Slashdot Mirror
Dell CEO Tells All
zapatero writes "The San Francisco Chronicle has an enjoyable read with new Dell CEO Kevin Rollins. He has quite a critique of the HP acquisition of Compaq: 'They had a great, profitable printer business before. They still have a great, profitable printer business. ... Their profits are 70 to 80 percent from the printer business. So that's the area where the profit pool still lives. It's where it lived before. It's where it still is now. So I just ask, what's changed?'"
He has been the CEO for all of a week and all ready he is opening his mouth about how HP sucks. Why not just make a good product and let people decide? We get enough mud slinging tactics in politics. It sure didn't take long to jump in the sand box and start being a mean kid. I sure hope this is not a sign of what is to come fome Dell now.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
You've clearly been brainwashed by far-left anti-capitalist socialist flakes like Mikey Moore, Zinn, Chomsky, etc.
why single out corporations? Why not rail against LLC's, partnerships, and other business types?
Furthermore, if you're against corporations so much, why don't you boycott them - starting with your computer, all it's components, access providers, etc. - all made/provided by CORPORATIONS or other business types.
Or maybe when you finally get out of the liberal haven that is universities these days you'll think about starting a business and would prefer to protect your personal assets when one of your customers uses one of your products in a way it was never intended, harms themself, then decides to sue you for all you're worth.
John Kerry is a Joke!
In general I am against two things: corporations (too much potential for abuse in the name of protection from "frivolous" lawsuits) and pan-national business in general (because no business should rival elected government in power and reach). These are simple things really. I am not anti-capitalist at all, I am simply anti-highway-robberry-in-broad-daylight, which is what those accusing me here of being "brainwashed" seem to find desirable.
Well, we out in the working world could care less if you're "against" corporations. Do you really think you'll change anything? If you get out of the isolated liberal sanctionary of the university where the majority of parent-subsidized students and teachers agree with this anti-capitalist nonsense, and go work for a business, perspective will change (unless of course you STAY in academe, or work for the Gov't).
Corporations provide a wealth of jobs and products and services - more so than any other business types. Sole proprietorships are basically individuals. It's evident you don't know what you're talking about.
As for businesses being bigger than governments, so what? You anti-corporate ninnies never realize that governments are the worst type of monopolies.
John Kerry is a Joke!
India trains great middle-managers and low-level engineers. However, there is very little entrepreneurial spirit over here -- we don't put out any useful CEOs.
I bet you didn't even know how much Mr. Rollins makes a year when you wrote that. I bet you also don't know how much an equivalent Indian CEO makes. I also bet you right now can't even point out one Indian company that has the annual revenue of Dell.
So basically, you're making a BS argument. You're just making yourself feel better because someone who runs the company can make decisions that you cannot. That's business. Learn and grow up.
They don't outsource CEOs because the US market is still the dominant consumer. Also, nearly stipulating that having an MBA equates to CEO qualifications is silly.
If at some time China or India buys more machines or otherwise produce more revenue for Dell than the US market does for Dell and does so consistently, there will likely be more upper execs from those countries. Even so, and much to some people's chagrin, folks forget that in the international community, being from the US still holds some weight as an influential, power company--whether you like this or not, in the customer market, US company and products is a big perception bonus.
Being a CEO is about public and market perception, not really much you pay them. If you get an unknown person or someone who isn't a leader, customers will wonder where the company is headed. In the US market, this is still particularly so; look at Apple with Jobs at the helm.
Plus, they have the luxury of choosing who works and runs their company. You're talking about the hand-picked successor by the man who started the company from scratch. How are you going to argue with that? You're argument is to save a million or two a year and maybe 10 million if he's fired in exchange for a foreign CEO that makes the stock tank 5 times that?
Not going to happen.