Why don't you people who are unhappy IBM employees just leave and find a position with some company that for which you have a good opinion. Your whinning and bashing here just makes it appear that you are emotionally immature and it's obvious that you have no objective perspective and have no capacity for financial analysis. I have a son who resigned a job which paid him $200 K plus because he had no respect for the management to take one for less than half. He had the integrity to put his life in conformity with his firm convictions and didn't hang around bad mouthing the firm he didn't respect. He's a happy and well adjusted, self confident person certaninly a contrast to what I see posting here. WW
Just look at the IBM CFO presentation! Most of the future profits depend upon 1- stock buyback, 2- cutting employee retirment and benefits and IBM-US job cuts (off shore), and 3- more service contracts (which is head-on competition with the low cost service providers)!
If these are the prime reasons to support higher stock price then IBM fundamentals can not support high price!
I accept that I was wrong before!
When messages like yours and all the rest of the "IBM to the Moon soon" are posted on this board, along with the IBM to split soon, then without doubt , irrational exuberance is occurring, retail investors are pilling in after the street is hitting an all time high, and you can bet that a market correction of at least 5% is going to occur in the near future
The street and big money primed the pump and dump, set you fish up perfectly and pulled the trigger yesterday on you buy high fish.
You people need to watch CNBC less, ignore the IBM corporate pumper toads and option players, market timers that post here.
Think like a corporate owner and evalute your companies based on sound fundamentals only, caution is indicated when a company relies on accounting and financial engineering to like buybacks and currency exchange rate forecasts to meet street EPS estimates and is not generating steady sales, revenue and organic growth under current executive strategy drivers and business models.
Especially hedge your risk more, as eventually everything, reverts to the mean.
Well, let me give an example. You joined an IBM 25 years ago, at that time you were fresh grad from engineering school and No family! On new employee orientation IBM management told you that you will have a job as long as your perform satisfactory. You worked hard, spent about 10 to 12 hours per day and 55 to 65 hrs per week at work. No sick leaves, very little medical expense and 2 weeks vacation. IBM managemnt liked that and gave good performance reviews. Time passed, you got married and had kids but still you gave IBM similar work hours! Family sacrificed for a while but as you hit your high 40s, IBM started cutting your benefits and skip raises just because you gave only 50/week hrs for IBM! Now you are in your early 50s! You know that you have vested 25 years with IBM, it is tough to move your family while kids are in their high school, wife has her own job or friends in a small town like Endicott! Now IBM look at you as a liability, high risk older man, with 5 weeks of vacation, less motivation and building better retirement is a goal! IBM can hire a young H1-B visa holder with same skill at half the cost and no benefits! So IBM is looking for any excuse to let you go!
You can not leave IBM because you have 25 years of investment in IBM and it is hard to find a new job at new place!
Now you see the real dilemma. IBM want you to leave but you can not! IBM thinks that your past high productive life was her advantage but was not a future investment and broke all the promices or words IBM gave to her own employees 25 years ago!
So now you know why inside IBM older workers are complaining?
"it is tough to move your family while kids are in their high school, wife has her own job or friends in a small town like Endicott!..."
Wait a minute. You live in ENDICOTT? Tell me the truth...
Yes, I can understand that in the scenario you describe it isn't all that simple to walk away. A son in law of mine did that 2 years ago from a Enginering position and good salary with a fortune 500 company and it worked out well, but he was fortunate. It's probably better in most cases to stick it out for the few years you have left. Big companies are not all that much different in the loyalty they show to employees and it's even more so toward the middle management people. There probably isn't one person in ten who really likes his job situation. It's simply what they have to do, but there are many who have very unreasonable expectations. WW
"Times they are changing" ==> Get use to it.
Right now ==> TimeTimeTimeIsOnOurSide...
TW says ==> You still have to break some eggs to make Mayonaise.
AllTheDucksAreInLine ==> Earnings/Divs/PEs/IntRates OnARoll
TW says THINK ==> ALL ABOARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR......D
Tom Watson Sr., and Jr. are probably writhing and rolling over in their graves. IBM was the finest company on earth for half a century. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
>The Company is immorally run by a cabal of insider employees for their own benefit.<
Let me tell you a story from the regime of Opel/Akers.
It came out early in the Cookie Thief's reign that in his predecessor's era the 1BM Company had started to record sales when manufacturing transferred ownership of the goods to Sales. Always before a sale was recorded when a real customer took possession of the merchandise.
The change had been buried in the Annual Report's notes.
From the time of this change forward IBM borrowed money to finance these "sales" and told the world it was money being used to prime the pump of the IBM Finance Corp's outside financing business when in reality it was financing Sales' notes on these piled up goods. For example, we literally ran off tens of thousands of copies of OS/2 and paid MS royalties with borrowed money for them, only to stock them in warehouses and then scrap the CDs later on.
It was classical IBM financial engineering.
In this way the 1BM Company quietly lowered itself into a hole that Gerstner had to bail out of by selling off real estate at fire sale prices, gutting employee pension rights in 1993 and 1999, and running one of the greatest untold scams of the twentieth century (the gross vs net swindle on outsourcing deals.) Don't forget that in 1993 Lou laid off one third of the IBM world wide workforce and in the next breath hired about 50 % of that number at lower wages to lower his breakeven point.
The Company is immorally run by a cabal of insider employees for their own benefit. Their names are on any list of recent insider trading you care to view.
I believe no house founded on sand can last very long. This one will crash someday when its bought politicians and judges can no longer protect it.
Man, do get to excited! Every IBM employee has their own experience and openion. I have mine, but we should look at the current situation on broad spectrum and must consider the future impacts. I am angry at IBM just because IBM executives acted like foreigners and cared less for USA! They briebed US politicians and lied in congress just to reduce manpower cost!
Even today these executives are pressuring US politicians to increase H1-B numbers while the same corporations are laying off the same skilled US workers! On otherside WS traders love this scam and reward executives!
You are attempting to defend the indefensible.
IBM hasn't made its big profits in hardware since the unbundling in the late 60's/early 70's. The largest profit portion of its mainframe products came from systems software. Even Opel and Akers knew that. Yet they allowed (even insisted) Microsoft to control the operating system for the IBM PC.
How could any business man in his right mind make that decision???
I like to hear from IBM employees, most of whom seem disgruntled. It gives me, an investor, a different insight as well as some balance to the constant IBM cheer leading from you, garce, and a few others.
It is quite obvious that IBM is a far different company than the IBM I worked for in the 60's and 70's - an IBM that had gross margins in the 80% range, that never had a layoff in corporate history, even during the Great Depression... and an IBM whose employees really believed in "IBM means service".
It was a company whose CEO and other top execs were not greedy bastards building personal fortunes on the backs of laid off employees. (In this respect IBM is no different than most big companies.) But Tom Watson, Jr. was born into wealth and didn't need to be greedy.
In those days there was some bitching and moaning too, but mostly by employees who were not performing and were destined to be fired. I fired quite a few in my days at IBM, all for non-performance and not a single one because of expense pressures.
I don't know who you hear from, Tex, but I'm an IBM employee and I think it's a great company, and most of the people I work with seem pretty happy. I'm well-compensated for interesting work, and have a lot of flexibility about when I do it. Yes, I know things were even better in the old days (aren't they always?), but as someone who has actually worked for other companies (like Exxon, TI, and Schlumberger) I can definitely state I'm better off here.
And no, I'm not in public relations or management. ;-) Just a developer -- and, I might add, a developer who is very happy he didn't sell 500 shares of IBM at 70-something last year. :-D