That will whip the management team in shape. Our stock performance is embarrassing!!
11 replies (most recent on top)
$43.90 down from $57.95 in July
Doubled in 4 years.
Right. And how much of that was due to stock buy backs?
Yeah.
Doubled in 4 years. That's shocking. Oh actually doubling your money is actually rather good....Muppet OP
@12VNIe1m-4xoo I disagree based on evidence. IBM Q Experience has been offering Cloud based access to Quantum computing since 2017. They have a large ecosystem of partners working on it and have tons of research papers published to show for it. Same goes for Google except they have not offered any access to their quantum hardware like IBM.
IBM spends most of their money on advertising and stock buybacks. Quantum tech, AI, machine learning are all 2019 buzzwords at IBM used to appease shareholders.
@12VNIe1m-4kqb I agree in general. Also, at Cisco's current market valuation, it is likely too expensive for an activist investor to grab 6+% of stocks and bully the board around.
I am not a legacy Cisco person, only been here less than couple of years unlike most of the people I know who have been working the pseudo-techno-political environment and riding the LR-waves for 18+ years. Cisco, despite the hype here about "solutions, AI/ML..." , appears blissfully oblivious that they do not have any AI/ML solutions - no SKU's for those and the sales teams don't care - they want to sell HyperFlex rambling about AI/ML but does not know what to do when the customer comes to us asking to solve their AI/ML challenges because we do not have a framework for those kind of businesses. Neither do Cisco seem very interested in Quantum Tech - you hear ramblings about quantum security, internet etc. but no internal R&D is ongoing that I am aware of.
At the end of the day, Cisco is still the box-mover that it was 30 years back. And I suspect they may pay for lack of vision and investment in genuine futuristic research as is happening at Google or IBM. Or should I say WE may pay for the lack of vision, ingenuity and dynamicity in our leadership.
Yes, an activist investor would certainly shake up the board and force them to look beyond the narrow confines of ‘business as usual’...but the question is whether Cisco wants to change from being a ‘play safe by acquisitions’ conglomerate to one that actually has a vision for the future. For the latter, it would need a major ELT reinvigoration as Satya Nadella did at MS...and I can’t see that happening sadly.
The last poster from Engineering is correct........but GSX (or whatever it is called now) goes way beyond what is needed to inspire the sales force. The amount of money spent is insane......it's a multi-day drinking and high end food fest, along with concerts, and other assorted stuff that the sales folks hide within their expense reports. It's crazy.
I was in Engineering but my understanding was that GSX (or whatever it is called now) was there to update the sales teams on new products and services, outline the key messages and strategy for customers and, most importantly, get everyone feeling confident about making or exceeding their target...which they would be asked (told) to sign-up to on return from Vegas. If true (and happy to be corrected by folks in Sales), the ‘investment’ is probably viewed as key in terms of making Chuck & Kelly’s promises to the street...
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ciscos-stock-falls-after-bank-of-america-cuts-rating-price-target-2020-01-08
obviously the best move is to cut the travel and expense budget...
Funny how that happens after the annual Vegas trade orgy.