Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

HP/Compaq Merger Official Today 184

Ankou writes: "Today (May 6th, 2002) marks the first day of the Hewlett Packard and Compaq merger. The finalized buyout of Compaq is expected to be done today and are expected to be working together "as a combined entity" by tomorrow. This also means a new stock symbol will replace the old HWP to the new symbol HPQ. Behind the hype this merger will cost, according resources at CNN on this article, a total loss of 15,000 more jobs with over 150,000 following the next two years. The same article details more information regarding the new merger and the recent events which have lead to today." Update: 05/06 15:03 GMT by T : Note: that job-loss figure is off; the 15,000 jobs projected to be cut are from a total of 150,000 between the two companies.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HP/Compaq Merger Official Today

Comments Filter:
  • New Name... (Score:2, Funny)

    by swordboy ( 472941 )
    From now on, you will refer to them collectively as "Hewlett Paqard".

    Change is good!
  • Content error (Score:5, Informative)

    by ckaminski ( 82854 ) <(moc.redochtrad) (ta) (mapson-todhsals)> on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:45AM (#3469522) Homepage
    Read the article. It says:

    It also will result in the loss of at least 15,000 jobs out of a combined work force of 150,000 during the next two years.

    Not that 165,000 jobs will be cut....

  • Surprise! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:45AM (#3469523) Homepage
    This is quite a surprise to me. Considering the company's respective markets, and the amount of products that they produce, I would have suspected that Compaq would have bought out HP, not the way it turned out. Seems to me as if Compaq produces a lot more products in general, does more research, has more of a market presence, etc..
    • Of course, they'll keep their 'original' brand names, to feign competition and keep the prices as high as possible. (Not that much profit margin is even possible anymore in retail, really)
      • to feign competition and keep the prices as high as possible

        Posts like this make my head hurt. Since when does competition, feigned or otherwise, keep prices high? The reason 15,000 people are going to get the 'pink slip' is to reduce competition (and redundancy in manufacturing), thus improving profitability. Or so the theory goes. Time will tell.

        • Since when does competition, feigned or otherwise,

          Real competition does help keep prices low. The point was that this is only the appearance of competition.

          • The point was that this is only the appearance of competition.

            Ie they make all the computers in the same place and slap a differnt sticker on 'em.
    • Re:Surprise! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by powerbarr ( 466387 )
      It's called printing. HP makes more profit than Compaq from the printing side alone. Not sure about the revenue side. I believe overall revenues are/were nearly the same for the companies. However, HP had a market cap of about 40 billion before the merger while Compaq's was on the order of 20 billion. Also, HP produces a lot of products on their own, especially imaging and printing.
    • Re:Surprise! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by cholokoy ( 265199 )
      HP has always been bigger than Compaq by looking at their revenues. HP is into more markets - large Unix systems and Workstations with their PA-RISC architecture while Compaq does not have such until their aquisition of DEC. HP has always been second to IBM revenue-wise and competes with them in many markets unlike Compaq who is very strong only on the Intel-based PC market.

      Its printing business is just a shadow of HP's while they are strongest in servers and PCs, HP is not far behind.

    • ...Seems to me as if Compaq ..... does more research...

      That's a load of bollocks. Compaq always were vacuum cleaner salesmen compared to HP. As is Dell. Ok Compaq tried to fix this situation by buying Digital, which as everyone knows, was a real tech company like HP. They also bought Tandem, I think. Not that it changed stuff much. Even after Compaq bought Digital they still were hoover salesmen. I mean, via Digital they had the arguably best RISC processor architecture ever (alpha), a reasonably good commercial unix which made their high-end offerings quite good, had they pumped enough capital into it to keep it going. But no, instead they sold they whole lot to Intel, so that they could focus on selling low-margin-pc:s. Sheesh! Compete with Dell in a super-low-margin-cut-throat market. What a blindingly stupid idea! Uh, sorry, "focusing on services (the niche where there is little if none competition, right?)" is the buzzword du jour which masks all management blunders. And yes, well there were rumours that the Alpha sellout was in fact a part of the deal with HP, which perhaps puts it in a different light.

    • Not hardly. Compaq's just a screwdriver shop, albeit a huge and stupidly-run one. There's no one at Compaq with brains enough to pour piss out of a boot -- the only thing that they do is package up other people's research (while taking a massive loss.) Sadly, this is also becoming true of HP.

