Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

“Legacy” GSSO Downsizing

SB and her Engineering VP friend she brought over are now referring to the CSSs and TSAs that are mapped 1:1 as Legacy GSSO Sellers. The reason is they are building and transitioning all GSSO selling from CSSs and TSAs to under them. Why do you think they flipped the 2 buckets this year. Think about it. Where do the SecOps and Duo CSSs and TSAs reside from an org. They are under SB and CGS. SB and CGS plans are to downsize the CSSs and TSAs that are mapped 1:1 that are not under them. That is why they distinguish by calling them “legacy”. SB is phasing legacy CSSs and TSAs out. This is another SB disaster in the making just like the “Go Big” investment in Small-midsize. Have you all noticed who all has left already and who is leaving. There are more departures coming and a few more big names. No one has confidence in SB and her VP Engineering friend.

by
| 3524 views | | 18 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1cUZ7b4T

18 replies (most recent on top)

Inclusion and diversity does not necessarily improve a company's ability to thrive. The more focus on that, the less focus on customers and products.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @klit+1cUZ7b4T

Well, revenue is money collected from previous sales. That’s up 7%. Bookings is sales you’ve made with revenue to be collected in future. That’s only up 1%. Tell me how that sounds good for the future.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @indd+1cUZ7b4T

yeah 7% is sh-t but don’t quote the wrong number

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @guzf+1cUZ7b4T

Wow a whole 7%?!?!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fmas+1cUZ7b4T

Bookings is not the same as revenue.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fzpf+1cUZ7b4T

I'm not a supporter of SB or CGS but given we are engineers here did anyone do the due diligence on checking the "1% growth in security" before everyone upvoted?

Confirmation bias is real given the nature of this site but security product revenue increased by 7% according to the last 10-K report. Don't circlej--k.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @foes+1cUZ7b4T

G is dead and gone. SB will have to manage a new executive relationship. Enjoy!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4qdm+1cUZ7b4T

Don’t let G off the hook there either. The portfolio sucks.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1gwh+1cUZ7b4T

It is become very clear to rest of Cisco that SB and CGS are completely in over their head. GSSO is literally sinking due to the incompetence of these two.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1psk+1cUZ7b4T

PB??

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cab+1cUZ7b4T

A couple of more “Directors” in GSSO leaving this week. What a mess SB and her VP Engineering friend have created.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1goa+1cUZ7b4T

Check directory again. They are already under her.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xha+1cUZ7b4T

Under SB, security sales grew a whopping 1%, that's a major accomplishment.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1yya+1cUZ7b4T

"Many years ago before she went to security, she railroaded people to pass the blame of her failures."

You just described every Director or higher at Cisco.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zmp+1cUZ7b4T

I see PB left…huge hit.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1oxc+1cUZ7b4T

There is no transparency with SB. Many years ago before she went to security, she railroaded people to pass the blame of her failures. She will never take accountability.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cyx+1cUZ7b4T

Based on the competition significantly growing and Cisco not, there are troubling times ahead for security sellers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tef+1cUZ7b4T

Listen up troops, its the Security version of Tokyo Rose making another broadcast...

https://youtu.be/-XEu1Bxpe00

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ank+1cUZ7b4T

Post a reply

: