costs. Further, the customer, forced with this task, will look at all vendors again, and put HP a distant last for messing up their program.
>Immediately we gain the buying power leverage, but in addition we get the >attention of ISVs and other partners because they HAVE to. To presume our failure could be a mistake on their part, so they MUST play with us. Those are critical pieces.
There�s no leverage to be had. HP is already at maximum quantity discount. Who are you going to push around? Intel? AMD? No, maybe your keyboard manufacturer. So you�ll pay 5.25 instead of 5.35. Not worth 25 Billion. Besides, key players, like Seagate and NVIDIA put you on allocation, not the other way around. Remember, the secret to Dells success is low, low, low, inventory. You think HP will beat them buy quantity buying? Putting more stuff on the shelf?
>We gain the ability our customers have longed for: total solution provision (with the exception of high level consulting which will also come from the >partnering). Procurement choices, channel choices, choice of technology to >match the problem instead of forcefitting the solution.
Look around, while HP is massively distracted, SUN and DELL are making partnerships that work. SUNW just signed up PWC for ALL CRM business, first preference for both companies, and it didn�t cost them a dime. Dell, IBM and Sun will still be big dogs in this.
>Yes, there will be jobs lost within the infrastructure, yes some product lines >will go, but I contend that to do otherwise will cause the loss of more jobs.
That�s not an argument.
>The consolidation within the industry will come. We can CHOOSE our partner NOW - or choose from the leavings later.
Says who? Compaq is not a partner, they�re a life support patient. Compaq has a franchise in Intel servers, nothing else. Their unable to make a profit at it so its not much of a franchise. They have a so-so desktop line, that�s hated by many for its proprietary design, also no profit. They have legacy Tandem and legacy DEC which will never grow. Their services team is break-fix for their own products. HP now leads the market in Itanium servers WITHOUT Compaq. Who needs who?
You have to admit PPF that Billy has much better arguments than you do, even though your arguments were well presented. I am against Carly because she has added absolutely no value since her arrival. I am against the merger because I expect to see tangible benefits to this deal in the short term, not doubtful benefits to customers and shareholders in the long term. The only benefits here are in the dismissal of well in excess of 15K employees, no where else. Carly of course sees the benefit of keeping her job, so for her there is a large incentive to keep justifying and prevaricating. The key to a successful merger is speed. IBM and Dell and others are not going to sit around eating popcorn while the show goes on. The customers also have to work within their own 5 year plans, so any delay in execution on our part is unwise, unprofessional and bad for all concerned. Carly should resign if she has any integrity and allow the board to select a more competent CEO.
Hi! I think we differ<g>. You speak as though you may be from CPQ rather than HWP..(?). I AM enterprise, by the way. From the HWP perspective this is not a throw everything out every 6 months on the Enterprise side. It never has been. If you think of the years HWP has supported the 1000's and 3000's and the older generations of the PARISC architecture - nothing changes there. Our pattern of forewarning customers years ahead of discontinuance and then end of support beyond that hasn't changed. The Alpha folks are in a bind, sure! That's no matter what happens though. Right now, Intel owns that technology, not CPQ, not HWP - it's non-issue here from the supportability standpoint. As for the every 6 month product roll - it's true, we've been rolling product on 'l's or 'n's every 6 months - that old terminology in the past 6 months even! Nothing new there. Customers are not FORCED into change without notice. HWP has never done that and I do not anticipate it happening anytime in the near future. Good grief - to accomodate techonology changes we've had trade-up programs and binary compatibility for about 10 years. Now - I'm not saying that if business dictates a change and that need dictates a different platform that it is easy - don't get me wrong. And really, when we're continuing HP-UX as a critical enterprise Op/Sys for the longterm, does it really matter if the processor is more MHz - other that the patches to accomodate. That which HWP has previously tested? PARISC has several more years ahead of it. Yes - IA64 will force economically driven changes - but it's a transition to PLAN for, not a forced entry.
Buying power - that lends itself to more than bits and pieces of computers or printers. That is health insurance, 401K management, real estate, pencils and paper - in this case you really need to think beyond that 'box'.
And then you go back to distraction, and we differ here entirely. The teams I work with have never been more focused. Sales folks are greedy - we have the best enterprise line-up in years and we're selling. Competing can be FUN! There's blood in the water when it comes to SUN, IBM's Shark, EMC's desparation and old architecture as examples, and we have faith in our support team. What's not to love? P&PF