4 ms·

I am curious if anyone agrees with my take: HP Enterprise and Oracle did not move because Texas is "more tech friendly." Instead they moved because HPE and Ora

I am curious if anyone agrees with my take: HP Enterprise and Oracle did not move because Texas is "more tech friendly." Instead they moved because HPE and Oracle are no longer primarily tech companies. While they do substantial technical work, most of that will remain in SV. It's sort of the mirror of Apple, which also has a substantial presence in Austin (finance, etc) but is headquartered in SV because it is primarily a tech company.

MH15 6y ago
I think this checks out. HPE and Oracle still solve "problems", but they are not problems if technology but problems of sales and organization.
_fat_santa 6y ago
I call it the "COVID come to Jesus moment". I remember for the last year or two. The murmurs here, twitter and reddit has been "Why don't these companies understand that their work can all be remote", "why does X company insist on having on-site employees". Meanwhile on the other side of the spectrum you had the higher ups all murmuring "well if we let people work from home, then our company will be doomed". Then COVID hit and we had no other option. Everyone went WFH and tech CEO's realized a few weeks/months in that no, their org isn't imploding, it's actually doing pretty damn well. Now all these tech CEO's are starting to look around and wonder, if my companies productivity didn't drop off a cliff, why should I be paying for this super expensive office space? Tech CEO's were told this lie that WFH will lead to a catastrophe in their company, all these office closures and moves seem to be a reflection of leadership calling the bluff on this.
- fullshark 6y ago
  WFH when everyone is forced to do it is different than WFH when you decide freely to do it and your competitor doesn't. These companies are fighting market share battles and are willing to pay millions or billions if the scale is large enough for an edge on competition. I continue to believe when this is over, not much changes in terms of remote work v. in person. Supplemental/support orgs might go WFH but the innovation engines will be in person and close to the c-suite.
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  Letting senior dev who knows the org chart work from home is very different than onboarding junior employees. I've seen seniors go completely async (timezones barely compatibles) and periodically you'd see an email from them detailing what they are working on, what they are blocked on and outlining the next steps. You knew they were doing something simply by looking at the pull requests they sent and the comments they left on the PRs they were reviewing. But try that with a new hire and I guarantee it won't go well.
- ativzzz 6y ago
  They werent told any lies, they are simply micromanagers who want to see their employees in their seats
ajmurmann 6y ago
Also brings the question of what's actually moving. Are any of the workers/jobs moving or is this just the corporate address? My suspicion is that the company is really moving to remote-first and changing it's mail and tax address.

MH15 6y ago

I think this checks out. HPE and Oracle still solve "problems", but they are not problems if technology but problems of sales and organization.

_fat_santa 6y ago

I call it the "COVID come to Jesus moment". I remember for the last year or two. The murmurs here, twitter and reddit has been "Why don't these companies understand that their work can all be remote", "why does X company insist on having on-site employees". Meanwhile on the other side of the spectrum you had the higher ups all murmuring "well if we let people work from home, then our company will be doomed". Then COVID hit and we had no other option. Everyone went WFH and tech CEO's realized a few weeks/months in that no, their org isn't imploding, it's actually doing pretty damn well. Now all these tech CEO's are starting to look around and wonder, if my companies productivity didn't drop off a cliff, why should I be paying for this super expensive office space? Tech CEO's were told this lie that WFH will lead to a catastrophe in their company, all these office closures and moves seem to be a reflection of leadership calling the bluff on this.

fullshark 6y ago
WFH when everyone is forced to do it is different than WFH when you decide freely to do it and your competitor doesn't. These companies are fighting market share battles and are willing to pay millions or billions if the scale is large enough for an edge on competition. I continue to believe when this is over, not much changes in terms of remote work v. in person. Supplemental/support orgs might go WFH but the innovation engines will be in person and close to the c-suite.
908B64B197 6y ago
Letting senior dev who knows the org chart work from home is very different than onboarding junior employees. I've seen seniors go completely async (timezones barely compatibles) and periodically you'd see an email from them detailing what they are working on, what they are blocked on and outlining the next steps. You knew they were doing something simply by looking at the pull requests they sent and the comments they left on the PRs they were reviewing. But try that with a new hire and I guarantee it won't go well.
ativzzz 6y ago
They werent told any lies, they are simply micromanagers who want to see their employees in their seats

ajmurmann 6y ago

Also brings the question of what's actually moving. Are any of the workers/jobs moving or is this just the corporate address? My suspicion is that the company is really moving to remote-first and changing it's mail and tax address.