Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

What is a realistic happy ending for SAS?

At SAS I saw few instances of strictly defined nepotism, but many instances of favoritism.

Because they were not promoted for ability, many of these people were unable to do their jobs. That’s why there have been no significant new revenue streams created at SAS in many years.

Arguably, the last successful new revenue stream was JMP, but JMP is only a small part of SAS. The Art Department is much smaller, indeed a “rounding error”.

If we consider all their employees combined, JMP and the Art Department have about 500 employees producing about 5% of SAS revenues.

If revenue per employee were constant, we’d have 9,500 producing the other 95%.

But in fact, SAS has 12,000 employees producing that other 95%.

That other 95% is where nepotism and favoritism have caused the decline of a once-great company.

@1n4+1jzq0haak
That's called "nepotism" (the strict definition). But at SAS it's a mix of nepotism and rank favoritism, in particular between senior management and subordinates. You have your made men, and your aspirants. Your made men are someone's favorite because they do the needful without being asked, usually, and can be counted on to lick someone's boots as clean as they can get them as often as asked. Your aspirants are the hopefuls, the candidates. They try to attach themselves to someone on the way up, but it's a gamble. If you climb on the wrong back and they're not strong enough to pull you both up you fall when they do. If you get close enough to the top, you may be able to climb them to get to the top, but you'd better cut the rope and send them to the bottom when you do. If you climb on the right back, well, things work out. If you don't, well... you're "#opentowork".

Sad, powerless, jealous person/people. Sure.

That being said, I don't delude myself and others into believing that I hit a triple when I was walked into the ballpark, walked to third base and can sit on third until I decide to be walked home.

A few years ago, there were some comments stating "that only relatives are promoted". Maybe those were written by other sad, powerless, jealous people? I didn't write them.

Personally, I don't think those other comments were written by sad, powerless, jealous people. I think they were written by skilled folks who worked hard to build their careers, but were then stripped of them and thrown out by a sad, jealous, lackluster person who has the luck of having the right relationship/paternity which allows them to rise in role that will last in perpetuity. At least be honest and open so that others can see your role for what it is.

“If I'm obsessed with anything, it's the politics of SAS and how management ascends through the ranks at SAS. Is it based on value or some other "secret" criteria? Connections? Paternity suits? Something else? It probably isn't competence and "value-add" to the business.”

The eternal whine of people without power explaining how stupid or meaningless things are because they don’t have perceived visibility into decision making processes. If I wasn’t involved it must be d-mb people who got their because of paternity tests.

Not a SAS thing. A sad pattern from sad jealous people.

Beautiful works of art all over a mostly vacant campus.

"Is the goal of SAS to have a functional, thriving business, or is it to run an entitlement program for friends and family?"

Goodnight founded and ran the company successfully for over 40 years. Thousands of mortgages, and tens of thousands of college educations, were funded from the salaries earned by his employees.

The landscape changed and unfortunately SAS leadership didn't adapt appropriately (in hindsight). That doesn't change the fact that he built an extremely successful company and many thousands of people were provided with a very good job for many years.

Finally, there is value-add to the Art department. Beautiful works of art all over campus.

@1ke The goal of SAS is to sell the company.

One person's "rounding error" is another person's "non-value-added" expense.
Would you want this to be the description of your career at SAS?

If I'm obsessed with anything, it's the politics of SAS and how management ascends through the ranks at SAS. Is it based on value or some other "secret" criteria? Connections? Paternity suits? Something else? It probably isn't competence and "value-add" to the business.

Is the goal of SAS to have a functional, thriving business, or is it to run an entitlement program for friends and family? Knowing which situation you are in makes a lot of difference in your career choices. I'm still not clear as to which it is.

Is there a globalization department? Huh. News to me.

Spending for the Art Dept. is a rounding error and so irrelevant. The dude obsessed with it is strange.

@1ev As long as JG has at least 51 percent control, the Art Department remains safe. It is a pet philanthropic department of one of the owners. The other owner's pet is JMP.

To my knowledge both areas have remained completely immune during layoffs. Anyone having knowledge to the contrary can elaborate.

Of course SAS would be better off with a group of experts in Cary that had a deep understanding of the core C code. The product would be maintained better if at least some R&D stays here.

However — that’s not how a Trustee thinks. It’s not how private equity thinks. It’s not how any likely buyer of SAS thinks.

Those people don’t understand code. They understand dollar signs. When an overseas developer is one-third the cost of a US developer, you have to argue that the US developer is more than three times as productive.

You can’t win that argument. You may believe US developers are more productive — and it may even be true! — but you can’t prove it. All you have is your belief, while they have numbers with dollar signs on them.

Whether SAS IPOs, gets acquired, or goes into a trust, its future is the same.

Good luck to all.

But what about the Art Department (which is safe)?!!?!?!

@1c3 no need for R&D except for a very small footprint in USA to address any remaining v9 bugs.

Totally agree on canning Viya. That should have happened long ago but better late than never. It is highly doubtful that the critical mass of customers would cry if Viya was canned. Any crying would be muffed by rejoicing. Canning Viya could be a reason for v9 customers to rethink abandoning SAS and could increase retention.

If Viya was the future of SAS, the company would already be sold .

I can be hired back out of retirement, at the right price 😁.

@1c6 'better off with an A-team of US-based experts who already know that code.'
Many of those US experts have retired or otherwise left the company.

Probably not advisable to move all of R&D to India. Does SAS India have historical experience with the core C SAS Base and Procs code that continues to make the real $$$$? It’s not unheard of to cause undetected regressions in some of that complex code. To keep the cash cow customers happy, better off with an A-team of US-based experts who already know that code. Cheaper is not always better! But then again, SAS has not seemed to learn that!

If I were that Trustee, I would:

1. Cancel Viya and other marginally profitable products;

2. Move all R&D to a small number of staff in India; and

3. Do no further development except bug fixes in V9.

IMO actions like that would be required of a Trustee with a contractual duty to maximize profits.

Similar actions are likely if SAS gets bought by a company like Broadcom or private equity.

"There is another alternative to an IPO or a sale that could benefit the heirs tremendously.'

This could be the fallback plan if a sale/ipo does not happen prior to JG passing.

There is another alternative to an IPO or a sale that could benefit the heirs tremendously. Namely, they can appoint a Trustee/Board of Directors with a contractual fiduciary duty to maximize their future interests in what is left of SAS in terms of cash flow and finances. This would likely include naming all new senior management, eliminating 60-to-70% of current employees, and reducing SAS footprint to one or two of the largest campus buildings. The company “stays in the family”, but is run by well paid businesses experts with profits flowing to the heirs until the whole thing runs out of gas somewhere 10 to 20 years from now.

"Like claiming everyone who doesn’t agree is in denial. Could be seen as insulting…. Could be true, could be false. But it usually applies to the people yelling it as much as the people they are pointing it at."

Like claiming someone you disagree with needs medication.

They don't need to sell. They are decluttering for when they pass.

@18g I tend to agree. The owners are aging, and over half of the buildings on campus are empty. There is no way a company can indefinately cary such overhead of expensive physical assets that do nothing but subtract from the bottom line. Is there??

@182 "Didn’t happen then; VERY likely won’t now."

The difference between then and now is the age of the owners.

They did not need to sell then; they do now.

“Insults are not arguments.”

Sure they are. You just have to read around them for the relevant stuff. Or realize that sometimes insults are unpleasant but based in truth..

Like claiming everyone who doesn’t agree is in denial. Could be seen as insulting…. Could be true, could be false. But it usually applies to the people yelling it as much as the people they are pointing it at.

@16b+1jzq0haak He clearly needs to read the layoff to get the info he needs to run the company.

“ However, SAS has spent significant money becoming “IPO-ready”. They have hired Deloitte and McKinsey, sent the Executive Team to NYSE and NASDAQ, and (most expensive of all) instituted a new accounting system to become GAAP-compliant.

SAS would not spend such money on theater. That doesn’t mean that they will IPO. But they are definitely preparing that option.”

LOTS of $$$ were spent on most of these same things circa ~2000 when “going public” was the talk and Boisvert was brought in. Didn’t happen then; VERY likely won’t now. JG/JS and their heirs are already extremely wealthy and set for at least the current and next two generations unless some of them really fook up …

… SAS’ realistic valuation notwithstanding.

@17e “There won't be a sale or IPO until after JG expires. The IPO stuff is performative theater…”

There probably will not be a sale, because no private buyer wants to pay the asking price. The Broadcom talks, when the $15-20B figure was leaked, effectively put a bright red “For Sale” sign on SAS. But clearly, no one has made a sufficient offer.

However, SAS has spent significant money becoming “IPO-ready”. They have hired Deloitte and McKinsey, sent the Executive Team to NYSE and NASDAQ, and (most expensive of all) instituted a new accounting system to become GAAP-compliant.

SAS would not spend such money on theater. That doesn’t mean that they will IPO. But they are definitely preparing that option.

An IPO takes time, depending on market conditions, and any new owner will take time to clean house. SAS may lay off another 10% before then. But I guess 90% of employees have at least a couple of years before mass layoffs.

"This could be a reason why a sale/ipo is stalled."

There won't be a sale or IPO until after JG expires. The IPO stuff is performative theater to run the clock and soothe the herd.

Stress and horrible leadership.

If there's one thing I've learned from working here it's that if what the leadership is doing isn't working, we can expect more of the same.

The same people (useless and in many cases destructive) who remain in positions of power (undeserved) will keep getting the same huge paychecks (waste) to do the same things (nothing) that got SAS where it is now (flatline/death throes).

There was a time when SAS could have course corrected but that time has passed.

The vibe is bad. Numbers are bad. Employees are anxious. Leadership has stopped communicating with employees. Customers are unhappy. The IPO that wasn't seems to be perma-stalled and the new CFO is NC born and bred and an alum of NCSU. More of the same will only create more of the same.

The boomers that made SAS successful are aging out of their jobs or finally retiring. Subsequent generations see SAS for what it is and it ain't pretty. Look at the age breakdown in the recent customer satisfaction survey. The numbers drop off a cliff after the boomer cohort.

More of the same will get SAS more of the same.

"SAS seems like an easy expense to cut, especially if open-source alternatives are available."

More and more recent college grads have no SAS experience and those that do are not keen on using it. Adding to that, most SAS advocates are gray heads and they are exiting the work force. The end result is a shrinking SAS user base.

This could be a reason why a sale/ipo is stalled. The market sees value only in the declining v9 revenue stream. Perhaps the asking price is not commensurate with that?

On another note about denial, I have a friend who is a SAS programmer at a local government contracting company. The company has been a SAS customer for many, many years. My friend is being asked to use R in analyses instead of SAS.

The company is working to reduce expenses due to the loss of government contracts. SAS seems like an easy expense to cut, especially if open-source alternatives are available.

@16b It is out of character. IMO the most likely reason is denial.

But another reason might be that canceling Viya would look bad in front of an IPO.

Perhaps both reasons apply.

"The latest example of denial at SAS is Viya, That platform has not increased revenues in ten years, yet SAS continues to promote Viya as its future."

IJG is a smart man. Seems way out of character for him to ignore the obvious for 10 years.

The latest example of denial at SAS is Viya, That platform has not increased revenues in ten years, yet SAS continues to promote Viya as its future.

Another prominent example is Open Source. SAS ignored it for years, and has still not fully embraced it.

SAS denied the value of software engineering. This resulted in Foresters and Philosophers being chosen as CTOs — and shrinking the company.

@13k+1jzq0haak delivers only insults.

Insults are not arguments.

@11q+1jzq0haak is correct.

“Up yours with your implied insult”

It wasn’t implied. Pretty sure I flat out said it.

Anyone who doesn’t see things in your over the top viewpoint has got to be in denial. Got it.

I witnessed customers being ignored and disrespected right in front of them by high-level people, and these people weren't Oliver. The whole show was about releasing a vanity product, and not about what the customer wanted or needed. And no, the product wasn't Viya.

I went to another site, and the first thing out of the customer's mouth was a request to not waste their time; they had contacted SAS before about issues several times before and were ignored -- they implied that this was the last time they were dealing with SAS. They graciously offered us their time, with the request that we not waste it by ignoring their concerns. Their concerns were ultimately ignored.

At another site visit, the customer was managing shortcomings in the product with an Excel spreadsheet. A fix was requested many times by the customer, but the requests were ignored.

So yes, SAS is all about MEEEE. Up yours with your implied insult. Denial is a real problem with that company, and in my experience, the company is filled with people who think their sh-t doesn't stink, and who are stuck in some form of denial. If you've been there 30 years, perhaps you are one of them, and you contribute to the problem.

"This is a joke, right?"

No one found that funny. How did SAS undo Oliver's pedantic behavior?

"Oliver did the ignoring right in front of customers, some of which were c-level."

This is a joke, right?