Analysts Call IBM Layoff Estimates "Hogwash" 131
jbrodkin writes "Rumors have been floating around saying IBM will cut 150,000 U.S. jobs, but a Network World story attempts to set the record straight by quoting analysts who say this news, if true, would wipe out the company's entire U.S. operations and would make no sense since IBM is actually doing pretty well."
They're probably right, but... (Score:2, Informative)
...they're just analysts. They don't actually know anything. They're making educated guesses at best.
FTFA:
Analyst Frank Dzubeck, president of Communications Network Architects, says the layoff rumor "sounds kind of ludicrous since there's only [about 350,000] people] in the entire company. That means they'd be wiping out every division in the United States including the headquarters, which doesn't seem plausible."
why does it mean that? they probably have several divisions they could drop entirely becau
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
That's not what they mean (Score:5, Informative)
Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless they're a 4th line or above, they're kidding themselves.
HAHA Re:That's not what they mean (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
IBM NEVER talks about layoffs. (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
What? That's like saying "inhale before you exhale". Obviously I read it, but failed to properly comprehend what I was reading :P
However, the reason I didn't comprehend it is two fold; I was in a hurry, and it was poorly written. There should be no need for the brackets in there, and TFA says nothing about how many employees they have in the USA, only that there are about 350K employees of IBM worldwide. For all I know, 250-300K of them are in the US (despite having worked for
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why is it that people have such a hard time reading simple words and numbers? IBM doesn't have 350,000 people in the US. IBM has about 330,000 people total, IN THE WORLD. IBM has some 130,000 or so people in the US. Total. Less than half of that is IGS. But just for fun, let's say half of IBM is in the US and half of IBM is IGS (that is not the case). We end up with IGS being a
Re: (Score:1)
Not hogwash, not just the US (Score:4, Informative)
Our offices here in Winnipeg (Canada) are going to be decimated down to a skeleton staff of people to maintain our managed servers (for places like MTS, etc.) I've been hunting for another job for 2 weeks now, since a relative of mine high up at IBM told me about my office situation.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
That's ten percent. I'm sympathetic, but it could be worse!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on how you define it... (Score:4, Interesting)
Are they talking just full-time people or contractors? My guess is that they're only counting full-timers.
If they include contractors in the number of people IBM employs, I have no problem believing this "hogwash" figure.
You're so funny... (Score:2)
Your hogwash reasoning goes well with Cringely's hogwash numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
I noticed the news article I saw locally said IBM was laying off 1,300 people, giving them 30 days to find new employment
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe I am not knowing the meaning of this "hogwash" word you are using...
For those that are wondering, it was a hog wrestling contest at a men's gathering. And yes I did get a Tshirt for doing it!
When have upper management decisions . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe there was a time long ago, but recently the only way to make sense out of half of the actions we see out of big company CEO's is if there actions will somehow justify giving themselves another $10 Million or so in salary or other bonuses.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
True number of employees?. (Score:1)
That 350K is apparently for salaried employees only. I doubt if much more than half of their entire workforce worldwide is employed in such a
The investors don't seem to have heard (Score:2, Interesting)
The IBM message board over at InvestorVillage seems to be ignoring this story ever since it broke last week. Usually the message boards are the first to jump on every unfounded rumor. It just seems that this story has zero credibility.
I begin to wonder if it was made up by a guy called Darl.
Never underestimate the lure of the dark side... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's all about short-term stock price manipulation (which I call the "dark side" since it ultimately winds up being a loss but brings instant gratification).
If the CEO is retiring soon, then he has little incentive to do right by the company in the long run, and plenty of incentive to play games to increase the stock price in the short term (so he can sell off his shares after the price goes up). A massive layoff like this would be entirely consistent with that scenario. And it's not like the company's "investors" would give a damn about the long-term outlook of the company anyway. After all, it's all about the growth rate of the stock, and fast growth for a short time is still fast growth that "investors" can take advantage of. They just have to dump the stock before it crashes.
So not only is a massive layoff of this scale plausible, I think it's highly likely. It's just the ultimate manifestation of the short-term thinking that American "businessmen" are so infatuated with.
