Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 23rd Nov 2012 14:03 UTC
In the News Hard to believe, but articles are popping up at business websites claiming that venerable Hewlett-Packard may fail. In their most recent fiasco, HP wrote off a loss of $8.8 of their $11.1 US billion acquisition of Autonomy and have alleged fraud in the deal. Revenue is down 7% from a year ago and the stock has hit a 10-year low. The company is laying off 27K employees but that may not be enough. Some speculate HP might be broken up into parts with buy-outs involved. This article from last May offers a good in-depth analysis of how all these problems came to pass.
Thread beginning with comment 543072
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Actual HP employee
by akro on Sat 24th Nov 2012 05:44 UTC
akro
Member since:
2005-07-06

So I am an HP employee. the reality is HP has become too big and we have had previous CEO's try to grow through acquisition. While wall street and the amateur techies see HP as a consumer computer company the serious IT folks see the enterprise side of the business.

The consumer side is a mess. Although I think the quality issues have been getting better the problem is that HP consumer products are a race to the bottom unless you can command a premium based on brand like Apple.

Enterprise is a different story.... number one in x86 server shipments for like 60+ quarters, HP Storage is doing better with the 3Par acquisition and becoming a real competitor on the network side of the house. HP software and services are a bit wacky because of the EDS and Autonomy acquisitions and well there is still a lot to do as far as integration on those two fronts.

Honestly the layoff coming are necessary. We have bulked up because of the acquisitions and we can't support the company at the size we are today, it does suck though for 29K people. Product road maps are starting to look a little more promising as we seem to be recovering from where Mark Hurd hurt us the most.

Morale is really the biggest issue...All the negative news really make me second guess my thoughts on staying as it just wears you down after a while, however I am starting to feel a little hopeful we will turn this around, hopefully before Oracle or some other company buys us.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Actual HP employee
by darknexus on Sat 24th Nov 2012 14:04 in reply to "Actual HP employee"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Honestly the layoff coming are necessary. We have bulked up because of the acquisitions and we can't support the company at the size we are today, it does suck though for 29K people.


I just love the blase attitude people have when it's not them getting the kick. I bet you wouldn't be nearly so calm about it if you were the one getting the boot, especially after it comes from idiotic decisions made at the board level. Hmm, I notice none of them are suffering as a result, they'd rather push it on to the mortals rather than pay for their own errors in judgement. Fascinating how corporate culture works, eh?
P.S. Yes, I have been employed by a large corporation before, so I'm not talking out of my ass. I've seen it up close.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by akro on Sat 24th Nov 2012 17:41 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
akro Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm the first to agree that layoffs suck but unfortunately they are a fact of life. I will also be the first one to point out that HP board-members and CEO's have put this company in a horrible bind. The company can't continue as is and this is a single step. I have seen a lot of people leave or get laid off many folks took early retirement packages. If it wasn't for my very unique situation I would probably go. This is the reality of modern corporations where ceo's are judged on a 13week basis. Is it wrong? Absolutely! It bothers me tremendously and is probably the reason this will be the last publicly traded company I work for. I do however understand what they are doing and this is an attempt to right the ship, will it work? I don't know...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Actual HP employee
by kwan_e on Sat 24th Nov 2012 14:59 in reply to "Actual HP employee"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Honestly the layoff coming are necessary. We have bulked up because of the acquisitions and we can't support the company at the size we are today, it does suck though for 29K people.


Why the hell not layoff the incompetent fuckers who made the poor acquisitions? Why the hell hire people whose only "strategy" is get rich quick through acquisitions in the first place?

They've basically got a whole small town of qualified people that they're going to throw away when in fact it could be cheaper and better in the long run to retain them and retrain them at a small cost. Think about what 29K people could think up now that they're not busy.

The place I work for, they're always encouraging employees to go "above and beyond". But then they completely decimate the headcount, leaving one person to do three people's jobs and they expect them to have time to do frivolous things.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by lucas_maximus on Sat 24th Nov 2012 21:09 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why the hell not layoff the incompetent f--kers who made the poor acquisitions? Why the hell hire people whose only "strategy" is get rich quick through acquisitions in the first place?


Bureaucracy and Politics, I worked in two mega bureaucracies now and I know politics. The game doesn't make sense if your think everyone is working for a common goal.

They've basically got a whole small town of qualified people that they're going to throw away when in fact it could be cheaper and better in the long run to retain them and retrain them at a small cost. Think about what 29K people could think up now that they're not busy.


It depends, in large organisations there are a lot of people that tend to be almost useless, but not damaging enough to get sacked.

I suspect a good number of those people were glorified secretaries.

The place I work for, they're always encouraging employees to go "above and beyond". But then they completely decimate the headcount, leaving one person to do three people's jobs and they expect them to have time to do frivolous things.


It normally the way, we have talented programmers (a lot better than I) firefighting legacy systems all day. I am currently the sole developer that has 100% of his time working on the CMS ... go figure.

Edited 2012-11-24 21:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by Delgarde on Mon 26th Nov 2012 00:59 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Why the hell not layoff the incompetent fuckers who made the poor acquisitions? Why the hell hire people whose only "strategy" is get rich quick through acquisitions in the first place?


Agreed, but getting rid of them doesn't get them out of the hole. Yes, senior management are hugely overpaid as individuals, but collectively they're small-beans compared to the cost of paying salaries for tens of thousands of workers. So even if they get rid of the bad execs (as they should), they still need to get rid of large numbers of regular folks as well.

Think about what 29K people could think up now that they're not busy.


In theory. In practice, they still need to be paid now that they're not busy. I've been in that position, and when the company isn't making money, the first priority tends to be to stop doing stuff that's losing money

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by Vanders on Mon 26th Nov 2012 11:16 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Why the hell not layoff the incompetent fuckers who made the poor acquisitions?

Er, they have. Shane Robison was one of the first out the door when Meg Whitman arrived. He was head of HP's Office of Strategy & Technology (OS&T), which is also gone. OS&T were responsible for almost all acquisitions within HP.

Disclaimer: I work for HP.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by zima on Wed 28th Nov 2012 17:44 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

The place I work for, they're always encouraging employees to go "above and beyond". But then they completely decimate the headcount, leaving one person to do three people's jobs and they expect them to have time to do frivolous things.

Yay for efficiency!(?) ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Actual HP employee
by Soulbender on Sun 25th Nov 2012 02:44 in reply to "Actual HP employee"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

But would you say the same thing if you where one of the 29k?

I do agree with you though, the enterprise end is where HP is strong. The X86/AMD servers and the Procurve line of switches are excellent products.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Actual HP employee
by akro on Sun 25th Nov 2012 03:24 in reply to "RE: Actual HP employee"
akro Member since:
2005-07-06

If I was or will WFR'ed be is irrelevant to the facts that HP would still need to reduce headcount. Of course my feelings would be a little bit more jaded and make no mistake I really am not happy with all of this...or the actions of HP for the last 8 years or so.

Reply Parent Score: 2