4 ms·
Nope. Major accounts require tons of dedicated technical resources and hand holding. You might not have been directly involved, but the people side of Cloud is
by mike_d 4y ago
Nope. Major accounts require tons of dedicated technical resources and hand holding. You might not have been directly involved, but the people side of Cloud is scaling out of control right now - even during "hiring freeze" and layoffs.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoThose are all marginally profitable staff billed through post sales. Consulting business sides of tech companies shouldn’t be considered part of the core footprint as they’re profit centers based on staff scale. The core product itself is designed to scale independently of people, because the marginal person doesn’t increase profits while the marginal unit of infrastructure. Sources, I was directly involved. Edit: my experience is with aws not gcp. Gcp is a bit of a non entity in enterprise cloud.
- bushbaba 4y agoIt’s a bit of both. Culturally it didn’t get enterprise, e.g. “ditch oracle and move to spanner”. Technology wise it was not setup for enterprise. Staff wise it was paying way too high of a total-comp for non revenue roles. TAMs making 400k/year on accounts spending < 5M/year. However it could have addressed all those. There were people inside advocating for those changes. Eng and Product leadership refused to listen. And the CEO refused to reward business success and instead rewarded product launches od multiple un-successful messaging apps.