I wouldn't buy Infosys if it were the last stock on the face of the earth! I've seen, first hand, the quality of the software development they do. Rework, rework, rework, to say nothing of the late deliveries. Good luck to those of you who have made money on this paper tiger, but I think this stock and all the other Indian outsourcing company stocks are going to see the same sort of bubble the .com's did a few years back.
OK, I agree with one of your points. It doesn't matter to me either whether you've just naturalized this afternoon or whether you were born here (here being the United States!). An American citizen is an American citizen no matter who long. Now, whether you're an American citizen or not DOES happen to matter to me (Pal!). If your company doesn't have any loyalty to this great country (again, the U.S.!), then I would say great, move! I'm sorry if my patriotism offends you, but I happen to love my country. I served my country in the Armed Forces and I've seen a lot of things and as day passes I love this country more. It truly hurts me to hear American citizens disregard their own neighbors and take for granted the life we've given ourselves (and that so many had died for to give us this great life). I'm glad you voice your opinions here, I've enjoyed the exchange, but I hope you understand what you have in the U.S. and would fight to defend it (if you had to).
Listen pal, whether I am an American citizen or how long I've been here is immaterial to the discussion. I want you to know that I can trace my family tree back to the 1820s when my ancestors migrated from Ireland. But that doesn't mean squat. That doesn't give me any more rights than the guy across the street from me who naturalized yesterday.
Second point, I don't have a very high opinion of Gartner myself, but it sure is more credible than the posts of an anonymous message board poster who is disgruntled with the current system.
Third point, I flatly disagree with your assertion that there are no "multinationals". I repeat what I said in my last post. I work for a Fortune 500 company that derives more than 50% of its revenues from abroad. Our identity is more "foreign" than "American". And you can say the same to our loyalty. If the US government has a problem with it, we can relocate our headquarters a few miles north to Canada. Or maybe Bermuda? Unlike you, the powers that be in the US administration are very much aware of this fact and will do nothing to cause a major deluge of companies rushing to get out the country.
You are well within your rights to disagree with me and Gartner and whomever else you choose to. But that doesn't make us all traitors or terrorists.
Ah! my poor misguided patty! I hope you don't really think that way! Who said anything about discrimination anyways? And this business of so-called multinationals (watch out - buzzword in the vicinity), to me there's no such thing! If you are incorporated in the United States of America (remember that quaint old phrase?) then you are an American company. If you happen to sell your goods in other countries, that's great!!!! BETTER JOB AT A LOWER PRICE!!!??????? Come on, do you really believe all that crap you read in the Gartner "research" articles in IT world mag? And the country dead last??? I'm sure glad that the past industrial greats that built our economy didn't think like that. By the way, are you an American citizen? (just wondering...)
Wow wow wow - Good of the country? If you are a business executive and you are making your decisions based on what's good for the country then you should be fired. There's such a thing as shareholder rights, you know. It is almost criminal for a multi-national to even think about such things. The company I work for is headquartered here but derives more than 50% of its revenue from abroad. Are you saying we should discriminate against all these countries that give us more than half our business and hire only Americans? Especially when these other guys are doing a better job at a lower price. No can do.
I would place the interests of the shareholders first (rich Americans), customers next (they are foreigners in our case), employees third (a lot of them are foreigners too), community fourth (we have operations in US, Europe and Asia) and the country dead last.
Actually, I've not been doing the "picking" of offshore partners, I just get to work with who is picked. So far, I personally have worked with 3 different Indian offshore firms and I regularly confer with collegues who work with others. All my experiences have been difficult and the costs high (rem: quality, tardiness, etc.). Besides, in all honesty I think offshoring of U.S. tech work is treacherous. U.S. executives are literally giving away our future. The current crop of U.S. executives is no longer part of the "greatest generation". These people couldn't care less about the good of the country, all they care about is next quarters share price (and options of course). U.S. executives have distorted the good intentions of free markets where products are traded openly, not labor. I have absolutely no problem in the world if Indians or anyone else want to make their own products and attempt to sell them on the U.S. market, so long as the U.S. can in turn sell in the Indian market. I distinguish this from offshoring. Now, healthcare and insurance are huge abusers of high tech (ie. they offshore alot!) yet where are my cost savings?????
