SAS can keep doing small layoffs, 1-2% of employees each year, to ensure profitability. A $3B annual revenue stream — even though declining — can support this policy for many years.
This is the most generous policy for current employees. Other companies, to maximize profits, conduct mass layoffs and sell declining assets.
So what’s your best guess? How long will the current policy continue?
@evbs+1sNL14U0 I wonder why you feel the need to ask baseless and mo--nic questions anonymously?
I wonder how many of those managers are "off brand" children?
aka someone has Broadcom on speed dial.
Plans for continuity of business are in place.
If he croaks, we are all put of jobs pretty quickly. The older he gets the more I think about it. Pretty sure none of the current crop are the heir apparent.
SAS will go the way the Branch Davidian compound did -- organizations founded on the cult of personality are only intended to last as long as the lead personality lasts.
@8whp+1sNL14U0 That is certainly an opinion.
Yup, all the managers and directors stayed the same for decades. The lucky ones got further bumped up to VP.
People who were able to come in high or make friends with the right people held on to those plum positions with iron fists. Woe unto you if you proved you were smarter or more competent than them. Then they panicked and slapped you down.
Meanwhile there's zero accountability for any of them to be good at their jobs -- ever. So they're all still there. Disgusting. It wrecked the whole company.
My experience at SAS was mixed. I had some great managers, and some terrible ones. I gave each of them my best work and best advice. Some viewed advice as a threat to their authority, and became defensive and hostile. I got blamed, and punished, and gaslighted — as did many others.
If good managers were in the majority, I’d have hope yet for SAS growth. But in my experience, a majority were incompetents or sycophants. The good ones must compromise with the rest.
This group’s record, over the past 30 years, is clear. We had the premier product for analyzing data. The amount of data in the world exploded, driven by the Internet. Yet during that glorious opportunity, this group actually managed to shrink the company.
The faces have changed, but the mix of managers has not. So I see no path to change.
I expect a sale sooner rather than later, because a) it makes no sense to hold a declining asset, b) a software company is a difficult asset to inherit, and c) it can’t be fun to preside over these layoffs.
If it were my call, I’d view a 2025 IPO as my fallback strategy, and I’d be talking to interested buyers right now.
(OP)
And if you feel that you can't go on
And your will's sinkin' low
Just believe, and you can't go wrong
In Goodnight you will find the road
It could be a while then. JG looks pretty healthy for an 81 year old and has access to the best possible healthcare. It's highly probable he'll pass 90.
I'd bet on the sale being the most probable outcome.
"Until the death of the founder, or until the sale of the company, which ever comes first."
"This, of course, is the right answer. Most likely death of the founder followed soon after by a sale."
The CEO clearly isn't interested in maximizing profits. Otherwise, he would have conducted mass layoffs, hired competent corporate officers, or bothered coming up with a decent strategy. So he's just waiting out the clock.
SAS revenues are stagnant, but solid. And the company has no debt. This can go on as long as the company stays cash flow positive and SAS has a lot of potential fat to cut on the expenses side.
Limping along in an ever diminishing state for the next 12 - 15 years is certainly doable. Heck, that's Broadcom's entire business model.
Until the death of the founder, or until the sale of the company, which ever comes first.