      I give HPaq 18 months, until they sell off printing and imaging and go bankrupt in an orgy of finger-pointing and recrimination. Fiorina, the architect of this train-wreck, will, naturally, be fired upwards. Again.

    • Not true. Compaq may sell more computer products than HP, but HP definately produces more products. Compaq is just a computer company, whereas HP has it's fingers in a lot of pies, like calculators, test equipment, printers (Compaq just repackages other manufacturers printers), etc.

      HP is much bigger than Compaq, and always has been.

      • Re:Surprise! (Score:3, Insightful)

        by glenmark ( 446320 )
        "...whereas HP has it's fingers in a lot of pies, like calculators, test equipment,..."

        Actually, HP spun off their test equipment line into a new company, Agilent [], back in 1999.

        Long live RPN!

  • Wrong (Score:2, Informative)

    by powerbarr ( 466387 )
    15,000 jobs out of 150,000 jobs total in the company over the next two years will be eliminated. Not great but, not 150,000 jobs lost.
    • I dunno, maybe when the combined incompetence of these two companies reaches a head, then we will see a loss of all 150,000 jobs...
  • I actually can't tell if this article from The Register [] is real or a paraody!

    Keep the synergy flowing! Anyone know any good replacements for HP laser printers?


  • by tps12 ( 105590 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:49AM (#3469548) Homepage Journal
    I'd like to be the first to say, I'm really excited about the possibilities of this merger. Historically, especially in the computer industry, we have seen that mergers of two good companies often create new companies that are "greater than the sum of their constituent parts." And this is no exception.

    Compaq has a stellar track record, from their sleek designs to their top-of-the-line reliability and support. Their support of the old standby DEC technology has truly been a boon to IT and engineering houses. As I type this, I am using a svelte Compaq tower with a P4 chugging away. This baby is sweet, and runs Linux with nary a hitch.

    As for HP, they have demonstrated time and again that they can reign supreme in the realms of laser printing and server mainframes. Their own Unix OS was a champion in its heydey, and with their recent efforts in the Linux world, we have nothing but good things to look forward to from them.

    In short, in a few years we will be looking back at this as the beginning of a new era for enterprise technology. Let's hope they keep raising the bar.

    • by looieprima ( 71559 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:53AM (#3469578)
      Thanks for sharing, Carly.
    • Dear God, this is one of the best trolls I've ever read. Either that, or you've never used a Compaq (insert rant about Setup programs being on hard drive rather than on BIOS here).

      I recently had the joy of setting up an old Compaq server. Win2K, Linux, nothing would run without all sorts of special drivers. Finding them, then getting them to work them was a pain in the ass like a concrete enema.

      While I've heard decent things about HP PCs and servers, and I love the Laserjets, I can't help but think Compaq will have a negative effect on HP's altogether decent PC division.

      • I bought a Compaq notebook in '96, and hated the way it tried to lord over Win95.

        I bought Compaq desktops in '97 for work, and couldn't get common hardware to work under WinNT.

        I haven't given Compaq a nickel since. The only good thing about that experience is it sent me to the white-box market, which I've discovered is really cool and easy, because they don't mistake corporate inveigling for enhancement.

      • While I've heard decent things about HP PCs and servers, and I love the Laserjets, I can't help but think Compaq will have a negative effect on HP's altogether decent PC division.

        'Decent PC division'? I guess that depends on which HP PCs you're talking about. Their Kayak and Visualize Workstations are nice... their Pavilions are wretched heaps.

    • Huh? What exactly did Compaq do with DEC's stuff that was so great? I mean, they're not a chip designer, what on earth are they going to do with the Alpha?

      As far as I can tell, HP/Compaq is a merging of an average PC manufacturer and a mediocre one, and I'm not sure exactly what they're going to do together that they couldn't do separately.

