Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Looks like Intel Security had good enough earnings to miss the layoffs.

by
| 1871 views | | 8 replies (last May 6, 2016) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+HfjqJ8L

8 replies (most recent on top)

If they offered VSP to them there'd be no one left in ISECG

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jzy+HfjqJ8L

Getting ready to divest. Intel Security in Reston beware...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rln+HfjqJ8L

I have heard small Intel Security site in UK will not be impacted - anybody could confirm?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @duj+HfjqJ8L

Or...mcafee is just better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tss+HfjqJ8L

One possible reason for that is that If a company is still acquiring other companies (which I believe Intel still is), you don't want to layoff a bunch of folks in a recently acquired company. It looks bad and will scare other companies you are interested in away from the negotiating table.

Another possible reason is if a company is getting ready to divest the other company (after realizing the purchased company wasn't that good a fit after all and didn't bring the value expected). In that case, you need those employees to have something of value to divest.

So, I would suspect it has more to do with one of those reasons and if I had to guess, I'd go with the second.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wap+HfjqJ8L

Who knows? There time will come... ;-)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @oyq+HfjqJ8L

I saw that too (that they were not included in the layoffs) but I don't think it was their earnings that kept them safe.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bjd+HfjqJ8L

You don't say...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xwl+HfjqJ8L

Post a reply

: