#competition

Flocks of our staff are jumping over to other companies. Recent trends also indicate Sixt is picking up talent. Who’s running over Kennedy’s empire?

Did you know Arista is half the market cap of Cisco and only has 5100 employees compared to 86,000 employees at Cisco?

Stankey seemed awfully confident during today’s ATG Live. After one solid quarter in a six-year tenure, the tone came across as more smug than self-aware, and the comments about employees didn’t exactly help.

Let’s see what next week brings after Verizon and T-Mobile report. One quarter doesn’t erase years of mixed results or settle the competitive picture.

If I were in his position, I’d spend less time taking victory laps and more time rebuilding trust with the employees who helped deliver the quarter in the first place.

I’m taking about the obvious ones (Veeva Systems, IQVIA, etc). Are they currently hiring Medidata employees? Any no-compete clauses for your standard IC/middle management personnel? Are they also going through the same layoff and cultural struggles as Medidata right now? For anyone working for Medidata competitors (either of equal size or smaller) has it been an improvement for your mental health?

I'm tired of hearing the same lazy narrative that Indian H1B IT professionals are "stealing jobs."

Let's settle a few things.

Indian IT professionals didn't invent the global labor market. Companies did.

If an employer in the U.S. hires someone from India, it's because they believe that person delivers better value , not because someone stole a seat at the table.

Many Indian engineers work 12–16 hour days, often across multiple time zones, while being paid significantly less than their counterparts in the West. That isn't exploitation by Indian workers; it's a business decision made by the companies doing the hiring. Or Companies wisely hiring 6 people in India instead of 1 person in west for same budget.

So here's my question: Why do some people assume they're entitled to earn five or six times more simply because they were born in a different country? In a capitalist market, compensation follows perceived value, skills, demand, and business economics—not nationality.

Another claim I constantly see is that Indians are somehow less capable. Yet if you look across the global technology industry, you'll find Indian-origin leaders running some of the world's most influential companies. That didn't happen because of charity. It happened because they proved themselves.

No one is forcing companies to hire Indian engineers. No one is forcing founders or executives to build engineering teams in Hyderabad or Bengaluru. Those decisions are made because businesses believe they're getting exceptional talent and results.

If you believe someone is taking your job, perhaps the better question isn't "Why did they hire them?" but "Why did they choose them over me?"

That's how competition works.

You don't have to like globalization. You don't have to like outsourcing. But blaming individual engineers who accepted opportunities offered to them misses the point entirely.

If you disagree, explain why. I'm interested in arguments based on facts and economics—not stereotypes.

Senior management protects their turf, you do something to better the company like win a technology challenge and are told that you should have saved it for your own group and not shared it company wide. For that specific reason I have been canceled. No longer an e performer even though no one knows nearly how to do their job and comes running to me. I was told that I should be honored that many take my slides for their own presentations and not giving me credit.

I went to a competitor who now loves my work and also understands their competitive edge over fidelity

Communications giant Verizon $VZ reports its Q2 earnings next week – July 24 – with Wall Street analysts becoming increasingly worried about the impact of competition from Elon Musk’s newly listed SpaceX $SPCX.

VZ’s share price is up 10.4% in the year-to-date, helped by its cost-cutting program to boost efficiencies and M&A such as its $20 billion purchase of fiber-optic internet provider Frontier Communications.

Wall Street expects Verizon to report earnings per share of $1.28 in Q2, up from the $1.22 it reported in the same period last year. Revenues are tipped to come in at $35.23 billion, up from $34.44 billion last time.

What Do Analysts Say?

Scotiabank Four-star TipRanks-rated analyst Maher Yaghi recently lowered his price target to $51.50 from $54.50 but kept an Outperform rating on the stock. It came as part of a report into the telecommunication services sector. Yaghi said he was adjusting some multiples on these stocks down to “investor trepidation to increased satellite competition”. However, he said he continues to favor Verizon in the sector.

The competition is likely to refer to the continued expansion of Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite services. Its growth is set to be rocket-fueled by the recent IPO of parent company SpaceX $SPCX.