      As for me, I've decided to buy my computers from either a small screwdriver factory, or Apple. The only large PC manufacturer I'd feel comfortable buying from is Dell.
    • Yeah, this is really great for all those geeks losing their jobs...
    • Huh? How could this possibly be good news for geeks? Have you ever tried to upgrade a Presario or Pavilion? Proprietary crap all over the inside of these boxes. I credit both of these manufacturers with the initial disposable PC -- can't upgrade it, so you have buy a new one...H-P's printers are ok, but I have since switched to Canon's (and they rock); I have never considered one of their boxes - probably never will now. "Sleek designs" by Compaq? When you make claims like this, you really should supply a .jpg as well -- beige boxes, etc. And don't even begin on the LS-120 fiasco....
    • But besides that, while HP's desktop boxes used to be somewhat keen, and I used to recommend them to family looking for a new PC, I've began to accuse them of having Compaqitis. Lots of useless crap silently installed into the OS out of the factory that has "gee whiz" value but only leads to lowered system performance and stability, hardware and case designs from hell, and a general feeling of "ewww yuck" surrounding their systems...
      The only benefit to the geek is that we'll have one less name on our long list of "Avoid these manufacturers..."
    • WTF?! Did you ever have to deal with Unisys, the combined Sperry and Burroughs? Apparently not.

      Or, the parent post is one heck of a troll.

  • a total loss of 15,000 more jobs with over 150,000 following the next two years.

    The combined payroll of both companies is 150,000.

    • by davmct ( 195217 )
      I think they meant that HPQ will be going bankrupt in two years time, hence the 150K employees getting sacked. But don't worry, I believe Carla and Cappy will be well-imbursed for their troubles.
      • Everybody knows the havoc Carly leaves in her wake, and this just lets her kill two dinosaurs with one stone, so to speak.
        My hope is that somehow, The good basic infrastructure of the PA-RISC systems gets the Alpha processor, HP-UX dies an slow, painful death, then goes to hell, to be replaced by OSF/1(Digital UNIX(Tru64 UNIX)) or Linux, and the unit escapes before the rest goes away.
        It could happen. The test unit escaped, so you can still get a decent O-scope... why not the unix side?

  • a total loss of 15,000 more jobs with over 150,000 following the next two years

    It sounded as if a lot of people were against this in the first place - and considering the job losses indicated above, explain to me who exactly is going to benefit from this?!?!?! Why was this a good idea? Both companies' computers are just "eh" to begin with..

    • by tb3 ( 313150 )
      Carly and Mike, and a number of senior execs, are going to take home about $75 million in bonuses, IIRC.

      And you thought that management worked for the shareholders...
    • It's usually viewed as a good idea by most management in large companies because large companies almost always have at least 10% of their work force that they would out-right fire if they could easily. Think about it. Any company that is over say 10,000 is going to have slackers. It's easy to hide in such a large company. Do the minimal amount of work that isn't really enough to justify your salary, but knowing that the company can't easily fire you after a certain amount of time. By merging or buying out another company the combined company gets to lay off thousands of dead-beat people that they would otherwise face numerous lawsuits to try and get rid of. Now, this does not mean that some innocent and "non-deadbeat" employees will unfortunately get layed off, but from the larger picture it's worth it to upper management to cut out the accumulated fat in a company and run lean for quite a few years again. Now, I know nothing about HP or Compaq people, so I can't say what the actual percentage of slackers are in each company, but anyone who is honest with themselves has to admit that the percentage is over 0%...
  • of course (Score:2, Flamebait)

    these layoffs are all the fault of big business capitalism... why if we were all communists like most of you /.ers want, we would all have jobs. Of course we would all be farmers, we wouldn't actually get paychecks, and oh yeah, we wouldn't have this internet thingy...

    just makes me sick all the anti business stuff on here, lets all go work for the government because they somehow aren't as evil as a business.... then want to explain how America kicks everyones ass in just about everything?

    Okay, mod me down, flame on, troll, and all that happy crappy, but after you do that go take Economics 101 at your local place of learning.
    • Re:of course (Score:3, Insightful)

      by foobar104 ( 206452 )
      You know, the parent post was a little light on content and heavy on ire, but if I had any points today I would have been willing to spend one just to encourage unpopular opinions. I, too, get frustrated with the vocal "Slashdot hippies" who spend all of their time advocating "free" software-- which carries a pretty twisted definition of "free," by the way-- and complaining endlessly about the "evil" actions of any and every corporation, big or small, good or bad, right or wrong.

      While the Slashcode moderation system is inherently a good thing, I think, it also serves as a pretty darn good object lesson in Plato's critique of pure democracy.
      • Unfortunately, both parent posts carry the unfortunate tone of right-wing political correctness. The tarring of advocates of free software as hippies (and seeking to associate them with the usual "hippie" attributes of unworldliness or immorality), is an example of the "everybody knows" argument - sounds good in polemic, but from an informational point of view is pretty useless - mainly because the information that "everybody knows" is actually a poorly distilled version of out-of-context snippets from the most vocal and least thoughtful proponents of a point of view.

