Did Cisco Cut Deep Enough?

COMMENTS

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

<< < Page 2 / 2

ycurrent 12/5/2012 | 4:58:39 PM

re: Did Cisco Cut Deep Enough?

I did not imply that growing a $40b company was easy or hard, just doable or not.

BTW I worked for the company from which Stall Points was researched/produced. But just because it is in print, does not mean it is gospel.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Pete Baldwin 12/5/2012 | 4:58:38 PM

re: Did Cisco Cut Deep Enough?

> Why is Google developing its own hardware?

But I think he did ask himself that, years ago (in different words).  In 2004, I heard Chambers predict increased low-price competition from Asia in routers and switches. Part of the answer was to change Cisco's business model -- making it more of a consultant like IBM, that's how it sounded at the time.

Another part of the answer was to go into a lot of the adjacencies that are so maligned now (consumer, e.g.).

The first pass at this didn't work -- although I don't think it's been the Nortel-sized disaster that some people are describing here.  Still, it would be a mistake to cut too many of those adjacencies in order to become more "lean."

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

sigint 12/5/2012 | 4:58:35 PM

re: Did Cisco Cut Deep Enough?

AFAIK, Cisco's Services arm (Advanced Services) is one of the most successful BUs. Like all service arms, they do need to employ tonnes of staff which hurts margins. Topline remains impressive.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

<< < Page 2 / 2