Comment by pinewurst
7 years ago
Hoping this is false! IBM is the worst of acquirers and they treat their people like utter garbage, especially the more experienced ones.
If there's any truth to this, it means those in charge have basically given up - assuming growth is capped and/or that the big return of a buyout premium would counter recent stock pricing setbacks.
(Update: now officially announced!)
My last startup, blekko, was acquired by IBM in 2015. They treated our people well; many of them still work there.
It takes 6 months to be acquired by IBM, so I don't think recent stock market gyrations have anything to do with it.
My perception is that IBM (and HP, Oracle, etc) will buy a product company, and then IBM-ify it, and then just sit on that product for years with minimal improvements.
That is my fear for Red Hat. Successful product companies are hungry - IBM is not.
They call it bluewashing.
Also, this might be just IBM buying out its competition.. like oracle and all the others do most of the time.
Now official! It's at $190/share vs Friday's $116.68 close
https://www.redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/ibm-acquire-r...
"- IBM to maintain Red Hat’s open source innovation legacy, scaling its vast technology portfolio and empowering its widespread developer community
- Red Hat to operate as a distinct unit within IBM’s Hybrid Cloud team"
>Red Hat to operate as a distinct unit within IBM’s Hybrid Cloud team
I read this as "everything aside from the cloud stuff will be gutted"?
Do truth-in-advertising laws apply if IBM were to change course from a stated goal?
4 replies →
52 week high is $177.
Oh no
Red Hat has a significant remote workforce. IBM famously fired theirs. Can we expect IBM to do the same to Red Hat's?
They didn't fire theirs - they ordered them to move to an arbitrary office, most commonly not the closest geographically either, without relocation money. If you didn't move, it was considered a voluntary departure. There was often no room at these offices even for the minority who accepted the moves.
It was/is a deliberate attempt to dispose of senior, less portable people without having to pay layoff charges.
Who needs fusion power when you can run off the Watsons spinning in their graves at relativistic velocity?
Holy bleep, have any good references for this?
1 reply →
Yes. It will take some time but I'd take an exit package and find a new job.
I've really got to wonder at the people who would stay at a company that treated them like utter garbage ... especially if they're experienced ... and especially in this job market.
Red Hat tends to employ people through offices in low/moderate COL areas or as fully remote. It would have been my #1 prospect after leaving the Bay Area. People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily.
as fully remote
Didn’t IBM have a massive crackdown on remote working recently? https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/09/ibm_workfromhome_cu...
1 reply →
> People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily.
Gonna have to disagree here. Raleigh is not a tech backwater. There’s plenty of comparable work to be found in the area.
3 replies →
"those in charge have basically given up"
Yes but which company's leadership has given up? If this is the ordinary acquisition model, where the buying company (IBM) leadership stays in charge, then I say it's Red Hat's leadership that's given up. If it's the 'buy a company to get an entirely new leadership team' then it means those in charge of IBM might actually understand their dire situation. But I have no idea if they have that awareness.
Unless the leadership happens to hold quite a lot of shares, their stance isn’t going to matter too much.
Your don't buy/hire a leadership team to tell them what to do (unless you happen to like to waste time and money).
This happened at Apple (NeXT took over). Somehow with Disney/Pixar too if I'm not mistaken.
1 reply →