        Are you willing to explore what this twisted version of "free" is, which you claim that others purport? Are you also willing to explain your use of what seems like an arbitrary appeal to authority (ie, Plato's Laws), and why it lends support to your argument?

        • Re:of course (Score:3, Insightful)

          by foobar104 ( 206452 )
          Are you willing to explore what this twisted version of "free" is, which you claim that others purport?

          Yup. It's not very complicated, and it's also not a new argument.

          The BSD license is a good example of a free license, in the traditional sense of free: "Exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control, or compulsion; able to follow one's own impulses, desires, or inclinations; determining one's own course of action; not dependent; at liberty." Webster's, 1913.

          The GPL, on the other hand, doesn't meet that definition of "free." GPL-licensed software is rife with restrictions. If I want to use GPL'd software in my own project, and not release the source to my own project, I am prohibited from doing this. That, to me, doesn't meet the definition of "free," sense 1, as given by Webster's. Whether the GPL is a good thing or not is a point for another debate. My objection-- at the moment-- is to what I perceive to be the misuse of the word "free" in characterizing that particular license.

          Are you also willing to explain your use of what seems like an arbitrary appeal to authority (ie, Plato's Laws), and why it lends support to your argument?

          Yeah, but Google does a better job than I could. Finding more information is left as an exercise for the reader.

          Plato's Republic contains a dialogue on forms of government, one of which is democracy. The problem with democracy, as defined by and discussed in this dialogue, is that political power rests with individuals who have no responsibility. Democracy, therefore, is fundamentally unstable and rapidly descends into tyranny.

          Contrast Socrates's definition of "democracy" with the modern definition of "democracy." Modern democracy is more like what Socrates would have called a republic, although we have long since abandoned the idea of the philosopher-king. Alas.

          Slashdot is similar, by analogy. Instead of political power, we're talking about editorial power. In a pure democracy, a charismatic individual could accumulate power by giving the masses what they want to hear, because democracy is based on the idea of positive feedback: you vote for, not against.

          On Slashdot, it's possible to accumulate karma (the Slashdot equivalent of political power, although karma carries with it no actual privileges) by giving the masses what they want to hear. Moderators are more likely to moderate comments up than down, so some ideas and patterns become highly moderated regularly.

          The old joke goes, "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!" This comment, or one like it, appears with virtually every article. Because this particular idea was so over-used, it became a joke. Comments that were once moderated "insightful" are now left unmoderated-- unless they're funny.

          Similarly, every story about some software product seems to include at least one comment either applauding the vendor for releasing source code, or deriding the vendor for opposite of same. These comments carry an implied converse, and they get moderated up often enough that an outside observer might conclude that the prevailing opinion on Slashdot is that keeping source code secret is unacceptable. I don't believe that's the most commonly held opinion by Slashdot readers. It just appears that way because of the way moderation works.

          The same principle applies to this particular story. Every time an article appears about a corporation, it seems that there appears one or more highly moderated comments on the subject of the "inherent" evils of commercialism or corporations. Again, I don't believe this is the majority opinion among Slashdot readers. It just appears to be because comments that have been moderated up are less likely to be moderated down.

          These situations all basically reflect the principles that were laid out thousands of years ago in the Republic: pure democracy, be it political or editorial, is unstable, and leads to tyranny, either social or intellectual.

          That's why I said that I would have spent a moderator point-- had I had any at the time-- to support the poster of the comment to which I replied. Contrary opinions are a good thing, and should be encouraged.

          In closing, I'd like to let you know that the fact that your post challenged the structure of my post, and not its content, is not lost on me.
          • Moderators are more likely to moderate comments up than down

            'cause we're good little sheep... (the moderator guidelines recommend doing this, as you know).

            Comments that were once moderated "insightful" are now left unmoderated-- unless they're funny.

            It's much easier to say something funny than to get modded up any other way, in my experience, but maybe that's just the class clown in me. /. is not the only bastard-child-of-applause-meter system that I've observed this on. (It's just the least obscure. :)
            Personally I try to avoid modding anything down, or modding anything "+1 funny", or modding anything to above 3. Other people are sure to do these things so it's not worth spending my points on.

            I'd say something funny about the DecComPaqard trend, but I can't really think of anything. I interned for a summer in Silly Valley at another research lab, and all the summer interns in a particular handful of places (that had this deal with each other) spent a few days going to each of the other companies and seeing "we're doing cool stuff and you should come here next summer, or else whenever it is that you graduate" presentations by various research groups. (Indeed there was some cool stuff.) It's not real funny to think about how many of these groups and labs are still around to work for now. :-b
    • Re:of course (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Grax ( 529699 )
      Life is about balance. Business does many good things but it has to be kept in check. Left unchecked it becomes as bad or worse than communism with a few powerful people controlling the whole deal.

      We have laws to try and keep them in check. Laws against abusing monopoly power, requiring companies to be responsible for their actions, and other things to keep them from being totally cut-throat, screw everyone as long as I get my money sort of entities.

      I think we have every right to complain when they misbehave and a responsibility as voters and government to keep them in line.

      As a small business owner I have other issues to contend with, such as big business making barriers to entry for small businesses and amateurs.

      Of course the layoffs are the fault of big business capitalism but the existence of the jobs in the first place is also the fault of big business capitalism.

      I'm not sure who or what you are arguing against but saying "if we were all communists like most of you /.ers want" is completely without foundation. My view is that /.ers are more open-minded about the benefits of different forms of government and are happy as long as it works, allows them freedom to create and allows them freedom to put food on the table. However, my view is as baseless is yours and we could both be completely wrong.
    • Commies like Walter Hewlett. Commies like the (many) shareholders who dumped their stock in both companies. Commies like the many who wonder what the heck happened to Compaq+DEC.

      Gotta run. Have to go rally the proleteriat.

    • since when does being against layoffs mean being for communism?

      i'm sure the 15,000 people who have been let go in this oh-so-promising tech market are proud to be part of this corporate climate that makes America "kick everyones ass"

      America is an OK place. Our employment rate stays reasonably high. Aside from that, the real advantages of America are big guns and cheap gas. There are other nice places to live though.

      My real problem with America isn't the government. I think Adam Smith's invisible hand still works (with some modification) in the modern world. America's problem is philosophical. We seem to be so eager to kill ourselves with work in order to buy bigger things. I for one prefer to take less money and have more free time. I'll never have the big house in the suburbs like my parents. But that isn't the only way to live. I have a different American dream.

      The suburbs are the worst though. The only advantage of living in the suburbs is it minimizes the necessity of interacting with other people. I'd rather live somewhere where I can walk to the grocery store and the park. I like the freedom my car provides me, but I also like the freedom of not having to drive it all the time. From my (limited) travel and discussions with those abroad, I think other places have a better philosophy as far as communities are concerned.
  • Well.. they had to do something to stay alive? Both companies were having problems that would have made them a serious takeover target for other companies. They decided that they would rather risk a merger than to be taken over by a company like Dell or IBM.

    And yes, they seriously were in that position.

    If they made a wise decision or not is something for the future. Although some "visionairs" say they know the future of the new company.

    There's a saying which could be applied here:

    A visionair (or pundit or whatever) is someone who can explain _exactly_ to you why a merger will not work before the merger and when the merger succeeds they can tell you _exactly_ why this success was the unwritten exception on the rule..
  • Great... Now there will be even more competition for the few jobs that ARE still available. The biggest problem is that when you find an open job now, they want a specific set of skills. This used to be okay, because they could just train you on the skills that you don't have. But now, we have so many people available that they'll just pass on you until they can find someone who already knows the systems they have in place. I wonder if the heads of these huge companies even have a clue what they're doing to all the little guys that will be losing their jobs now... ARGH!
  • Is it all that good? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dalassa ( 204012 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:52AM (#3469569) Journal
    I admit I don't know much about the merger so feel free to take my comments with a grain of salt:

    Right after all the reports about the massive money pit that is AOL and how it is hurting Time Warner why do these companies rush into mergers? And why right after the Enron and Global-Crossing fiascos is no one examining the benefits to the CEOs of the companies? While the Compaq-HP deal was announced last year there was alot of criticism about the benefits to both companies, where has it all gone? Was this a self defense merger? Were the two companies afraid that with out a merger they wouldn't be able to compete with other companies?

    Well I suppose I can look foward to good printers being sold with lousy computers and less hope of HP ever having decent Mac support.

