Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

SAT scores - literally the only standardized test evaluating ones capability...

Obviously Monkey never run any quality metrics on Cisco's code when it was written by people who did take the SAT.

Why would ANYONE want a Stanford grad these days when they've done away with SAT scores as an entrance requirement and have fully swallowed the DEI sandwich?

SAT scores - literally the only standardized test evaluating ones capability is no longer required and instead replaced by the color of your skin and gender - the things we ABSOLUTELY should NOT be evaluating people on.

Why would Cisco want a Stanford or UC grad? We sell & market legacy network equipment. Find the cheapest bodies from Santa Clara, and don't give them raises or stock for years.

"If you ask any UC, Stanford grads the last 10 yrs, for them Cisco equals layoffs."

This isn't 2008. UC, Stanford grads don't think about Cisco as a potential employer unless they have a DUI or as--ult charge.

If you ask any UC, Stanford grads the last 10 yrs, for them Cisco equals layoffs.

Ask all the PhDs who quit months after being hired and they won't even mention layoffs. The quality of the work is available is poor at best. Some did their thesis on topics relevant to groups they'd never be able to work for, further reducing the value Cisco could have gotten.

With yearly layoffs.

That represents quite a slowdown. I remember when they were quarterly for years.

just tough for Csco to get the best talents out there. If you ask any UC, Stanford grads the last 10 yrs, for them Cisco equals layoffs. With yearly layoffs.. No recovering from this label. Why would you work for a company that treats employees like this?

@1kxg+1owvzQHa Yeeeaaah...maybe not Nortel way but Motorola or Siemens way is for certain. Motorola had 75000 employees in 2011. Just acquiring companies is not enough, execution and revenue generation on those acquisitions are the key and Cisco - as much as they hype the "software" and non-existent GAI keywords - has not done very well on that have they? Countries RELY? "Blank cheques?" Where do anyone get these information from? And if Cisco folks think that that was all that is needed to stay relevant in a rapidly evolving, AI and automation driven market, then well, Good Luck! As the other poster said: " To see how an acquisition would affect Cisco note that for each billion in addition revenue Cisco grows by less than 2%, so good luck."

I don’t have much faith in Cisco actually building the things customers actually want to buy. It’s so annoying just building things for the sales motion and customers end up being unhappy with inaccurate expectations.

Buy High, Sell Low. That's Cisco in 4 words.

"Cisco is going down the Nortel and Siemens way. They have no interest in growing technologically."

Cisco will never go the Nortel way. They built strategic relationships to ensure many countries RELY on Cisco networking equipment, we obtain blank check government contracts without any competition. If a new technology threatens Cisco switches/routers... we'd acquire the company.

Also Cisco was never interested in growing technologically. We've always acquired products and even features externally, nothing was created internally technologically.

"Juniper was never more than a dwarf player in the networking market after more than 27 years since its founding."

Dwarf player? Maybe in enterprise but in SP/ISp matket they own 50% of the market share. And now steadily eating Cisco's lunch in enterprise courtesy of AI driven wifi. But I get it: Vision is not a "Cisco thing". So yes, good luck!

Cisco is going down the Nortel and Siemens way. They have no interest in growing technologically.

Circuit switching yielded to packet switching for IPv4. IPv6 is by many measures a failure so what else is on the table to supplant IPv4? The demand for speeds and feeds is still growing albeit more slowly so Cisco should be able to plod along for the foreseeable future.

Even Juniper is visibly trying to expand in AI and quantum domains. At Cisco those are just stuff of ppt slides

Juniper was never more than a dwarf player in the networking market after more than 27 years since its founding. A sudden tenfold growth in revenue would still leave them behind Cisco, so good luck.

If you've read those PowerPoint slides and noticed a few sensible points amid much nonsense and put the sensible points into Google you'll see that no idea was created by anyone at Cisco. The reason most of Cisco's business is built on acquisitions is because they don't have any development skills and haven't for decades. To see how an acquisition would affect Cisco note that for each billion in addition revenue Cisco grows by less than 2%, so good luck.

Cisco is going down the Nortel and Siemens way. They have no interest in growing technologically. They are circling the drain. Even Juniper is visibly trying to expand in AI and quantum domains. At Cisco those are just stuff of ppt slides

Cisco's Board of Directors doomed the long-term viability of the company when they hired another sales guy to be the CEO after Chambers ran out of sales gimmicks ("We have 50 business priorities.") and then stayed way too long.

Chuck followed the same playbook and hasn't delivered anything innovative over his entire tenure. His legacy will be as the willing caretaker of Cisco's decline into irrelevance.

if Cisco had reinvested some profits into 5G, arguably the company would have been even more profitable long-term.