Yes, we'll need strong business skills and an understanding of the business applications that ride on the networks and actually make some money. Or maybe better muscles. I saw on the news that the Pacific Maritime Association offered the longshoremen a raise for the highest paying job to $137,000. The longshoremen turned it down. Unbelievable. Hey, I'm generally a bleeding liberal, but this port closure thing p!sses me off.
Priscilla nrf wrote: > > > > > > Sorry to be so pessimistic. NRF - got anything to add? > > Oh, I got lots to add. But let me try to keep it short by > couching things > in the following bullet points: > > *If you want money, somebody has to be ultimately paying. > Money in, money > out. > > Cisco is not a mint. No vendor is a mint. Cisco can only earn > money > sustainably if their customers are making money. And not just > making money, > but making money by using Cisco gear. You can only get money > out if there > is money coming in. Is that really happening? > > Let me explain. Let's look at the Internet. Many studies have > shown a boom > in Internet usage. A boom in traffic. A boom in users. A boom > in time > spent on the Internet. In all categories there is a boom, > except for the > one category that matters - a boom in profits. How many > dotcoms actually > make money? Few, very few. How many service-providers > actually make profit > from providing Internet access? Again, few, very few. If you > tally the > aggregate of all the profit and losses derived from Internet > operations, you > will see that the Internet has been nothing but a financial > debacle of the > first order. A business model where you, as a vendor, are > making record > profits while many of your customers are unprofitable is a > business model > that is unsustainable. > > True, Cisco is not just all about the Internet. So let's look > at Cisco's > bread-and-butter - the enterprise customer. Enterprises will > continue to > invest in their network only to the degree that it is > profitable to do so. > Has Cisco, or any other networking vendor, been able to > demonstrate a solid > ROI from upgrading the network? In many cases, no. > Companies don't just > build out networks 'for fun', they do so because there is a > clear business > reason to do so. What are these reasons? > > Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there are no good > reasons to do > a network buildout. Indeed there are often many good reasons. > But my point > is that we need engineers who are not only technically strong, > but can also > articulate a strong business case as to why money should be > spent. In > short, we engineers need to know more about the business and > financial side > of things. > > *How many people really care about the network? > > By that, I mean how many regular (non-technical) people really > care about a > network at all? Are they going to be dazzled with mentions of > BGP and VoIP > and all that crap? Hardly. Regular people care about the > services that a > network can provide. It is the services that people are > willing to pay for, > not the network itself. But that begs the question - are there > really all > these jazzy services out there that regular people are willing > to pay for? > Before you answer, you may wish to consider the following > snippet from the > Hart-Winston study: > > "The bottom line is that among people who are most likely to > subscribe to > high-speed Internet access, the obstacles are price and lack of > appeal," > said Hart, CEO of Hart Research. "Forty-eight percent have no > interest > regardless of price and another 21 percent are willing to pay > at most $20 > per month. If you cannot win over the people who are currently > using the > Internet, consumer acceptance of high-speed access will be slow > and > limited...Findings about consumer interest in subscribing to > high-speed > service also apply to those who use it at work, the poll found, > indicating > that even those exposed to the service find little reason to > subscribe at > home" > http://www.comptel.org/press/nov29_2001_voices.html > > Then of course there was that incident in Oregon where a whole > town was > offered free broadband for a year, and only half the households > signed up > (can't find the article unfortunately, but you may wish to talk > to Steven > Ridder if you want to see it). The point is, at this time, > very few regular > people actually care about the Internet because there are no > truly > compelling services out there, and especially not much that > people are > willing to pay serious money for. > > * Cisco isn't going anywhere. > > All the nasty invective aside, the fact is that Cisco holds > more of a > premier position in the industry than perhaps at any other > time. They got > billions of dollars in the bank, and very importantly, no > debt. The > disaster of the service-provider market was something of a > godsend to Cisco > in the sense that it has crushed its competitors like Nortel > and Lucent. > Just a few years ago there was talk of how Cisco was going to > have its lunch > eaten by those Nor/cent because of their long-standing close > relationships > with service-providers. You don't hear that kind of talk > anymore. The fact > is, Cisco has basically been handed another few years for which > it can > develop a strong service-provider initiative (no, Stratacom > didn't really > work out, and the GSR is a point product, it's not an > initiative). > > *The best move may be not to play. > > Cisco and networking in general most likely has its glory days > behind it. > Things will probably never be as good as they were. Cisco will > probably > never reach a market cap of $550 billion for many years and > will probably > never see a growth rate of 60% ever again. This extends to us > engineers. > We will almost certainly never have it as good as 1999 ever > again. Network > engineers will most likely have to combine their networking > skills with > other talents if they want to remain employable. For example, > they will > probably need strong business skills. Or strong app skills (to > understand > the services that actually generate the revenue that is needed > for increased > network spending). Things like that. > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=55116&t=54957 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
