3 ms·
This strikes me as an attribution problem e.g. Within large companies business units are treated as standalone financial entities so you are either making money
by jfrankamp 7y ago
This strikes me as an attribution problem e.g. Within large companies business units are treated as standalone financial entities so you are either making money or a cost center. I think what could be happening here is that the kubernetes group is generating what look like un-paid-for costs, instead of being back-credited for ALL of the compute they are selling via the worker VMs. I would argue that people come to GCP for GKE which means it should be seen as a revenue generator, in that light it makes sense to hold the loss leader of the control plane open and 'free' to grow GKE as quickly as possible. This decision is bad for business.
- nojvek 7y agoWell then this is perhaps a big failure by the execs at GCP. It’s making the individual teams look good at the cost of unhappy customers. Sometimes I think Google has phenomenal engineers, they have this massive ad cash cow from search, YouTube etc. However when it comes to business units that need to handhold their customers and need human interaction, they are pretty terrible at it. Empathy is perhaps a skill that’s not important to them when they are hiring.
- zapita 7y agoIt would be cool if service teams were credited a referral fee for all future consumption, platform-wide, by consumers that started with their service. As a bonus it would incentivize each service team to prioritize easier onboarding.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]