HP3000-L Archives

August 2002, Week 5

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Russ Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Russ Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:32:02 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
Wirt writes:

> Every transaction has to (be) constructed so that both parties walk away
from the
> table feeling they were treated fairly and received a trade that was to
their
> great profit. There's absolutely nothing "utopian", corny or old-fashioned
> about that statement. It is simply the only way to conduct business stably
> over an extended period of time.

And you hint at the real problem by ending your thought with the disclaimer
"to conduct business stably over an extended period of time".

American businesses, in general, seem no longer to care about anything but
the
next quarterly reported profits.  Why was Carly brought into HP?  Because it
was hemorrhaging money and would be gone in three years?  No, because it
simply wasn't performing as well as the stockholders and board felt it
should,
in a quarter over quarter and year over year analysis.

Grow or die!  And give us profits now by selling every long term asset we
have and then take your golden parachute and leave.  How much of that is
because everyone one and his brother (read "people not raised on the idea
that the stock market will give you an average of ten percent per year over
any given ten years, but should never be looked at as a way to get rich
overnight") came out of the 80's with 401k's in hand and the belief that
they
knew enough to have an account on eTrade.  If the stockholders sell and
run after a little bit of bad news because they don't understand the company
is a long term investment, then why would the boards and executives
running the companies do anything long term either?

It may be that HP no longer could include the 3000 in their long term goals.
But can they show much to suggest that they still have long term goals?  And
to give them credit, maybe the resources they were devoting to the 3000
just need to be reallocated to their next 30 year project.  Can someone
PLEASE tell me what that project is?

Oooooooh, a sleek new color for my printer.  Whoopee.

I hate to look at my retirement account balances, but I am getting allot
more
shares each month right now for the same investment; and when the market
comes back, I'll be fine.  I wonder how many of the HewPaq investors have
even HAD that idea.  Carly's doing exactly what her "bosses" want her to
do.  Or am I the only person who noted that the believers in the HP Way
were out-voted a few months ago.

Ugh,
Rs~

Russ Smith
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
The opinions expressed in this email are mine, and are not meant to reflect
those of any other party.  The subject matter herein is intended solely for
the named recipient(s) of this email.  Spellcheck cancelled.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2