    As I said, not knowing much about the deal and the two companies, feel free to ignore.
    • I'm guessing that HP found a lot in Compaq that it lacked (servers, support facilities, handhelds, whatever), and basically decided that they could buy Compaq at a good price. I imagine that they're going to let a lot of Compaq's revenue sources dwindle in the wind in favor of the HP versions, and just keep the things compaq does better than HP. Which in a way is good, it'll result in a more robust single company, but they're going to have to lay off a lot more people. I hope I don't get the ax.

      Honestly, Compaq was hurting. They were not making money. HP was making money, had money, saw something in Compaq that it wanted, and said, "well, why not?" And the rest is history. I don't really know why Hewlett was so against the merger, probably because he saw a lot of overlap, niches in both companies that would not benefit from the merger. but the pro-merger folks saw beyond that and said, "look, this that and the other thing will be better as a result of this!"

      As with any story, there are two sides. As a Compaq employee (until tomorrow! today is Compaq apparel day--break out your compaq and Digital garb and don it for basically the last time),Am I worried as a result of this merger? Yes, not for my job(I'm in a pretty safe area) so much as my personal well-being. I'm certainly uncertain about the future, but everybody here seems to be against this merger, and have a personal vendetta against ms. Fiorina. Why? I think yer all just jealous that she makes more money than you. But in all seriousness, while I have serious doubts about this merger, that's just the skeptic. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong. Most of my cow-orkers are pro-merger, even though it could mean bad things for us on the other side. We'll see.
    • Right after all the reports about the massive money pit that is AOL and how it is hurting Time Warner why do these companies rush into mergers?

      The individuals who set up the mergers make tens or hundred of millions of dollars, Everyone else loses. But that's who set up these mergers. "The people" have no say in this way of doing "business."

      AOL lost $54 BILLION !!!!!!
  • I could swear this article [] talks about the same thing....

    Seriously, the thing I'm curious about is what's going to happen to the Unix divisions? Both HP and Compaq have their own flavors of Unix. Will we see a merging of the two (Join me...and together we will rule the root as father and son!) or will they decide to ditch both, and focus on a FreeBSD-GNU/Linux style solution?

    There is some interesting possibilities between these two companies with their development houses and expertise - it all depends on whether they can actually make the good pieces fit together to make a better whole.
    • For both UNIX flavors there are contracts to be fulfilled, but since HP-UX has a far larger customer base, it looks very likely that True64 is going the way of the Dodo.
    • "Seriously, the thing I'm curious about is what's going to happen to the Unix divisions? Both HP and Compaq have their own flavors of Unix. Will we see a merging of the two (Join me...and together we will rule the root as father and son!) or will they decide to ditch both, and focus on a FreeBSD-GNU/Linux style solution?"

      It was announced quite some time ago that efforts to port Tru64 Unix to IA-64 were being halted. HPQ will move forward with HPUX running on IA-64 with some juicy bits from Tru64 rolled in. Also, OpenVMS and NonStop NSK are being ported to IA-64 as well.

  • The shareholders and investors of a company dont really care how many people it employs, wether is succeeds, or gets bought out. All they DO care about is how much profit they will make on their investment. Thats it. If it means laying off people, making the company succeed, or having it bought out, they will do it.

    So it doesn't matter how many jobs are lost or how much restructuring has to be done as long as the investor gets his 'bang for the buck'. In my own opinion, this is a bad idea. But I can see why the shareholders voted for the merger. They just did some simple calculations and figure 'we're gonna get ourselves some big bonuses, and pocket a whole lot of money if we go this route'.

    • Actually I am a share holder and an employee and I care a great deal about both areas. I like money, I want my investments to make money.

      I also like having a job. It is wrong to assume that the shareholders don't care. It is correct to assume that they entrust there savings and investments in people whom we all pray are doing the best job that they know how to do.

      Now there are CEOs who will cut jobs just to make there stock look good but you must be aware that long term investors care very little for short term bounces. Nobody that I know is looking forward to the next year or three in the new HP but from an envestment perspective we hope that ten years from now what is HP will really be a good company to have owned stock in.

      From a job perspective, it is inconceivable that the people laying off 15,000 people are not going to have really grim dreams for the next little while.

      My point is that regardless of whether this merger was a good or a bad idea, the people who thought it up did so because they felt that it was the best possible choice out of series of really bad options. They deserve the right to see if they can make a go of it.

