4 ms·
This is not surprising. Michael Dell spent billions to take the company private because he believed the company was undervalued and under-performing[0], and tha
by chimeracoder 13y ago
This is not surprising. Michael Dell spent billions to take the company private because he believed the company was undervalued and under-performing[0], and that he knew how to save it, not because he was content with leaving it the way it was.
That process necessarily involves personnel changes - if anything, I'm surprised we didn't see these sooner.
The real question will be who they're cutting (and more importantly, who they'll be replaced with, or if those positions will be replaced at all).
[0] The other reason public companies go private is to liquidate, but that's clearly not his goal.
- pekk 13y agoProbably it's not that they don't need people, just that they don't need so many expensive people in the US (other than execs, of course)
- mcphilip 13y agoIt'll be interesting to see how development is affected. Dell has had a reputation of being the place to work if you wanted a high salary with minimal responsibilities here in Austin. I've heard the politics are brutal, though.
- atwebb 13y agoThere were similar comments in the Nashville subreddit recently, I was surprised with how flippant people were.
- cesarbs 13y agoThat sounds so different from their office in Porto Alegre, Brazil. It's a sweatshop there. I know a number of people who work/have worked there and they all say it's awful.
- smtddr 13y ago>>Dell has had a reputation of being the place to work if you wanted a high salary with minimal responsibilities here in Austin. I've heard the politics are brutal, though. When you can't justify yourself by demonstrable quality output, office-politics comes in.
- fludlight 13y agoThe changes probably more to do with the replacement of laptops/desktops with smartphones/tablets. Joe Sixpack doesn't have as much use for Wintel as he did in 1998.