4 ms·

THE VERDICT: Google-Motorola Will Be A Colossal Disaster*

10 points by SoftwareMaven 15y ago

jigs_up 15y ago
Writer makes good points. I find it hard to disagree.
wanorris 15y ago
Motorola has 19,000 employees and can't consistently turn a profit. These two facts seem related in an obvious way, and this implies a way to turn a profit on it. Cherry pick all the best research and software folks and bring them into Google, abandon MotoBlur and release devices with vanilla Android (thus eliminating the need for said software folks), and streamline operations with massive reductions in headcount. Possibly shutter unprofitable product lines like feature phones entirely, and focus the company on things Google considers strategic for them, i.e. Android phones and set top boxes. Admittedly, Blodget is right that Google has no experience in performing this kind of maneuver, so there are a lot of risks, but considering that they bought a patent portfolio that happened to come with a company attached, there's no real reason to be afraid of downsizing the company to a point where Motorola can turn a decent profit and start growing again. Or, as Blodget points out, they could just spin the company off as soon as they can and wash their hands of the whole thing.
jeffool 15y ago
Most of the points seem to be "Google doesn't know hardware". This is a valid point, but the article mostly reads like this one point repeated over and over. First, it discounts the fact that Google isn't inheriting a shell company; those former Motorola employees? They're still there. Second, so what if they don't already have a dedicated hardware factory already? They've got a dedicated team, one that's proven. Danger, Inc. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/11/andy-rubin-gets-danger-back-together-at-google-to-work-on-android-hardware/ http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/11/andy-rubin-gets-dange...
anigbrowl 15y ago
Disagree. The companies' cultures are more similar than they might otherwise appear; Motirola has a strong engineering heritage and a good hardware pedigree but their software UI has been badly lacking. Not that the merger will be easy, but a colossal disaster? I think not.
- rjd 15y ago
  You just made me realise it will be a total disaster. Because Google aren't buying the entirety of Motorola, they are buying the cellphone/consumer division of the company. Hence if the clever ploys are true which John Gruber alluded too, then motorola are smart. And being smart they have already moved the best talent back to the other company "Motorola Solutions" and Google are buying a pile of average to bad. Plus I doubt Google is ready for the HR mess thats about to hit them. If anyone here has been through a large restructure or merger then you can appreciate just how disruptive and demoralising the process is. Productivity and loyalty will plummet. If you haven't been through a process like that go watch the movie "Office Space" its a light hearted view of a dark subject, and is way to close to home on many points.
  - anigbrowl 15y ago
    Talent issue, no I don't think so. Google's a company where individual talent matters a great deal, they're not oblivious to those issues. There will be a big culture clash and you are right that there will be many HR challenges. I worked as a contracter for Motorola (very briefly and many years ago) and can relate to the problems Google will encounter...but that's well known about Motorola. I don't agree that large mergers are always a failure; Ernst & Young is still together and successful, even though there was a huge clash of cultures there - it was literally a case of ne company being a Mac and one a PC.
    - rjd 15y ago
      But if reporting is to be believed Google is struggling to hire and keep talent, and there hiring approach has been heavily criticised for encouraging 'generic' and 'average' employees. The entire truth behind that I can't comment on myself, but thats what goes through my blogs feeds form time to time. I know from every restructure I've ever been in the first casualty is the talented staff. They don't hang around to mucked about, they are in demand so they just flow somewhere where those issues don't exist. But who knows, I guess there was a lot of sleepiness nights at Google before this went ahead, so our conjecture would have already been through more solid risk/benefit analysis than what a chat thread could offer.

10 points by SoftwareMaven 15y ago

Writer makes good points. I find it hard to disagree.

Motorola has 19,000 employees and can't consistently turn a profit. These two facts seem related in an obvious way, and this implies a way to turn a profit on it. Cherry pick all the best research and software folks and bring them into Google, abandon MotoBlur and release devices with vanilla Android (thus eliminating the need for said software folks), and streamline operations with massive reductions in headcount. Possibly shutter unprofitable product lines like feature phones entirely, and focus the company on things Google considers strategic for them, i.e. Android phones and set top boxes. Admittedly, Blodget is right that Google has no experience in performing this kind of maneuver, so there are a lot of risks, but considering that they bought a patent portfolio that happened to come with a company attached, there's no real reason to be afraid of downsizing the company to a point where Motorola can turn a decent profit and start growing again. Or, as Blodget points out, they could just spin the company off as soon as they can and wash their hands of the whole thing.

jeffool 15y ago

Most of the points seem to be "Google doesn't know hardware". This is a valid point, but the article mostly reads like this one point repeated over and over. First, it discounts the fact that Google isn't inheriting a shell company; those former Motorola employees? They're still there. Second, so what if they don't already have a dedicated hardware factory already? They've got a dedicated team, one that's proven. Danger, Inc. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/11/andy-rubin-gets-danger-back-together-at-google-to-work-on-android-hardware/ http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/11/andy-rubin-gets-dange...

anigbrowl 15y ago

Disagree. The companies' cultures are more similar than they might otherwise appear; Motirola has a strong engineering heritage and a good hardware pedigree but their software UI has been badly lacking. Not that the merger will be easy, but a colossal disaster? I think not.

rjd 15y ago
You just made me realise it will be a total disaster. Because Google aren't buying the entirety of Motorola, they are buying the cellphone/consumer division of the company. Hence if the clever ploys are true which John Gruber alluded too, then motorola are smart. And being smart they have already moved the best talent back to the other company "Motorola Solutions" and Google are buying a pile of average to bad. Plus I doubt Google is ready for the HR mess thats about to hit them. If anyone here has been through a large restructure or merger then you can appreciate just how disruptive and demoralising the process is. Productivity and loyalty will plummet. If you haven't been through a process like that go watch the movie "Office Space" its a light hearted view of a dark subject, and is way to close to home on many points.
- anigbrowl 15y ago
  Talent issue, no I don't think so. Google's a company where individual talent matters a great deal, they're not oblivious to those issues. There will be a big culture clash and you are right that there will be many HR challenges. I worked as a contracter for Motorola (very briefly and many years ago) and can relate to the problems Google will encounter...but that's well known about Motorola. I don't agree that large mergers are always a failure; Ernst & Young is still together and successful, even though there was a huge clash of cultures there - it was literally a case of ne company being a Mac and one a PC.
  - rjd 15y ago
    But if reporting is to be believed Google is struggling to hire and keep talent, and there hiring approach has been heavily criticised for encouraging 'generic' and 'average' employees. The entire truth behind that I can't comment on myself, but thats what goes through my blogs feeds form time to time. I know from every restructure I've ever been in the first casualty is the talented staff. They don't hang around to mucked about, they are in demand so they just flow somewhere where those issues don't exist. But who knows, I guess there was a lot of sleepiness nights at Google before this went ahead, so our conjecture would have already been through more solid risk/benefit analysis than what a chat thread could offer.