What is your perspective? Im paid well, work hard, really want things to get better and stay. But im worried it is hopeless, talent is gone, most who stay are either too weak or too young. Does ibm really have a chance to stop the bleeding and show steady growth? Is it an illusion 100%?
15 replies (most recent on top)
yeah, IBM is improving all right...
IBM historically has raised the dividend in April and paid the higher dividend in June.
The only positive sign is that we are not bankrupt yet... The dividend payment is now more than the free cash flow... where do you think this is going? I have not heard IBM raised the dividend this quarter, unless I missed the announcement. IBM should really reduce the dividend, but we all know that if it does that, the stock price will crash.
My honest $0.02. I'm paid well, I love my clients, and I love my team. Those are the positives. All of the negatives that come with it though are forcing me out the door. CV and LinkedIn updated, now actively looking because I've had enough.
IBM services doesn’t have to sell IBM HW/SW to be successful Remember Intel = commodity (100’s of suppliers), Power = Niche (1 supplier, but dependent on ISV’s who have rewritten for LINUX/Intel), Mainframe = monopoly. IBM services can farm commodity and make just as much if not more. It’s the old joke Customer says I want Lucky Goldstar PC’s made in North Korea. IBM services says Lucky Goldstar is what we do best. They will sell what ever sells and eat a good breakfast
IBM Services did not have to sell IBM hardware and software. So they did not fight it when customer wanted another brand. They also took over the engagement from the client team. Many times we were in the dark on how it was going but still on the hook for winning.
Positive signs and ibm?
Ibm is dead man walking, seriously they have nobody to complete the work because they decline to pay competitive wages. Most teams are stuck in cycle of training new hires every couple of years.
But this year it got much worse, even new hires aren't coming anymore. They have to hire high school grads as interns and maybe going further temp worker only.
This all means the leadership starting at FLM doesn't care about products. Either they sell themselves (like mainframes) pr they don't sell at all, which is the case with most new sw ibm tried to compete on.
Look at the power division of ibm systems currentlt, eventually all divisions will end up like that.
Hey, remember Watson Health? Ginni's "Moon shot"? What a joke. Not a peep about that anymore. Never mentioned on earnings calls, and nowhere to be found in the media.
Quantum will turn out like Blockchain for IBM... IBM always fu--s things up. It will be no different this time around. And like someone else say, when IBM invest a single dollar, the competition invest ten.
I am pessimistic ibm will make any money on quantum computing at all. Google, amazon and microsoft are all exploring the technology. For every dollar ibm is willing to invest, each of them will invest ten.
Agree with much of this. But I don't think we're 50 years away from quantum being useful. They've actually made huge advances in just a few short years. Will IBM create an easy, profitable way for customers to use their expensive and massive Q systems thru the cloud and then hold the market? Eh, I sure do hope so. I really do. I'm tired of seeing IBM get there first then trip over their shoe laces.
Good replies to this so far. Totally agree Sam's push for services, ie body shop, took the focus off of HW / SW innovation. Not that IBM labs could not innovate, but, the executives sniffed short term gains in services and allowed the HW / SW products to go stale. By the time they realized what happened, IBM HW and SW was not longer leading the direction on the industry. The industry was going in new directions and IBM has been struggling ever since. What a freakin shame!!! IBM invented virtual machines. Invented disk drives. Invented so much! Now nothing! Maybe quantum computing will be the future, but that is prolly 50 years away from being truly useful.
Only time will tell. But so far in my team, 6 people have left since May. And guess what everyone is new grad or co-op to replace previous colleagues with one squad lead. Now you can think of what they can do with our current project. Only maintenance and fixing defects. No good senior engineer to guide and introduce new features. This is how they are expecting the growth. We are on our own and implement whatever we find from Google. Also, IBM can't afford good senior levels because they can't pay well similar to competitors.
Actually Lou was quite effective in his first term (1993-1998) as he shook up IBM and especially management to its core He reduced management to 7 levels from their 14 levels when he joined. He cut IBM from 350k to 220k within 18 months, and refocused the company on where the industry was heading (services). Lou was mediocre to poor in his 2nd term (1998-2002) He became complacent, lost his focus on innovation and let Sam run wild with services even when the contracts signed didn’t make a profit.
Sam once he became CEO continued on the services March and IBM’s future was assured (lack of innovation and just a body shop). I can’t tell you how many Enterprise accounts I worked on where the SW/HW sales were raided to subsidize Services contracts. Sam was focused on roadmap XXXX where making 15 bucks per share was all that mattered, and then where 20 bucks was the goal. Services even under his leadership was already starting to drag IBM down, but management wouldn’t speak up to Sam and his golden child.
Ginni inherited a sputtering IBM and doubled down on Sams strategy (services with zero innovation) and you can see the results Profits halved and revenues down by a third. That’s a he-l of a record that the board should have addressed by her 4th year. Ginni’s other problem was she had zero vision for IBM’s future, and under her leadership IBM fell behind in almost every major technology disruption that was happening right in front of her. By the time she retired IBM was a leader in nothing, , and an innovator exclusively in Mainframe due to being the only man left standing in that market place. Her chasing the next shinny object with her strategic imperatives was an industry inside joke and management is to blame (IBM board that means you)
Finally we have reached AK. He has inherited a vision less and innovation less company. His strategy is trying to leverage what IBM does well (yep mainframe) and roll services into it. NOTE buying Redhat even though expensive may still payoff, because it gives IBM mainframe sellers something to pitch
IBM lost it's way when Lou retired years ago. Sam rode his coattails, the Ginny screwed the pooch. Disaster.