by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday October 25, 2002 @05:24AM (#4528259)
I work for a major Dutch cable company, in the tech support department. About two years ago, we had about 10,000 customers, built up over a year or two, and were therefore relatively small. Service was fairly good (except for a bad choice in cable modem systems), and improving.
Then the mother company, French, decided that they wanted to sell us. So, they set a goal for 100,000 customers by the end of the year. That's a lot of growth. Somewhere down the line, they even hired to consulting managers (*expensive*!) to guide tech support and the like.
The result is obviously guessed: The company is now nearly bankrupt, though a buyer has been found ("Look! Over 100,000 customers!"), and the layoffs have begun to keep the company afloat long enough for fresh capital.
They destroyed a perfectly functioning company that could have handled quite a bit of painless expansion, simply to increase its value for a sale. Can someone explain to me why this sort of thing would be good for the economy?
Anyone remember Metricom, and their Ricochet network? You knew they were gonna go under when they stopped selling service direct, and started selling through expensive retailers like Worldcom...
Not to mention other brain-dead tactics like disabling peer-to-peer connectivity between modems, forcing subscribers to migrate to more expensive 128kbps service, and selling modems at a loss in order to induce people to sign up.
That's one company that so obviously was run into the ground by management bozos. Superior product with manageable growth, replaced by unmanageable spending and excessive debt. Serves the bastards right when they passed up the inital bankruptcy bid of 20mil, and ended up getting bought out for only 8mil!
The sad thing is every corporate exec that worked for them is probably employed at some hapless company right now. There should be a blacklist of suits circulated around the geek community, so you know to bail when one of these idiots signs on to your company...
There is also another big example of bad managment in this sector in Holland: UPC [www.upc.nl]. This company bought many small cable networks in The Netherlands, some which were of very good quality, like A2000. In has now grown into a monstruous orginization where all quality and service has gone into thin air... Worst off all, it may go bankrupt taking with it all those small previously well functioning networks:(
It is probably good for the economy for the same reason as it is good for the economy to decalare highly educated professionals as useless relics because they have passed 40 years of age. It is really funny to read an analysis by some Wallstreet bozo claiming a company is stagnant and not "young and dynamic" anymore based on the facts that the average age of the employees is a bit high and that a search on a select collection of online job indexes revealed that they are not constantly hiring alot of new people. The net result is that people looking for a job get rejected becaue they are too old or respond to a job advertisement that turns out to be an "Opportunity for an unpaid praktikum period" (like anybody wants to work unpaid for a few monts) which is another way of saying "we just advertised that job because management wants to fool the stock analysts into thinking we are a "young and dynamic" company so we brought you all this way to an interview to make you an offer we know you will refuse. Perhaps the management methods you describe are the legacy of the 1980s jukbond kings and takeover pirates?
I think there should be some sort of punishment for company execs that put to much into short term growth and not enough into long term growth. Obviously they need to keep enough money coming in to pay everyone and allow modest growth but it's bad for the company, employees, and economy when they quickly inflate their own wallets and then jump ship before the company pops and sinks.
A great deal of our current economic situation was caused by tech companies doing just this. The worst cases are obviously where company execs sell out leaving all other stock holders and employees holding the bag but it really isn't much better falsely inflating these companies. People are still buying tech. Electronics and other techie gizmos are still hot selling items. Companies are still making a profit from them. There is no real reason for the tech market not to be booming. It's just dead because of the few individuals that were greedy and shortsighted.
Also I think the concept of day trading is partly to blame. People don't buy stock for long term value. They buy it, try to make a few quick bucks, and sell it again. They don't care where that company will be in five years. They don't care where the world will be in ten years. It's no better than a get rich quick scheme.
Research and technology drive society forward. They give us new abilities, raise the standard of living, and give people something new to buy. They may not pay out in an immediate obvious way but they are what fuels our economy and lifestyle and should be protected.
Death imminent (Score:4, Informative)
Then the mother company, French, decided that they wanted to sell us. So, they set a goal for 100,000 customers by the end of the year. That's a lot of growth. Somewhere down the line, they even hired to consulting managers (*expensive*!) to guide tech support and the like.
The result is obviously guessed: The company is now nearly bankrupt, though a buyer has been found ("Look! Over 100,000 customers!"), and the layoffs have begun to keep the company afloat long enough for fresh capital.
They destroyed a perfectly functioning company that could have handled quite a bit of painless expansion, simply to increase its value for a sale. Can someone explain to me why this sort of thing would be good for the economy?
Sounds like Metricom (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to mention other brain-dead tactics like disabling peer-to-peer connectivity between modems, forcing subscribers to migrate to more expensive 128kbps service, and selling modems at a loss in order to induce people to sign up.
That's one company that so obviously was run into the ground by management bozos. Superior product with manageable growth, replaced by unmanageable spending and excessive debt. Serves the bastards right when they passed up the inital bankruptcy bid of 20mil, and ended up getting bought out for only 8mil!
The sad thing is every corporate exec that worked for them is probably employed at some hapless company right now. There should be a blacklist of suits circulated around the geek community, so you know to bail when one of these idiots signs on to your company...
Re:Sounds like Metricom (Score:2, Funny)
There should be a blacklist of suits circulated around the geek community, so you know to bail when one of these idiots signs on to your company...
<obvious> :)
We only need a picture... anyone with pointy hair is a good candidate
</obvious>
Re:Sounds like Metricom (Score:1)
> There should be a blacklist of suits circulated around the geek community, so you know to bail when one of these idiots signs on to your company...
That would be handy... I'll bet the slander suits would "mow, like the harvest" (
It would be nice to find such a file (Called "Suitwatch.txt" or something) floating around one's favorie P2P network, wouldn't it?
Hmmmm......
Re:Sounds like Metricom (Score:2)
Re:I second the motion... (Score:1)
Re:Death imminent (Score:1)
There is also another big example of bad managment in this sector in Holland: UPC [www.upc.nl]. This company bought many small cable networks in The Netherlands, some which were of very good quality, like A2000. In has now grown into a monstruous orginization where all quality and service has gone into thin air... Worst off all, it may go bankrupt taking with it all those small previously well functioning networks
Re:Death imminent (Score:4, Interesting)
Greed (Score:4, Insightful)
A great deal of our current economic situation was caused by tech companies doing just this. The worst cases are obviously where company execs sell out leaving all other stock holders and employees holding the bag but it really isn't much better falsely inflating these companies. People are still buying tech. Electronics and other techie gizmos are still hot selling items. Companies are still making a profit from them. There is no real reason for the tech market not to be booming. It's just dead because of the few individuals that were greedy and shortsighted.
Also I think the concept of day trading is partly to blame. People don't buy stock for long term value. They buy it, try to make a few quick bucks, and sell it again. They don't care where that company will be in five years. They don't care where the world will be in ten years. It's no better than a get rich quick scheme.
Research and technology drive society forward. They give us new abilities, raise the standard of living, and give people something new to buy. They may not pay out in an immediate obvious way but they are what fuels our economy and lifestyle and should be protected.