Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Feb 2009 10:24 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 350654
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Who actually got fired
by KugelKurt on Wed 25th Feb 2009 17:10
in reply to "RE: Who actually got fired"
RE[3]: Who actually got fired
by segedunum on Wed 25th Feb 2009 17:36
in reply to "RE[2]: Who actually got fired"
Acquisitions during a recession make a lot of sense, because the buy-out targets are very cheap.
Not when you've been losing revenue and customers for several years, even when times were supposedly better ;-).
Acquisiations mean taking on more staff, spending a ton of time and money integrating them into your company and with no guarantee at all that you'll make it ultimately pay. Novell certainly haven't made the Suse acquisition pay. There comes a time when it pays just to invest in and trust your own employees. Novell look as if they do neither.




Member since:
2005-07-06
The problem always is with these companies that you never hear the full story. One hundred layoffs sounds quite small. It almost always is worse than anyone is saying, and past Novell layoffs and other company culls have bourne that out. You can't just add up the blogs, and remember, those writing will probably be unable to talk about it fully.
Look at what Hubert Figuiere hinted at in his blog post as to Novell's rudderless position. Acquisitions in Novell's state and in the current climate and laying off employees? WTF?