Indeed, Bernstein analyst Laurent Yoon gave a similar reasoning after lowering his price target on VZ to $44 from $49, keeping a Market Perform rating on the shares.

“While SpaceX’s Starlink is unlikely to have a substantial near-term impact for telecom companies, it represents another competitor in an already mature and highly penetrated broadband market,” he said. Yoon believes the presence of Starlink implies subscriber gains for one provider will increasingly come at the expense of another, making market share shifts more consequential. “Uncertainty surrounding Starlink is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon,” he said.

There has been much industry commentary about whether Starlink would be forming an MVNO – Mobile Virtual Network Operator – partnership with a major telecoms company or operate as an independent mobile carrier. Indeed, SpaceX is reportedly now considering launching a Starlink retail product and could build its own terrestrial U.S. mobile network.

Five-star TipRanks-rated Wells Fargo analyst Steven Cahall believes Verizon has “the most to lose and the most to gain from an MVNO with Starlink,” applying a 40% probability to such a deal. He noted that a VZ-Starlink Mobile MVNO “would be mid-to-high single digit percentage accretive to EBITDA/EPS by 2032.”

He recently initiated Verizon at Equal Weight with a $43 price target and named it Wells Fargo’s most preferred telco.

I heard that most of the experienced people we laid off recently were immediately snapped up by a competitor at a much higher salary. If that doesn't show how clueless our leadership is, nothing will.

How would you compare us to the rest of competition?

I am interested in opinions of folks that worked for other companies.

Also, I'd love to see what people think about our position a few years from now

Remember, it was you who moved the ball for the company. It was the front line employee who made a difference to the customer base. It was you that made VZW. Not the so called decision makers. That being said, the best way to combat this is to all go work for a competitor, and bring what you brought to make VZW great. Let’s take VZW down by stacking the competition with highly driven, winning-cultured players in the industry.

A coalition of twelve states, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, has filed a lawsuit to block the proposed $110 billion merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery. The states argue that the consolidation would reduce competition, leading to higher prices, lower quality content, and fewer opportunities for diverse storytelling in the film and television industry. Paramount has stated that the lawsuit misapplies antitrust laws and that they will vigorously defend the transaction. The Department of Justice had previously investigated and concluded the merger would increase competition. Industry observers note that smaller, independent filmmakers are already demonstrating market viability, challenging the necessity of such large-scale consolidation.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/julia-cassidy/2026/07/13/12-democratic-states-block-paramount-merge-with-warner-bros-n2679342

1. Startup: Bringing your business idea to life.

2. Growth: Consumers know about you and your revenue is increasing.

3. Maturity: More brand awareness and a strong presence in your target market.

4. Renewal or Decline: While every business wants to avoid a decline, it’s bound to happen to almost everyone. Reinvesting in your company can result in its renewal -- or decline can happen for a variety of reasons:
    

• Not pursuing opportunities to expand during the maturity stage
• Changes to the industry that require a change in strategy
• Competing businesses having better products or services
• Not reacting to technology updates or advances


https://www.thehartford.com/business-insurance/strategy/managing-growth/4-stages-business-growth

Nordic Veneer has ceased operations at its Roseburg facility after 72 years in business. The company's final production day was July 2nd, leading to the layoff of most of its approximately 55 employees. Plant Manager Bayley Adams cited intense international competition and rising wood supply costs as significant challenges. A major blow came in April when a primary buyer, Roseburg Forest Products, stopped purchasing their veneer. The company is now considering selling the facility or waiting for a more favorable market.

Roseburg, Oregon

https://www.opb.org/article/2026/07/08/nordic-veneer-closes-mill-in-roseburg-after-more-than-72-years/

While Starlink is pushing the industry forward and Wall Street is raising concerns about what that could mean for AT&T, we’re still consumed by RTO, presence reports, and building a new headquarters. That’s the only focus here and it feels completely backwards.

