Executive management has always, and continues to run the company and make decisions. The only changes within executive management have been IT execs and managers, who have little to no say in anything but IT matters, and the CFO, being David Gamsey. Everyone else is the same as was there in the beginning. Scott D. himself makes most of the decisions and still runs the company like when it was private - after all he is still majority shareholder and controls the board (which he hand-picked from his friends).
So where is this out with the old and in with the new? The only thing really new there is the overpriced computer system that they just implemented for clients. So if you are stating that this is the savior of the company (which leads me to believe you are a management insider) you can save your breath because that is what INOC has been saying and doing for years, with no success.
Fact is they implemented a system a few years ago before they went public, then re-implemented it, and then went to yet another system. When you look at the business, every customer wants a custom solution, but they don't want to pay for that solution. Unfortunately INOC has a habit of giving away the technology side in hopes of making a "long term partner" (read the mission statement) with which they can leverage more business and make a profit in the long run. Well, history has shown that this is not working. Ottotrac has is right, the company needs to get out of "giveaway" mode and learn how to price their work and be competitive. Getting a name client is not worth anything if you cannot make money on the deal. Names mean nothing, profits mean everything.
So good4, why don't YOU show us something factual and quit spouting the company line speculation...
Here are a few things for you to consider..
INOC had already dumped their contract IT personnel long before now. They are now eliminating permanent positions and replacing existing personnel with cronies of the IT VP.
INOC did not bring in temporary CSR's for an expected X-mas rush. There is a difference between CSR's and account team. The account team is in charge of handling INOC's customer (i.e. Martha Stewart, etc..) The SCR handles the end consumer (i.e. the caller on the phone). INOC is cutting account team positions in an effort to reduce their burgeoning overhead.
Telecom fulfillment - what drugs are you on? The telcos are not growing fulfillment business. Look at SBC, they have their OWN fulfillment center - they also make up over 50% of the telcos in the nation, so where is this telco biz gonna come from? Also, the telco business is totally different from days past- in the past INOC profited from reselling the units, that is no more, INOC only profits from their labor of fulfilling the unit. No longer are they getting hundreds of dollars for a 15 dollar caller id unit.
As for the other side of the story - Yes INOC is trying to make a comeback, but they do not appear to have a NEW and solid plan. As soon as Scott relenquishes control and brings in some new blood with new ideas - the company will change. Meanwhile expect more of the same "technology is the savior" with new and more expensive systems coming online that do not save any money because the company has mis-priced their services.
What is also interesting is that you post a rosy picture of the company just before the conference calls, only to find that life is not so rosy.
Let me give you what I have heard about the IT issues...
They started a while back with an initiative to consolidate (good) but the execution of the consolidation to an ERP system went south (bad). They ended up with more systems to support than they started with (bad). They brought in an IT guy to give them a vision (good). He gave them a vision and a plan for consolidation to manage costs and bring implementation costs in line (good). But it was going to take time and money above what they normally spend (bad). They got sidetracked this year with daily support of the acquisitions and new business (bad). Then they lost faith in the IT guy who was sidetracked with the fires from the new business and brought in a consultant to deliver them from IT hell. I hear he told them the same thing as the guy before. IT seems to be the only thing that changes. There is something else wrong.
This is certainly speculation but looking from here and hearing the tidbits around makes it hard to second guess but if I look at this company I see that they would have been in much better shape without MSO and Smith & Hawken revenue even though they lost SBC and HomeDepot last year...