About the only thing that might prevent it is a huge backlash against IBM by "investors", which is possible but doubtful IMO.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Never underestimate the lure of the dark side.. (Score:4, Interesting)
>run
The CEO in a corporation like IBM is never a dictator, never has sole authority on executive decisions, and is held accountable to a Board of Directors, all of whom also have a vested interest in the corporation (and contrary to popular belief, do generally consider performance beyond the next quarterly report.)
A company with as diverse stakeholders and as much volume as IBM has, will have quite strict controls on governance and management.
Re: (Score:2)
The CEO in a corporation like IBM is never a dictator, never has sole authority on executive decisions, and is held accountable to a Board of Directors, all of whom also have a vested interest in the corporation (and contrary to popular belief, do generally consider performance beyond the next quarterly report.)
A company with as diverse stakeholders and as much volume as IBM has, will have quite strict controls on governance and management.
You clearly were not an Eisner-era Disney shareholder...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I *wish*. OMFG are you serious?
Category 1984 2004 Percent change
Disney's Revenues $1.5 billion $30.8 billion +2,000
Disney's Income $294 million $4.49 billion +1,600
Disney's Tax-Free Cash Flow $100 million $2.9 billion +2,900
Stock Price (adjusted for splits) $1.33 $28.40 +2,100
Market Value $1.9 billion $57.4 billion +3,000
Disney's Enterprise Value
(market value plus debt minus cas
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
to get acquainted with everything here yet, but as a matter of fact
we can arrange neat tables by selecting "code" in the comment-submit
drop-down menu:
Category 1984 2004 Percent change
Disney's Revenues $1.5 billi
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Godsdamn Communists!!
Re:Never underestimate the lure of the dark side.. (Score:2)
Well, not entirely true. Manipulating it and dumping it right afterwards could lead you to be liable for insider-trading fraud. In fact, lately the SEC has been coming down quite hard on folks practicing securities fraud in any form.
You're right about the investors bi
Lazy Americna perception... (Score:2)
Just prior to the DOT COM bust I would see a lot of Visa workers staying
very late, and not particularly getting much done, but looking very industrious.
On the other hand I saw a lot of Americans standing around and "chatting"
about the latest TV shows, Sports, Church, family, etc etc.
The management saw this and took it on face value, so when the layoffs
came a lot of Americans were canned and only a few Visa workers.
I "was" working at Cis
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lazy Americna perception... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Never underestimate the lure of the dark side.. (Score:5, Insightful)
IBM will lay off and hire people here and there always. Some times they will lay off or hire a lot of people. IBM has acquired a lot of companies the past couple of years, layoffs are inevitable. These numbers are insane though. Insane for a simple reason: IGS doesn't have 150,000 people in the US to lay off. IGS doesn't have 150,000 people in the US period. So, will IBM hire all of these people before they fire them?
Cringely needs to lay off his mothers medication before he writes his nonsense.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Never underestimate the lure of the dark side.. (Score:2)
Essentially stopping operations (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. That deep cuts would seriously hurt IBM not only in the long run but also in the immediate short run. If IBM cut half its US staff the street would interpret that as a sign of severe problems at IBM, problems that IBM obviously have been hiding. This would trigger fears about inappropriate behavior, bad accounting, memories of Enron, and a massive sell-off woul
Satirewire article: (Score:3, Funny)
http://www.satirewire.com/news/att.shtml [satirewire.com]
At first, I remembered this as being an onion article, but actually it wasn't. Although the onion did have:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28984 [theonion.com]
So there you go!
Cringely Little... (Score:1)
Cringley was the one to break this story (Score:4, Funny)
Seems Entirely Plausable (Score:1)
Senate Bill to Triple H-1B's Next Year (Score:3, Informative)
Hagel is the sponsor?? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Haha... relieving us of what, our jobs?
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, come one, ALL of the visas this year went in under 6 hours! There has to be some serious demand that isn't getting met for that kind of response.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you read Cringeley's comments section (Score:3, Interesting)
So I suspect it's all true - although the actual count of employees to be outsourced might be speculative at this point since it appears IBM is keeping that number close to its vest.
