ACS was and is the DOG of computer consulting firms. The worst of the lot and the others, SAIC - CSC, et al are pretty bad too. Xerox to my mind already had a service business of sorts, supporting their hardware base, so they - Ursula - picked up a company that fills an alternative niche for a huge price and producing a lousy product.
Are you saying XRX woulld have been better off not buying ACS? You think it would have been better not to transition to growing higher margin services? How much higher would the stock be if they hadn't moved to services?
XRX would have been better off with a competent CEO. Call centers are NOT higher margin. Selling innovative technology is higher margin. The current CEO is a cost cutter, nothing more. Fine, she's cut costs so much employee morale is rock bottom.
Given that XRX has destroyed its technology revenue and now depends on growing services, it makes sense for upper management to transition too. XRX needs a CEO who came up on Services and understands that business. You know, a leader. Not a cost cutter that employees won't follow.
Lets see if the Board fixes this problem. Until then don't expect the stock to go anywhere.
I am saying that I don't know. That's why I asked the question instead of making a statement. I would have thought the aquisition of ACS would have been benefitial to the company and maybe it was in the sense it might have been beneficial by stopping XRX from going belly up. I was simply making an inquiry, not arguing a point. Now, if you have an answer, I'll thank you for the information.