Instead of talking about how we’re going to compete with Starlink, people are talking about badge swipes and making sure they sit in a chair for eight hours before heading home. Time that many employees once spent working extra is now spent commuting. The result is 8&skate culture where people check the box, do their eight hours, and leave. That’s not how you build an innovative company, but that’s the culture Stink has created with RTO, FTW, and Presence monitoring.

At the same time, we’re spending billions on a new headquarters nobody wants while facing one of the biggest competitive threats the company has ever seen. Shouldn’t the priority be improving our competitive position, controlling costs, and attracting and retaining the talent needed to compete?

The conversation should be about how we beat new competitors, not how many days people are in what office. If leadership wants this company to be successful, the priorities have to change. Right now, it feels like we’re looking inward while the competition is looking forward.

Time is running out, and if things don’t shift soon there won’t be an AT&T left for these egos to lord over.

Wells Fargo analysts started coverage of AT&T with a sell rating and price target of $18, implying nearly 15% downside. They are worried the telecom giant will likely lose ground to SpaceX's Starlink in broadband internet and, further down the road, could be threatened by Starlink's mobile ambitions. These aren't exactly new concerns. Just take a look at AT&T's stock chart, with shares down over 20% in three months.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/08/att-could-sink-as-starlink-use-soars-wells-fargo-says.html

Wells Fargo initiated coverage of AT&T with an underweight rating and set an $18 price target, implying nearly 15% downside from Tuesday's close.
In a note to clients, analyst Steven Cahall says Starlink is a near-term gainer in broadband relative to fixed wireless access and a longer-term disruptor to wireless. He says competition is likely to be fierce outside AT&T's fiber footprint, while the company's weaker market share footholds outside wireline areas leave its wireless net additions most at risk.

Cahall also says AT&T is less likely than rivals to strike a mobile virtual network operator partnership with Starlink. That leaves the company needing stronger execution in fiber and convergence to create upside for the stock, in his view.

Shell has first mover advantage by selling non operated Nakika asset. This simplifies the company significantly and creates capital and capacity where it’s needed. Now BP will have Talos as a partner. Talos going to learn the hard way how slow and complex BP really operates.
Why didn’t BP sale when they had a chance?

Lessons learned from Hormuz conflict is that XOM needs secure LNG and Venture Global is the perfect fit. XOM was slow in January of 2026 where it could have bought it cheap…and most likely paid it off in short term

SpaceX is launching Starlink at full speed, and it is coming straight for the big three telecom companies. This is not some minor disruption. Starlink delivers high-speed internet from space to places traditional infrastructure struggles to reach, and it is moving fast.

AT&T cannot afford to sit back. The current leadership team is not built for this fight. These executives have operated in the old world of limited competition and steady returns. That model is ending. They lack the urgency, vision, and willingness to make the tough calls needed to respond to a competitor that thinks in terms of global satellite constellations rather than quarterly earnings.

The company needs new leaders who understand technology disruption and are ready to move with speed and decisiveness. Cleaning house at the top is not optional. It is essential if AT&T wants to survive and compete in the years ahead. The window is closing. Time to act.

https://www.barchart.com/story/news/3024814/why-verizon-at-t-and-t-mobile-should-be-terrified-of-elon-musks-next-move

Maybe not fully ready for the first 2-3yrs for mass migration but it’s coming. And at the very least, we’ll likely lose FN. And that will lead to mass layoffs as Johnboy takes it out on us.

I would rank in this order

1. Puma
2. adidas
3. Nike

Now, this is for all practical purpose, a three horse race.

Nike's products were old, lackluster and uninspiring. Led by Nike's top endorsee Brazil which is not having best time in their illustrious history, the uniform just looked bad. Nike's idea of improvement? change the color of uniform from strong yellow to light canary. Wow!! Typical of Nike in last 5 or 6 years. Now don't get me started on team USA's hideous American flag garbage. Great job Nike.

adidas had Nike upgrade in many of their uniform that looked good. Specially bringing back their trefoil logo. It worked. Maybe short term but it worked in this WC. Team Mexico was great success!!

Puma won the race with nice but subtle upgrade of their offering and increase of teams wearing it. Also, I am sure that Puma did not give those teams monster contract like Nike did to Brazil, USA and Germany.

Anyone in this site that wants to buy the leftover Nike soccer jerseys from my soccer specialty store then please reply below and I will contact you.
As you know Nike doesn't care if cr-p sold or not. They want their ACH on time or they will suspend my account

Starlink has a contentious relationship with their D2D launch partner T-Mobile. This explains a lot of the rumors about them acquiring a terrestrial network.

https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2026/06/26/fever-pitch/

Seeing a lot of Cisco reps moving to competitors or partners lately or a complete flip in career. What insights do they have that we don't? 🤔

AK = Gerstner 2.0

https://247wallst.com/investing/2026/06/26/blackberry-ibm-and-nokia-are-all-trying-to-come-back-history-says-only-one-survives/

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4914954-at-and-t-spacex-threat-seems-exaggerated

I put this in a reply to another thread but thought it was something that might be it's own topic. VSP is not for the benefit of the employee, it's for the benefit of the Company, Board and Shareholders

Something I don't think anyone is considering, and a point that Centene would like to keep quiet is Unemployment benefit requires you to lose your job through "no fault of your own". (check your state) If you resign or take a standard severance package on your own, you generally won't qualify. So if you do take VSP you should plan on making that money go as far as possible since Unemployment is not going to be an option.

Asking the AI the question, how long someone in our position could expect to be out of work.

In 2026, laid-off professionals from health insurance giants like Centene or Molina can typically expect a job search to last 4 to 6 months. While the general timeline to secure a role can stretch to 5–6 months on average, specialized roles often take longer to fill. Navigating a job search after leaving a payer company involves several factors.

General Insurance Market Average: In the broader white-collar and insurance sector, the typical duration ranges from 3 to 6 months.

Healthcare Specifics: Because of strict credentialing, compliance requirements, and extensive application reviews, hiring processes within the healthcare sector can be slower, sometimes taking up to 8 months to fill specific roles.

Company-Specific Context: Centene (which offered Centene Offers Staff Buyouts Ahead of Potential Layoffs) and Molina (which filed WARN notices for their headquarters Molina Healthcare Layoffs 2026 - 156 Jobs Cut) have recently navigated structural downsizing. This means many former colleagues may be applying for similar roles at competing payers like CVS Health, Elevance Health, or UnitedHealth Group, temporarily increasing competition for equivalent roles.

But you are being pit against your peers in the rankings and the distribution is enforced.

Go team!

Market share going away, cutting prices while losing billions of dollars, datacenter builds plans cut and dropped across the industry, Microsoft distancing itself from OpenAI like it has an STD.

A sobering new sign for OpenAI as ChatGPT competitors gain ground

The chatbot that set off the AI craze just fell below 50% in market share for the first time, according to Sensor Tower, just as OpenAI is gearing up for an IPO.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91560276/chatgpt-loses-ground-gemini-claude-below-50-percent-market-share

I heard last week the company is throwing money at expanding IF&M under a new brand name (Healthsprings) so they can compete against other blues in the Obamacare space. Is that actually happening??? Isnt IF&M already a failing market??? Why would this leadership team throw money away like this????

The entry barrier to inferencing is less compared to training and modeling side of AI . So competition will ki-l the dominant position soon. So the hyper scaler story CEO says will only have short life and company heading south

Anyone with half a brain knows that Starlink is no longer just a rural internet fix. With 9.2 million paying customers ($10B in annual rev), and direct-to-cell satellites already working on standard smartphones, SpaceX is building a parallel network that bypasses carriers like ours entirely. Oppenheimer recently flagged it as a threat to the entire $1.6 trillion US communications industry. Legacy carriers spent decades owning and building the costly infrastructure. SpaceX just launched its own.

SpaceX is going scotch earthed and VZ will be roadkill!

This lonely Phillips 66 station! Not a single car at the pumps or customers inside. Located across the street from a competing station with 4 times the amount of traffic.

https://imgur.com/a/8w7MaHx

Moral of this story, the P66 brand su-ks.

People are leaving for competitors every single week. And the company isn't offering them better pay or any incentive to stay. Not even a conversation. With others being kicked out through layoffs, where does leadership think that will leave us in a few years?

How many of you think that SpaceX will eat telecom business?
Hard days ahead

Optimum's outlook 'more aspirational than realistic' – analyst
Optimum's new multi-year outlook sees its broadband business stabilizing at 3.8 million subs by the end of 2028. That's a 'tall order,' says New Street Research, which expects broadband losses to continue.

Picture of Jeff Baumgartner
Jeff Baumgartner,Senior Editor,Light Reading
June 10, 2026

For more than a decade, Comcast and Charter operated broadband internet businesses that were monopolies in everything but name. When a company passes a cable past 100 homes and 53 of those homes buy internet service from them — representing nearly 70% of every actual internet-buying household — that is not a competitive market. That is captive demand. Customers stayed not because the product was superior, but because there was no alternative.

That era is over. It is not ending gradually. It is ending structurally, simultaneously, and permanently across multiple dimensions at once.

The competitive as--ult is coming from every direction. Fiber providers — led by AT&T, which is building 5 million new fiber locations every year through the end of the decade, and Verizon, which acquired Frontier to assemble a 30-million-location national fiber network — are overbuilding cable's footprint at an accelerating pace. Fiber now passes more than 60% of US homes. Where fiber arrives, cable loses approximately one-third of its subscribers — not over time, but immediately and durably. Fiber customers don't come back. Fixed wireless from T-Mobile and Verizon has already attracted 16 million subscribers nationally and capacity is still expanding. Starlink is beginning to address suburban markets at the margin. Charter's CEO described the competitive environment in plain language: it is "not letting up."

The businesses in secular decline are the core businesses. Broadband — the segment representing more than half of both companies' enterprise value — is losing subscribers every quarter with no visible floor. Penetration has fallen from 53% toward 47% and the structural math, applied to AT&T's declared buildout trajectory, points to 38-42% by 2030. Video is losing 3,500 customers per day and will continue doing so until the subscriber base reaches a small residual of customers with no alternatives. Wireline voice is effectively already gone. These are not cyclical downturns. They are one-way technology and market transitions.

The responses available to management make things worse, not better. To slow broadband subscriber losses, Comcast cut prices and locked customers into five-year rate agreements — surrendering pricing power permanently. Charter chose the opposite: protect ARPU, absorb the subscriber losses. Neither path leads to stability. Both companies are investing billions in network upgrades that are defensive in nature — spending capital to stay competitive, not to grow. The wireless businesses are real but structurally parasitic on the broadband base they depend on. If the base shrinks, the wireless ceiling shrinks with it.

The hard reality for the coming years is that two of America's largest companies face simultaneous volume and price pressure in their most important businesses, rising capital requirements to remain competitive, and a competitive landscape that is accelerating rather than stabilizing. The monopoly that sustained their economics for a decade has been replaced by genuine, well-funded, structurally superior competition. What took a decade to build is unwinding in years. There is no technology upgrade, no acquisition, and no promotional campaign that reverses a fiber buildout already written into AT&T's capital plan through 2030.

The ice is melting. The question is only how fast.

More layoffs are coming this summer, and will continue to come as long as they bleed customers.

Productivity is several times lower than competitors, employee morale has hit an all‑time low, revenue growth is far behind the rest of the industry, and customers are developing AI tools better than us.

If I were in his position, I would initiate a targeted layoff focused on non‑essential roles immediately, followed by a clear public commitment that no major workforce reductions will occur for the next one to two years. This would stabilize the organization, reduce uncertainty, and allow remaining employees to focus on execution rather than worrying about job security.

What is your thought?

The Existential Threat -- what is Verizon's strategic plan or more importantly an imminent plan to diffuse the potential diminishing of the wireless market share??

The products, service plans, rendered by SpaceX and Amazon -- technologically satellite internet??

Mr. Schulman you are a friend of Elon's so we-ponize to create powerful combinations!!!

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/03/att-downgraded-ahead-of-spacex-ipo-on-coming-broadband-competition-from-starlink.html

It’s over y’all!