Thread regarding IBM layoffs

@1hal google cloud is a late entrant and already gaining serious ground. They are emerging at most customers as the cheap/commodity option, especially for companies that compete with amazon in other ways. They will be a credible third player in <18 months.

Ibm has nothing that google would want to buy that they couldn't get elsewhere at a better price with more current technology. Ibms software is dying from neglect and yesterday's technology, hardware is irrelevant, services more expensive, lower skilled, and less profitable than competitors due to overhead and all the cuts over the years. Research is a shadow of what it was. Google is Working to k--l red hat and openshift by moving containers to direct hosting on hypervisors and donating the code back to the community.

As for z, it's a cash cow because of vendor lock in (and customers know it, and many resent it). But there's no growth there, no new logos, and companies would drop it in a cold minute if they weren't stuck with the legacy business applications. The myth that z drags distributed software is a fig leaf covering massive internal reversals because the reps pack c-ap into the ela that the customer doesn't give fertilizer about. It's almost as bad a joke as SO dragging software and hardware revenue.

IBM is about managing the declining business as long as possible. That's likely measured in decades because of, as you say, the monopoly lock in. The only hope for change is red hat ceo taking over and jettisoning most of the existing stuff - including mainframe - and keeping and stoking those small embers of innovation burning in the corner.

Put it another way. I hope the red hat ceo has a valerian steel blade to take out the night queen and the rest of the walking dead,

All of the big FAANG guys (Apple, Google, Amazon, MSFT, FB) have 100s of billions in cash but are making no big acquisition moves.

They will all be broken down at some point, all of them got way too big.

They know this, and there are monopoly investigations into all of them (one just started yesterday on Apple - Europe is leading the way)

That's why you will never a large acquisition from any of them (Whole Foods at 10B was the last big one and there will be no more)....

1ifg. Never said they want the whole enchilada, but maybe 1/2 of it. They want “Enterprise” and they want monopoly power and IBM brings both. I realize you don’t think they want Z, but that’s where the monopoly lives (HW and SW wise). Redhat only enhances that Monopoly.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/red-hat-amplifies-enterprise-linux-130000846.html

Everyday Google waits, Amazon pulls ahead. Can google afford to build out their enterprise over 5 years, or is it cheaper in the long run to buy their way in. YES you are correct there is a whole lot of IBM that they would not want. IGF, 2/3’s of GTS/GBS, Storage, IBM management overhead. Take those pieces out (sell, spinoff, close) and the numbers get compelling. Almost any MBA can make the numbers close considering the free cash flow and they don’t have to change a thing. Momentum will fund the deal. NOW combine the remaining IBM with “good” management, and you start to get very good earnings expansion and wall streets tail starts to wag. There is a reason the CFO keeps saying “in the businesses we choose to play in”. He has already started the (sell, spin or close).

@YVVg9uV-1blh Google isn't going to buy IBM. There's far more that they DON'T want than what they do. Other than Power and maybe a very small part of GBS, there isn't anything they'd be willing to pay for. Z? No. Legacy database and middleware software? No. Watson? LOL. IBM Cloud? Double LOL. Quantum? Triple LOL. 95% of GBS/GTS? No. Global Financing? No. And they certainly don't want the 17 layers of overpaid bureaucrats that permeate every organization.

OK take a peek at that chart. What does it show. A first adopter/leader, a SW monopoly player, and a niche player. I believe we can all agree everyone in the other quadrants are “also rans”

First adopters get monopoly power because they own the space and set the rules

SW monopoly players exploit their SW install base

What does Google exploit? They are a niche player, but not a monopoly player. They want to play in Enterprise. They have made that very public. So how does a niche player get to enterprises? You hire a guy Thomas Kurian (Oracle Exec) who understands how to exploit Monopoly power. You now need to acquire a monopoly. Who is left standing in the also rans. (China(alibaba), China (baidu) and IBM). Yes IBM brings a HW/SW legacy monopoly. WillChina the country allow Google to expand Most likely not. Does Google want all of IBM. Definitely not. What’s a Google to do? Perhaps tell IBM “slim down” and we’ll talk. Collaboration gone, social gone, Commerce gone. GTS/GBS combining the “good” parts ongoing. Licensing Google your P9 IP done. Now back to the Monopoly angle. Remember Amazon is exploiting first mover, and Microsoft is exploiting SW Monopoly. Google will never catch up as it sits, so something has to change. Google wanted Redhat and was willing to pay (approx 28 billion), but missed out due to Diane Greene transition. Google wants enterprise and is willing to pay. Google has hired a Monopoly exploiter extraordinaire Are the stars aligning. Who knows. BUT remember the Forbes article approx Oct of 2018. They said of IBM. Transform OR shine yourself up for a sale. Only time will tell but the shining sure looks like it’s on going via IBM. Don’t be surprised if “the slim down” is nothing more than shining old Blue up

The chart is not drawn to scale. If drawn to scale - AWS would be in the upper right hand corner touching the corner, Microsoft would be about where it is now, Google would be lower and to the left of the cross marking the center of the chart, and everyone else would be in the lower left hand corner touching the corner. That is the current reality of the cloud market based on real world usage as opposed to fake financial numbers created for Wall Street. AWS is the clear leader, Microsoft is the challenger, Google is fighting for dear life, and everyone else is irrelevant.

"And notice that red hat isn't on any one of them. So much for buying to as part of a cloud strategy."

Actually, it is worse than that. The article says "Red Hat (NYSE:RHT) is another notable player but gets accounted for along with IBM."

I think what Gartner is saying is the (pathetic) IBM dots in these charts represent IBM+RedHat combined already.

And notice that red hat isn't on any one of them. So much for buying to as part of a cloud strategy.