My gut reaction is that whoever wrote the article pushes the cart way too
far. In fact, advocating mass layoffs to justify something HP already has
goes exactly the opposite of the HP Way as I knew it when I was part of this
company.

What made me join HP back in '84 was a wonderful product offering. What made
me stay for 13 years was the HP Way. What now makes me continue working with
HP as a Business Partner is both the product offering and the HP Way, or
whatever little remains of it.

Calling "votethehpway" a website that basically advocates exactly the
opposite as the HP Way sounds, best case, nonsense to me. Worst case, it's
an absolute lie.

There's a little gem on this site. The orange box on the left column has a
caption of "... create $5-$9 in present value per share". I think we all
remember the days, not so long ago, when that company HAD a value of $5-$9
per share. So they seem to be willing to pay $18billion (based on current
NYSE value) for something they already had ? Nonsense again. Why create at
tremendous price something you already have ?

Then, there is the subject of hp employees said to be massively supporting
the merger and the mass layoffs. From sources both inside and outside hp,
I'm tempted to believe this is gross manipulation. And the claim is, AFAIK,
not substantiated by fact.

IMNSHO, the merger is nonsense. The product lines of both companies are
largely redundant, servers, PCs, some storage, etc. So the only real gain is
economies of scale. Assuming the official figure of $2.5bn/year is
realistic, that's a ROI of more than 7 yrs. I doubt my own Board of
Directors at my employer's would back a project that has a 7 yr ROI. They're
expecting ROIs more in the 18-24 month range, if not less. A side effect of
the announced merger is that mass layoffs at both companies went almost
unnoticed. So the real intent MAY (conditional mode, just incase - Yes,
that's my idea of a disclaimer !) only have been to organize the layoffs. Am
I overly cinical ? Paranoid ? Perhaps. Someone once said that "only
paranoids survive".

What HP lacks most is the service activity. IBM does, I believe, about 40%
of their business with services. The figure at HP is closer, I guess, to
15%. They're simply not a major actor in that activity. They failed at
snatching PWH, and that was not good for them.

It's been said that the real intent of the merger was not about PCs and
other entry-level stuff, but more about the high-end market. I'm having very
serious second thoughts about this idea as well. In fact, HP already has a
presence in the high-end with the Superdome. What Compaq brings is nil.
OpenVMS may be an excellent OS (I believe it is), but I don't see it
surviving long-term. HP's competition in the high-end is Sun (Sunfire) and
IBM. Joining forces with Compaq, which has no real product offering and no
established image in the high-end brings nothing.

Don't misunderstand me : I love HP, I have many friends within the company,
I love the products and solutions, and I have no intention of switching my
allegiance to another manufacturer. But I believe that this proposed merger
plan is going way too far. It's becoming nasty and ugly. It should be
scuttled ASAP, for the sole purpose of restoring some calm, peace of mind,
stability and coherence to HP as a company. I need my partners at HP to
spend time processing orders, etc. , instead of fighting for their survival.

In this struggle for survival, I guess we'll soon see who prevails.

Time for a quote ?

"You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave"

Excerpt from "Hotel Carly-Fornia", The Eagles

Christian Lheureux
No sig. I'm speaking for myself.


> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]De la
> part de Mark Wonsil
> Envoyé : mercredi 30 janvier 2002 05:03
> À : [log in to unmask]
> Objet : [HP3000-L] WSJ: HP return volley
>
>
> And it keeps coming.  From Tuesday's WSJ, same page as the others:
>
> (Large Bold)
> Yesterday
> vs.
> Tomorrow
> (Normal text)
> Shall we write the next chapter of technology, or take dictation?
> Shall we lead change, or follow it?
>
> Shall we look to Yesterday, or Tomorrow?
>
> Some suggest HP should narrow its
> interests and limit its expertise; invent--but within boundaries.
>
> The times argues the reverse.
>
> We are now entering a period of computing in which all limits are
> ignored and all borders erased--a period in which the main
> requirement is
> that everything works with everything else, everywhere, all the time.
>
> To meet these changes, the leading technology
> company of Tomorrow must stand at the center of it all, bringing
> simplicity and usefulness and seamlessness to the whole.
>
> By merging with Compaq, HP will become a global technology company
> with extraordinarily deep experience in both consumer and
> business markets;
> together, we will put forward a technology portfolio broad enough to
> deliver "end to end solutions"--not the advertised cliche',
> but the real thing.
>
> Together, we will become the market leader in servers, storage,
> management software, printing and imaging, and PCs -- markets where
> leadership really matters to our customers and partners.
>
> Together, we will double our profitable and growing services
> business, greatly;y
> strengthening our R&D efforts, and extend our customer reach
> into 160 countries.
>
> This is the potential and the power of the new HP.
> On behalf of our customers and partners, our shareowners and
> employees, we choose to look at tomorrow.
>
> To learn more, please visit: www.VotetheHPway.com
>
> (Invent logo)
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *