Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

"If it is true that JMP has growing revenue every year, then JMP may IPO before SAS due to SAS having flat revenue for past 10 years. "
True. But the real metric is profit. For all we know. JMP breaks even each year. Pu--c GAAP will shed more light on JMP's profitability. Same for SAS.

"Ot can a subsidiary IPO independent of their parent organization?"
Yes. Several ways that can happen. Too much detail to scribe here.

If it is true that JMP has growing revenue every year, then JMP may IPO before SAS due to SAS having flat revenue for past 10 years. Investors want to see growing revenue.

Ot can a subsidiary IPO independent of their parent organization?

“If JS wanted that, the time for that to happen was before the sale and IPO chatter ramped up.”

In an IPO, sellers usually retain partial ownership for a while. If not, buyers concerned about stability and leadership may lower their price. Even in a private sale, buyers want a smooth transition.

This means the sale or IPO will probably take another year, and potentially several more years.

JS is a smart man who knows all these things. He will turn 77 this year. So I think he has made his decision.

"If JS wants to control the trajectory for JMP, he needs to get it solo asap so he can remain in the driver's seat."

If JS wanted that, the time for that to happen was before the sale and IPO chatter ramped up. With JS leading JMP completely divorced from SAS, he could have kept JMP insulated from the distraction of a sale/IPO. Consequently, JMP's future would be much less of an unknown.

"But seriously, JMP is not the same organization it was decades ago. It can and will be able to survive without SAS. If it gets bought, some employees there may be toast, but JMP will be fine."

If JS wants to control the trajectory for JMP, he needs to get it solo asap so he can remain in the driver's seat.

Having sai that....JS is filthy rich and in his elder years. Perhaps more importantly, his kids seem to have zero interest in JMP, so being in the driver's seat for more years might hold zero interest. Completely understandable if so.

Regardless of whether you think JMP is deserving or not, JMP will be like Jack and Rose (or at least Rose) … leaping off the sinking ship at the last minute and not getting pulled under. JMP will drift away on a piece of a door and start a new and better life, unencumbered by any of their baggage from the past.

But seriously, JMP is not the same organization it was decades ago. It can and will be able to survive without SAS. If it gets bought, some employees there may be toast, but JMP will be fine.

“In an IPO, it will take some time to clean the company up to the point where it is efficient and running smoothly. Years, if not a decade or more.”



@24w+1jh3fph20 For the sake of friends still at SAS, I hope you are right.

Another scenario is that the Executive Team goes through all the steps to IPO, only to receive at the last minute a better offer from private equity.

A third scenario is that the IPO succeeds, but the stock tanks shortly afterward, and private equity buys SAS on the dip.

It is an endgame best observed from a distance.

"Either way, the Art Department is not safe for long."

It will remain safe if there is an IPO. In an IPO, it will take some time to clean the company up to the point where it is efficient and running smoothly. Years, if not a decade or more. Lots of political landmines with that cleaning process, and few will have the stomach to trod forward and separate the producers from the consumers. In an outright sale, however, all bets are off.

In my opinion, an outright sale will not occur. It's a "family" company, that I believe functions as a Corporate Conservatorship for people with "special relationships" to the owners. Over time, those folks will age out and retire. But in the meantime, they'll remain, performing their roles in this Kabuki theater.

@24n+1jh3fph20 Sarcasm noted.

We were discussing subsidiaries. JMP is almost the only SAS product that can be easily separated, and therefore either sold or not sold. The subsidiary was created to give the buyer that flexibility.

For SAS employees, the pending sale is a pending disaster. Under any likely buyer, it will be followed by cost cuts including mass layoffs.

For JMP employees, the outcome will be either a disaster or a great opportunity.

@24m+1jh3fph20 If I followed that correctly you are saying that in the event of a sale the new owner could either sell JMP or not sell JMP. Deep vibes.

JMP is not shielded from reality; JMP makes money. The Art Department, of course, does not. As soon as the sale occurs, both will have a new owner.

The new owner will likely decide that JMP does not fit their business model, and sell it. The subsidiary makes that easy, and it would be the best outcome for JMP employees.

Alternatively, the new owner could treat JMP the same as SAS, cutting costs and milking the revenue stream until it dies. IMO that would be a missed opportunity, but we’ve all seen missed opportunities before.

Either way, the Art Department is not safe for long.

JMP and the Art Department will continue living their respective lives in a state of oblivion, completely shielded from reality as long as JG and JS remain in control. Safe spaces!

“JMP is a subsidiary. A subsidiary should be paying 100 percent of their expenses.”

I doubt whether all subsidiaries literally pay all their own expenses, but I would expect a bona fide subsidiary to “pay” for benefits received from the parent company via chargebacks that appear on the books. I know (first-hand knowledge) chargebacks used to happen between SAS departments, but I don’t know whether JMP has ever done the same. The rules for JMP were always at least a little different. JG let JS do his own thing and vice-versa.

SAS did not create its subsidiaries to please you, but to please its buyer. Making JMP and Innovation Air into subsidiaries makes it easy to value these parts separately.

The buyer will get a close look at JMP’s books, and can easily estimate the costs of rent, utilities, HCC, RFC etc. This makes it easy to decide whether to keep JMP or sell it.

Making it a subsidiary does not make it a parasite — rather the opposite. SAS would not make it easy to see JMP’s books, unless those books look good.

Subsidiaries don't ALWAYS pay their own expenses and OFTEN share infrastructure and resources. It depends on the relationship they have with their parent company and the specific agreements in place.

• Instagram (Meta Platforms Inc.)
• Marvel Entertainment (The Walt Disney Company)
• Blue Bottle Coffee (Nestlé)
• LinkedIn (Microsoft)
• GE Healthcare (General Electric)
• Google Cloud (Alphabet Inc.)

7. Amazon Web Services (AWS) (Amazon)
8. Tide (Procter & Gamble)
9. Gillette (Procter & Gamble)
10. Pampers (Procter & Gamble)

These subsidiaries benefit from shared infrastructure, resources, and cost efficiencies provided by their parent companies.

JMP is a subsidiary. A subsidiary should be paying 100 percent of their expenses. Is that happening with JMP?

A subsidiary is considered a "standalone" entity, meaning it operates as a separate legal entity from its parent company, with its own management, debts, and liabilities.

JMP is a subsidiary in name but likely does not meet the definition stated above. Yes, JMP has its own management. But does JMP truly have 100percent of its own debts and liabilities? Is JMP paying their own way 100% on liabilities such building rent, utilities, HCC, RFC etc?

I was bitten by a tick. But it did not bother me when it su-ked my blood, because it was not a subsidiary 😂.

"So you’re saying JMP was not a parasite 5 years ago, but it is now?"

Hardly anyone cares about five years ago. Zero relevance.

So you’re saying JMP was not a parasite 5 years ago, but it is now?

"If that makes JMP a parasite, it makes them all parasites."

Nope. The difference is that JMP is a subsidiary and the rest are not. Try again.

All SAS products use SAS code, SAS facilities, and SAS benefits.

If that makes JMP a parasite, it makes them all parasites.

"Again: That’s true of every SAS product"

Bit but but, officer, every one else was also speeding.

Stop JMPing to false conclusions.

Again: That’s true of every SAS product 😂!

Why? Because parasites need a host.

Get out and do what? No one has authority to divide SAS’s market, except its owners.

And giving JMP the Desktop Analytics market might have worked — assuming VIya succeeded in the BI market and the Cloud.

It wasn’t an unreasonable division. It just didn’t work, that’s all.

Backseat drivers.

Get out and do it if you have all the “answers”

“JMP competes with SAS and thus should be standing on their own.”

This issue is not so simple. JMP competes with SAS in statistical analysis on the Desktop. But JMP does not compete in the BI market, and JMP has no product in the Cloud.

To say JMP “should” be on their own is not the SAS viewpoint. SAS wants these markets. That’s why JMP is not allowed to enter them.



The SAS CEO hoped and believed that Viya would succeed in these markets. We can wish things had turned out better; but he made the decision that he made.

“…it is a dysfunctional business arrangement”.

OK, no argument there 😁.

"Are SAS employees jealous of JMP employees because JMP hasn't laid off as much employees as SAS has?"