Also, I don't buy the statement that there's no way to stop this (ie. offshoring). I think there is! If you care at all about the effects of offshoring, write your congressman. Vote! as well.
"Seen firsthand the quality of the software ..." blah, blah, blah ....
I really doubt that you have ! Anybody can come here and post, so WHAT ?
I know some people who work at Infosys and also people who use Infosys outputs. I will say that the people I know working at Infosys are absolutely firstrate and I hear from the people that use the Infosys services that it is excellent ... And on top of that, I know that they continue to win contracts, so I will disregard your comments completely and must say there must be some sour grapes somewhere ? Maybe you applied to Infosys and they rejected you, because they found a better candidate ?
OK, you got me, so here's some more blah, blah, blah! No, I didn't apply and get rejected. I'm happily employed as a software engineer in a great company. I'm just calling 'em like I see 'em! I see many reasons for avoiding these sort of stocks, because I understand the product, I understand the market and I see the trends. Eastern Europe is the next stop for the MBA's. Yup, you're right anybody can post, but can just anybody talk about the performance of the Java virtual machine, ieee 802.11g, the base pointer (BP) at the assembly level, weblogic, jsp, enterprise java beans (EJB), regular expressions (remember grep!) and pretend (no I didn't cut and paste these)? And can this same poster claim to understand what she's talking about? Can she claim to understand the business of offshoring (the Wipro's, the Satyam's), the cheap hourly rate (you get what you pay for)? Sure can! Can she comment on buying equities and did she experience the .com bubble, sure and sure! Can she comment on jarbled and rigid code, unorganized and unnormalized databases ? I think so!
dont buy, if you dont want to. Dont use offshore if you dont want to.
there are millions of $$ flowing here and they wont stop because you and your company were unable to manage something well.
Go crib somewhere else....
I work for one of the outsourcing companies. Well, during last 4 years of my career with these outsourcing, I have seen both the positive and the negative aspects of outsourcing. I was working with one of the biggest financial institution in US and offshoring worked very well for them. They have as many as 4000 people working in offshore with various vendors. They planned everything properly, execution was top class, deliverables went on time with absolutely very minor rework effort.
Recently, I moved to a different client which jumped into offshoring in last couple of months. Well, here everything is going haywire. They have no process in place. They just went offshore without a proper plan. And they are falling flat on their face now. But now after seeing the dismal performance, they were atleast good enough to accept the fact that the problem was on their side and are now working towards setting up the things right.
Having said this, let me tell you Offshoring is a process that would happen over a period of time, not in a day or two. People have to come out of the mindset that they will start saving from day one.
Even I accept the fact that there has been lot of rework effort. But everything boils down to poor designing and planning. I can confidently say this because I have seen both side of the coin now.
I don't know if I'd go as far as saying IT is overrated. IT has been extreemely valuable for business in managing product and personel. While it's true that IT is not a part of the core business for many firms, I think we'd be no where near where we are today economically in the US if it weren't for IT. But like I said before, the finance MBA's have been given the reins of these organizations and have since wreaked havoc on this vital business function. Another point that I'd like to make is this: large corporations are sending alot of IT work offshore and calling it a success. But pay attention to who's actually doing the success "talking", why it's those same MBA's that I keep mentioning. And just like their ancestors before them (remember them? "always buy IBM and you'll be safe!!!!") they will rarely admit when they're wrong. So these large corporations continue to tell themselves that this is the way to go, that offshoring is such a great thing. But, I've seen how the offshore projects work. Put together some requirements, send it offshore, spend hours on the long distance line explaining the requirements, get some code a week later, send the code back with comments, back, forth, back, forth....! Large corporations hide the true costs of offshoring. I've written many smaller firms asking whether they offshore or not (I want to know this kind of stuff when I buy stocks) and you'd be surprised at the number of firms that told me that they tried offshore, but it just didn't work out. Why do you suppose this is? My guess is that they HAVE to deal with the true costs, they can't hide them as easily as the large firms.
I used to think like you. I now work for a medium sized public Corporation in the Financial Services sector. I have a Consulting background and I find the inefficiencies in the IT department of this company are mind boggling. But it continues to be a very profitable operation, we made record profits last year. Which makes me wonder if the importance of IT to businesses in general is over rated?