Thread regarding Open Text Corp. layoffs

Reclassification may be perfectly legitimate, but it doesn’t create growth. Show Core performance on a consistent product basis.

Ultimately, the success of the GTM strategy should be measured by sustainable business growth, not how the numbers are categorized.

Lol...what do you expect . He is a sales guy. Sales peoplemlie through their nose. Investors are looking for someone to pump the makett and then dump their shares. Noticed how always speaks of "owners". .I really wish we had technologists running the show who understand business as well. But no....all we get is fake leaders shomworry more about optics and showboating

@OP insightful post, not quite false accounting but bluffing the markets at best. What next ADM moved back into core and the back out? It seems nothing is off the table.

@bx I'm thinking of leaking the internal email to analysts. This whole shell game is absurd. And I thought MB was bad. AA is exponentially worse.

He manipulates the numbers to try to look better. Just looks at the email he sent vs the numbers in the investment deck. He thinks it’s going to make people believe he’s doing a good job. It’s gross.

What products outside of arcsight were reclassified?

@ab Seems like two different things are getting mixed together here. Nobody really disputes that the overall business declined. The question is whether the Core number would still have shown growth without the product reclassifications. If someone has the before-and-after numbers showing that impact, that would be a lot more convincing than arguing about whether someone “lied” or “fibbed.”

So, it's business as usual at opentext.

@a3 yes, he did. Some core products in cyber were bleeding money. They along with the bleed data were moved into a non core bucket. That negative dollar was therefore NOT reported as part of core results. Legal? Sure. Analysts are only looking at actual numbers and overall OT continues to shrink.

@a3 To be announced at Ayman's town hall.

I'd skip the "AA lied" claim because there's no evidence presented for that. The actual numbers make the point better: revenue -4.0%, ARR -3%, support -9%, license -8%, services -11%, while "Core" somehow grew 2.4%. And the -1.7% figure is constant currency excluding divestitures, not reported revenue. The fair question is: what exactly moved in or out of "Core," and what would Core growth have been on a consistent product perimeter?