      I only hope I don't loose my job or my envestments loose value in the face of this effort.

  • by crow ( 16139 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @11:04AM (#3469653) Homepage Journal
    When a company goes into bankruptcy, a 'Q' gets appended to the end of the ticker symbol. HPQ. Hmmm.
  • 150,000? (Score:2, Informative)

    by dan14807 ( 162088 )
    The article says 15,000 jobs will be cut out of a workforce of 150,000 over the next 2 years, not that 150,000 jobs will be cut. Original post wasn't that clear....
  • Official??? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lar3ry ( 10905 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @11:04AM (#3469657)
    I've been told that tomorrow is "Day One."

    But if you prefer to start counting at zero, then I guess you might think it's official today ("Day Zero").

    But then, I just work for Digital^H^H^H^H^H^H^HCompaq^H^H^H^H^H^HHP...
  • a total loss of 15,000 more jobs with over 150,000 following the next two years.

    Come on dude, read the article. That's 15,000 layoffs in the next two years out of a combined workforce of 150,000. I.e., the combined size of the new company will be about 150,000 employees, of which ~15,000 (10%) will be fired in the next two years.
  • HP + COMPAQ IBM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @11:15AM (#3469742) Homepage Journal
    They may have sold the investors on HP+COMPAQ=IBM but previous experience shows that X + COMPAQ X seems more true.

    I would be surprised if it only cost 15 thousand jobs as they have a lot of overlap in products. Consider also that most of this overlap isn't exactly in a profitable area (PC and PC peripheals)

    I think its best HP bought Compaq and not the other away around. The key to the merger will be how much control HP maintains over the process...
    • Re:HP + COMPAQ IBM (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mckwant ( 65143 )
      Rave on, brother. I still can't figure out why anybody thinks this is a good deal, unless there's something in Compaq's server offerings that I'm missing. It strikes me that HP's got printing, and some relatively big iron, while Compaq is just nowhere, competitively. Esp. since you can't make serious money with PCs any more.

      Prove me wrong, kids.
      • Compaq is a major player in the storage industry. IIRC, HP's offerings are rebranded OEM, while Compaq actually did something with DEC's StorageWorks platform.
        • This is not true, and has not been trued for about the last two years. HP used to rebrand storage offerings, but in the last couple of years they have actually developed their very own, in house, Virtual Array series.

    • Re:HP + COMPAQ IBM (Score:5, Interesting)

      by red_dragon ( 1761 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @01:09PM (#3470727) Homepage
      Consider also that most of this overlap isn't exactly in a profitable area (PC and PC peripheals)

      Are you sure of that? To me, it looks like the two companies are almost identical. To list:

      • Pavilion v. Presario
      • Vectra v. Deskpro
      • Omnibook v. Armada
      • Jornada v. iPaq
      • Kayak (name no longer used) v. Evo
      • Visualize v. AlphaStation
      • Netserver v. Proliant
      • HP 9000 v. AlphaServer (Tru64)
      • HP 3000 v. AlphaServer (OpenVMS)
      • ... and so on.

      That's all I can think of off the top of my head, but I know there are many more parallels between the two. The only differences I can recall are HP's printing and networking hardware product lines, for which Compaq doesn't have equals.

  • Note: that job-loss figure is off; the 15,000 jobs projected to be cut are from a total of 150,000 between the two companies.

    Timothy, are you sure you want to make that correction? Your previous statement, while more speculative, may actually be closer to the truth! ;)
  • HPQ Website (Score:2, Interesting)

    by snawdjj2 ( 577975 )
    Anyone notice that [] is active. (But it's just hp's home page right now.)
  • I really love it when newspeople mention how the economic downturn is over, yet in the same breath mention that company abc is laying off thousands of worker.

    With 15,000 being layed off, it seems the matter of this merger being a "good thing" depends entirely on who you ask.
    • That is, firing trails the downturn and hiring trails the upturn. First things go to hell, then people get fired, then things get better, then people get hired.
    • That's a totally pointless comment. If this merger existed in a bubble, and was the entire US economy, and 15,000 just lost their jobs without any chance of future employment, then you're right. The reason analysts say the downturn is over is because they believe jobs are being created at a faster rate than they're being lost -- disagree with this if you want, but "some people lost their jobs" is not sufficient evidence to prove "the economy is doing poorly."
      • For all of the tech jobs laying off, you believe that the new positions opening at McDonalds, even if in greater quantity, is an upside for the economy?

