> there's great value with legacy systems in not getting rid of the people who have been working on them for the last 20 years, and know all the idiosyncrasies

> there's great value with legacy systems in not getting rid of the people who have been working on them for the last 20 years, and know all the idiosyncrasies and foibles. As someone who unfortunately has been in touch with CA-7 and who comes from a strong Unix/Linux background I can tell you I wouldn't want to touch that thing with a 30ft pole and on top of that these batches are usually extremely complicated in terms of dependencies and a ton of history and lessons-learned go into building those chains and the whole system is so complex yet so critical, we have 1 or 2 guys doing graveyard shifts for nothing but watching CA7 do its thing because if anything fails it could also shut down vital parts of the bank. (e.g. because literally some plain text files didn't get copied from A to B, in 2012...) So not only is there possible great value in NOT getting rid of people who basically grew up with the system and know it inside out but when you do get rid of them it should be more than crystal clear to even the most disconnected manager that this is some really serious stuff you are outsourcing and just blindly trusting the friendly sales guy's promises is not going to cut it... it is almost like outsourcing a custom in-house software to an off-shore "expert" and hoping they can just instantly pick things up where your people left it off. Now it is time to really take a very close look at those SLAs that the project team just wanted approved and signed asap....