JMP has laid off employees? News to me.

Jealousy does not factor into it.. It is recognition of favoritism and calling that out. Do not expect others to believe nonsense that JMP has no fat to trim.

JMP competes with SAS and thus should be standing on their own. JG has an unusually high amount of unhealthy corporate compassion for JMP. Bottom line it is a dysfunctional business "arrangement".

What is the obsession with scapegoating JMP about?
Are SAS employees jealous of JMP employees because JMP hasn't laid off as much employees as SAS has?

"Why is Greenland still a part of Denmark?"

Why are Guam and Puerto Rico still a part (territories) of the U.S.?

“JMP has been shielded, nursed, and protected from reality ever since it was hatched…”

That’s true of every SAS product 😂!

It's something on the order of $100M ARR ~= $200K per employee.

https://growjo.com/company/JMP

https://leadiq.com/c/jmp/5a1d987c2300005400872f8a

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/jmp/20775103

What is the annual gross revenue for JMP?

"The 75 milllion American mo--ns who voted for Trump want lebensraum now."

Red herring. Do better.

Why is Greenland still a part of Denmark?

The 75 milllion American mo--ns who voted for Trump want lebensraum now.

As long as JMP is su-king on the SAS te-t, no one will truly know if it is profitable.

Because if it wasn't, JMP would have to pay for its own administrative staff, among other things, which would significantly eat away at its alleged profit.

JMP is like a bandaid that has been attached to the host way longer than necessary. It should have been ripped away years ago. Of all the departments at SAS, it is easy to envision that life for a JMPer post sale/IPO will be MUCH MORE of a shock than any other department experience s. Why? Because JMP has been shielded, nursed, and protected from reality ever since it was hatched. JMP is analogous to a bear cub who is completely unprepared to be weaned from the mama bear and continues to refuse weaning attempts.

“The biggest argument people make is SAS will sell faster if JMP remains part of the for sale bundle. Evidently that is not a big carrot to a buyer because SAS remains unsold.”



For a private buyer, it is not a big carrot. A private buyer will pay $5-10B for SAS’ $3B Annual Recurring Revenue. JMP’s ARR is small in comparison, so not a material consideration. For the same reason, Viya is not a material consideration, and neither is AI -- for a private buyer.

In a public IPO, though, buyers love to see areas of potential growth. That’s why SAS’ public statements always position Viya sales as growing (from a small base). That’s why they call SAS an “AI company”. If there is an IPO, then JMP, Viya, and AI will all be touted as potential growth areas.

I saw JMP revenue figures when I was employed at SAS. They grew slowly but steadily, about 10% every year. I never saw profit figures, of course. But if you understand the relationship between the two owners, you know this: if JMP were not profitable, it would never be allowed >500 headcount.

SAS has addressed the problem of JMP’s independence — temporarily. JMP is positioned as a Desktop product for scientists, engineers, and statisticians. JMP does not compete against SAS in Business Intelligence or the Cloud.

If JMP becomes independent, it could compete against SAS in these markets. So it’s fair to call JMP’s independence an “unaddressed problem”. However, JMP’s independence will only occur after the sale of SAS. Then it will be Somebody Else’s Problem.

JMP was made a subsidiary for the same reason as Innovation Air: to make the sale of SAS more attractive, by providing flexibility to the buyer. SAS airplanes may not fit the buyer’s business model, so the subsidiary makes it easy to keep them or sell them. JMP may not fit their business model either, and the JMP subsidiary gives the buyer that same flexibility.

The final owner of SAS will be a company like Broadcom, or private equity, which is in the business of purchasing declining software revenue streams. Their business model is to lay off, outsource, and milk profits as long as they can. If they apply that model to JMP, it will be a disaster for JMP employees.

However, JMP’s steady growth and profitability don’t fit that business model. So a new owner is more likely to spin it off. That would be the best thing for JMP employees, freeing their product to grow in any market.

The founder of JMP is 76; after the sale, he’ll be a year or two older. He could buy JMP back from its new owner, and run it as an independent company; or he could stay with JMP as an advisor for a while. But like @af+1jh3fph20, I believe he is likely to find the change in ownership a logical time to retire.