Re: (Score:2)
Speculative? It's insane! There isn't 150,000 people in IGS to let go. Not even close. Will IBM hire an additional 100,000 people in IGS in the US so that they can let go this number of people?
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Layoffs are underway, but exact number not public (Score:4, Informative)
However, IBM is using staff cutting and IBM India augmentation to achieve the efficiencies that are documented in LEAN-M, whereas IBM's implementation of LEAN is really just a pony show that is masquerading as an internal offshoring program.
The number of decimated IGS units in total will probably be something closer to 30K-40K employees.
For the record, IBM has also made a settlement in a class-action in respect to its Cash Balance pension changes which were instituted after Y2K. Many people at Alliance@IBM (the organization which is trying to unionize existing IBM employees) fear that IBM is trying to put the pension fund itself into default so that those obligations can be wiped off the balance sheet, which would also be an instant win on IBM's stock EPS.
IBM is not only ditching employees, it is also ditching customers. IGS was known for signing a lot of non-profitable contracts in anticipation that future work would be coming from those same clients (in addition to ancillary project-related purchases by clients for things such as networking and hardware and all the labor that goes with that).
That apparently didn't come to fruition. IBM will be giving some sad news in the next few years to come of its accounts as it lets those go, and those resources who were working on them.
Re:Layoffs are underway, but exact number not publ (Score:2)
The scary thing is that a bunch of us will find out next week
Just another IT layoff (Score:2, Redundant)
From what I understand, the people being laid off don't actually "make" anything, they just support the stuff other people create. Doesn't that make them a potential target for any layoff or outsourcing venture? In that light, this doesn't sound so far fetched, at least not to me.
Makes no sense. So? (Score:1)
- RG>
Bait and Switch (Score:5, Insightful)
And IBM will look like the good guys, or at least not-so-bad guys.
IBM Employees and Contractors (Score:3, Informative)
I know of 10 contractors that were let go and 2 regulars. I know of another team that lost 15 of their 23 member team but don't know the breakdown.
[John]
Plausible (Score:2, Informative)
The numbers are plausible, but not at the 150,000 mark being bandied about here today. Last week, the number being quoted was 100,000, and in the USA that would be feasible, especially given the plan would be to actually hire almost 1 for 1 outside of the US where labor is much cheaper for the same skillset.
My department lost ~33% of it's staff last week, with more cuts coming in the next month. While I don't quite expect a full 100,000 Americans will be out of work, a lot of
WRAL article (Score:2)
I could see 50,000 of that 130,000 out the door (Score:2, Interesting)
Most of his rethoric is anxiety relief (Score:1)
guy's rights.
They're not cutting 43% of their workforce. They're sending those 43% to
China because that's where those jobs will be needed in the near future
to support all those other jobs that are sent there by the rest of the
F500 "economy".
The number are wrong but it's going to be harsh (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah I think it will happen.
Yeah not having an SLA can hurt you long run (Score:2)
And on a personal note the three times I have needed a PW reset from India, I'm sorry but I could NOT understand what the person on the phone was speaking to me. It's a string of random numbers and letters. There's no context. Even spelling it out with a military alphabet t
Compared to HP, Google (Score:2, Interesting)
HP has 156,000 employees, and about 90 billion in revenue.
IBM has 366,000 employees, and about 90 billion in revenue.
google has 11,000 employees, and about 12 billion in revenue.
I think that's where the 150K came from, the old $/employee ratio.
Layoff's don't make sense (Score:1)
Amusing (Score:1, Informative)
Competing with the Indian companies (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
The agnostics, those are the "tolerant" ones.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
When can we expect this Utopia to occur? Right after the Rupture - when all the Christians go to hell because Jesus believes that "they all think like bugs down there"?
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
This is just weird. Where does it come from? Why is it that insane people like this poster has to spout this kind of nonsense in random places?
Nothing good ever came out of religion. The foundations on which the US was built are entirely secular in nature, even though the people who built those foundations had different views on religion and Christianity. They were all smart enough to understand that only a secular country will survive. Countries lead by religious maniacs will alway fare poorly. Look at t
Oops-Was meant as a reply. No I am the fool. (Score:2)