Who posted this company is, dead? Look at the share price? Look at the earnings report?
NetApp to the moon!
13 replies (most recent on top)
I personally don't think qlc drives are going to fail In droves. Will some put under the wrong workload, maybe. By and far the access patterns of 98%+ all flash users wouldn't wear out qlc The manufacturers warranty says 1 complete drive write per 3 days, for 3 years. If we stretch it to 6 that's 1 complete drive write per 6 days for 6 years. That's a 16% daily change write very few people are writing 16% per day. If you're using SnapShots it's a self
Limiting system. The higher the change, the bigger the snaps, the bigger the snaps the more storage your need, the more storage you have the more data you need to write.
I ran numbers on 1000s of AFF systems in AIQ looking at historic performance almost all of those systems would run fine on QLC for 8 or 9 years.
The real reason NetApp didn't want to do this earlier. Cost erosion. They didn't want to cannibalize their AFF sales so Pure did it for them. I would be willing bet big money that the current c series is performance hobbeled just to stem the cannibalization of AFF.
Oh my, thank you for the explanation. Clever and risky at the same time, whatever it takes to make revenue now. Oh my!!
Warranty costs are not a category directly reported to investors, it's just a hit to revenue scheduled for 2-3 years from now. They're banking on increased sales vs pure and others offsetting future losses and praying that these drives hang on long enough for service contracts to expire.
To the previous poster, I don't understand NetApp's switch/change of tune. If they know these drives will not last long and NetApp will lose money, why the offering?
I can't imagine GK and Mr. Octavian agreeing to this setup. What am i missing?
NetApp straight copied Pure.
https://www.purestorage.com/products/nvme/high-capacity/flasharray-c.html
They didn't even change the name.
This was something I begged Octavian to do years ago, and I was told QLC is just a different media, it doesn't matter. We can slap them in whenever we want, we just know they won't last more then a year or two, and Pure is going lose a fortune. Instead of Pure losing a fortune it looks like NetApp might have which is why they're changing their tune.
Lol at mention of Ponzi scheme. Good one...
NetApp has innovation, how about NetApp's announcement earlier this year of C-Series products?
C-Series is a low cost, high capacity product. C250, C400 and C800 are now available in production. Let's give NetApp credit where credit is due.
Without innovation there is no growth.
We suck less then expected! We suck less then expected! We suck less then expected!
This earnings report was good only in the respect that it wasn't as bad as expected. The trends are all bad. It's not all NetApp's fault, there are macro shifts and all phases of storage are getting squeezed. But NetApp is far from the best and might even be near the worst. This trend overall is bad. The actual vs expectation is simply a matter of going out of business slower. Now I don't suspect this to drive NetApp into the abyss at all. But I smell a margin erosion as competition ramps up.
Do you know how to read a balance sheet and earnings report? Kurians ponzi scheme continues. Headcount reductions, stock buybacks and lowering expectations. Year over year the company had less revenue and lower earnings. From your "to the moon" comment it looks like you get your investment insights from the apes on Reddit.
Dave is this you?
I'm looking for the next round of layoffs to buy up more stock.
More Layoffs = Higher stock price and larger dividend.
Ok ... a$$hat, what are you doing here then?