"Carly WAS doing her job, when others didn't do theirs, my analysis of course, but I look for a CEO to be able to make the tough decisions."
Between Q4 2000 and Q2 2001 several thousand people were added to HP's payrolls. The biggest driver: Carly's mandate to businesses during the Fall 2000 planning processes that they MUST grow 15% at a minimum. If Carly had LISTENED to her organization during that time, instead of DICTATED impossible goals, no excessive hiring would have taken place. The additional staffing was added to drive growth toward the IMPOSSIBLE, DICTATED growth plan. I also look to CEOs to make tough decisions. But more importantly, I look to CEOs to make CORRECT decisions. And who didn't do their job, Carly, who completely drove an ABSURD growth plan into 2001, or her employees, who did what they were told to do, under penalty of firing if they didn't?
A final rejoinder to the manipulation issue. You got both sides of it wrong. I'm not using shady tactics at all, and I am not trying to incite anybody. You should show more respect to your fellow employees, and allow them to come to their own conclusions, rather than surmise that they are incited and infuriated at every turn of my keyboard. In what I've witnessed, that sounds more like YOU than THEM.
You were right about that particular post. That was a bit over the top. The hyperbole was intentional, and unemotional, however. If I offended you, I apologize.
I really don't care too much about the leaders of HP. Right now they are pitching a deal I don't like. I'm in finance, the numbers don't work for me. End of story. I could give a crap whether Carly is a megalomaniac or not. She has some personality disorders I'm pretty sure. Not being a psychiatrist, I don't know what they are, but you must agree that she has tried to cultivate a cult-of-personality type leadership since she got here. I'd say her ego is way overboard but, really, who cares. The only important thing to me is how she does her job.
I don't find much evidence that the performance has been good. Just compare stock price relative to our peer set since she's been here. That is the only metric of any value. Ricky, to be blunt, our performance stinks, and she's been here long enough to have made a positive difference. Investors aren't that dumb, they'd be buying the stock if they were confident in HP.
Now, show me some data, provided by external sources, not some internally generated fluff, that shows me she's doing a good job, and we'll have a real discussion on Carly.
Otherwise, I'm simply anti-merger, on the basis of the numbers.
From what I've read he was using the epiphets as an example, not invoking them. Its not a big deal to me.
What does concern me, is to refer to Carly as a Nazi, or another Hitler, or Paul Pot. That is disturbing as these monsters brought horrible suffering to millions.
Carly is just a bit player, way out of her depth, about to go under for good.
Call her a megalomainiac, tyrant, whatever, but calling her another Paul Pot says more about the poster the the 'poser'.
The purpose of my going public was to put my real name to the posts. I take credit, or discredit, for anything I have posted previously under mtothar. That was the point. Therefore, judge the words in aggregate. If I was hiding behind my identity, I wouldn't have disclosed my name. Does that make sense?
I see Mike's use of an alias as a shield to protect him from CF's firing squad because he has an opinion counter to the dictator. The jews did that during the Nazi era too. Same shit, different place.
I do not work for HP, so writing to CF with a false negative view of the deal would not be a worthwhile exercise.
If you go back and read mike_rubsam's posts and mtothar's posts, you will notice that he says that he is leaving HP in a matter of days. That being the case, then why did he feel the need to hide behind an anonymous name while he used highly inappropriate language to describe other people? Could it be that he just did not want other people to know that he was that kind of person, since he had nothing at risk?
in several of his posts, mike claims to be deeply offended by his perception of breaches in his personal code of conduct. At the same time, he is using anonymous screen names to post vile descriptions of other people.
Do you see the gross inconsistency in that?
Thanks for your reply. A quick note; I didn't refer to anybody using any epithet. If you had read the original post, you would know that.
As far as your other comments, you are entitled to your own opinion, even though the Falwell comparison is laughable. Unlike Falwell, who claims to be right and guided by god, I do not claim to be right. I've said numerous times that my conclusions are my own and that they may not apply universally. In addition, my insights are not guided by a higher deity, unlike Falwell, who purports to be God's megaphone on earth.
You claim to be a finance and investments guy. So, let me ask you a few pertinent questions. What is your valuation of HP's IPS business, compared with HP's CS business? And a follow on: What is your valuation of HP's CS business, 1 year post merger? Finally, what are your perceived economies of scale in the PC business? Do you really believe the combined company will have a more competitive cost structure, and if so, why?
Let's see some data out of you, before you discredit anybody else.
Realize that with current managment at HWP, to write a signed letter, stating your opposition to the CPQ acquisition, and sending it to Carly, would probably get you fired or put on the 'lost list', first to go in the next wave.
This has not always been the case at HP. I've talked directly to Vice-Presidents with issues they didn't want to hear. Open and honest criticism was welcomed. Not anymore.
Carly used to encourage people to email her. That encouragment is notably absent in this foray.
I've got a number of subtle hints from managers: do not speak out against the merger.
If you want to test it, go ahead and write the letter. I know its not your position, but do it to prove me wrong.