        Yes... yes... I know. I don't have sufficient evidence to prove that either. But I believe in that as a trend, on a general level.
      • and which companies announced today that they'd be hiring 15,000 new employees?

        When the biggest employer in the nation is a temp agency, I don't think you can say that the economy is healthy, at least not any definition of "healthy" that applies to normal people.
  • According to this [] story, the stock is up so far today. That's a shock to me considering that according to this [] story that the street expressed it's displeasure with the idea by pushing HP stock down 25%.

    Maybe it's a post merger hangover?
    • Well, as of noon Eastern US time, HPQ is up a whopping 2%. Any buying into the stock is likely a combination of "ok, the wait is over, the merger is done" buying (arbitrage crowd closing out their positions), and mutual fund start-of-quarter buying. Given the sell-off of the previous several months, it's questionable to say that market liked this deal.
  • Two funerals to go to, that is. The other was a longtime personal friend. Rest in Peace, H-P. I will miss you.
    • Well, in the immortal words of a man slung over John Cleese's shoulders -

      "I'm not dead yet"

      "I'm getting better"

      "I think I might go for a walk"

      Of course, then Eric Idle bludgeons him to death, but you never know - HP might just survive. And if it doesn't, it won't be for lack of effort from its workforce (and no, I'm not Carly)

      • I think it would be better to compare H-P to the Monty Python dead parrot sketch; it is an ex-company, it has ceased to be, it has gone to meet its makers.
  • just like the merger of AT&T and NCR, the merger of Burroughs and Sperry, and the merger of Digital and Compaq.

  • Hewlett Compaqard (Score:3, Informative)

    by daviskw ( 32827 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @12:30PM (#3470404)
    The heading above is mistating the facts just a little. The new HP doesn't roll out until Tuesday, May 7th. Today is the last day that Compaq is an individual.
  • And thus... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by infernalC ( 51228 )
    we see the obsolescence another one of those cute little topic icons on /. RIP, Compaq.

    You know, maybe it would be nice for nostalgia's sake to post an article under the Digital logo once in a while. Of course, a small piece of DEC lives on in the Digital Networking Products Group []. It's a real shame that Compaq cut off the and domains this year. DEC = 3 letters, Compaq = 6. More to type.

    Maybe this signals the need for a mechanism to merge topics of old in the slashcode.

    Time to go see if that VAX I booted 9 years ago is still heating, er, running...
    • "It's a real shame that Compaq cut off the and "

      Er, typing "" into my browser takes me to Compaq's website. "" takes me to "", as does ""....

  • Actually, I for one expect most of the 150,000 others to go over the next couple of years. At the end of the day this is a stupid merger for stupid "I can piss further than you" corperate ego reasons. As such, no one will win except the execs that pushed it through who'll get nice big cheques to push off once it's clear how much damage they've done.


  • I just heard from a friend at HP that he was told today that his position no longer exists. Sounds like there's a lot of that over at HP today.

    Gotta pay those executive bonuses somehow.
  • The gold "Compaq" letters were removed from the old DEC Systems Research Labs building in Palo Alto just a few minutes ago. Unknown at this time whether they get replaced with "HP", or "Available".
  • Seen in rec.humor.funny (by King Ables) []
    With apologies to Don McLean...

    A long, long time ago
    I can still remember how computing
    used to be worthwhile.

    And I knew from the day I was born
    that I could make that code perform
    and maybe I could do it with some style.

    But last September made me shudder,
    with every 'nouncement Carly uttered.

    Bad news in my In-tray,
    I couldn't take one more day.

    I can't remember if I sighed when I
    read about our latest stride,
    something cut me deep inside,
    the day the HPWay died.


    Purge, purge, Ms. Technology Scourge,
    Drove my Beetle to the Needle,
    Now my job's on the verge.

    Them Compaq boys were
    drinking Starbuck's and Surge
    singing "This'll be the day that we merge,
    This'll be the day that we merge."

    Did you write the Book of DOS
    And do you believe an albatross
    Can really save our company?
    Now do you believe in buying time?
    Can Compaq save our bottom line?
    And can you teach me how write a resume?

    For all the words in a much better formated way (thanks lameness filter!) go here []

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.