HP restructures (again?)

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich (artistic@telus.net) wrote:
>As I understand it (some analysts were suggesting the changes came
>rather suddenly due to a resignation of the head of the Computer
>Division, so some is still a bit sketchy) the very lucrative printer
>division is being merged with the computer division under the
management
>of the printer division.

Well those of us who work in the IPG organisation at HP can't
understand why HP would do this - certainly in terms of how successful
the respsective businesses have been. Personally, I reckon it's all to
do with stopping the analysts stirring up thigs by suggesting the
pritner business should be spun off leaving the rest of the businesses
to support themselves. Of course, if this happened the share price for
the computing bit would tank and the printer business would be an
unstoppable force, crushing all its rivals. The only reason why HP
can't want this to happen is that it would vindicate the Walter
Hewlett court action that he launched when the takeover of Compaq
happened.

Ah well, at least I've still got a job, unlike some of my ex-HP
colleagues.

--
Mushroom

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

As many have implied, HP makes the majority of its money in their
printer division (IPG). As you state, that division is healthy, and it
it were to became its own entity, the new company would probably end up
having to explain the massive profits to the anti-trust people (in
regard to ink sales), so this way they can "damp down" the profits
considerably and mix it all together with the enterprise and personal
computer divisions.

Also, who would buy the later divisions, unless it was the same company
that just bought out IBMs computer division to further consolidate and
corner the market (or maybe Gateway/emachines, or Dell).

And, anyway, we ALL know that Walter Hewlett was right! And Carly
Fiorina would be out of the game as quickly as you could shoot her out
of a cannon (and not the printing kind ;-))if the IPG was to become it's
won company.

Art


Mushroom wrote:

> Arthur Entlich (artistic@telus.net) wrote:
>
>>As I understand it (some analysts were suggesting the changes came
>>rather suddenly due to a resignation of the head of the Computer
>>Division, so some is still a bit sketchy) the very lucrative printer
>>division is being merged with the computer division under the
>
> management
>
>>of the printer division.
>
>
> Well those of us who work in the IPG organisation at HP can't
> understand why HP would do this - certainly in terms of how successful
> the respsective businesses have been. Personally, I reckon it's all to
> do with stopping the analysts stirring up thigs by suggesting the
> pritner business should be spun off leaving the rest of the businesses
> to support themselves. Of course, if this happened the share price for
> the computing bit would tank and the printer business would be an
> unstoppable force, crushing all its rivals. The only reason why HP
> can't want this to happen is that it would vindicate the Walter
> Hewlett court action that he launched when the takeover of Compaq
> happened.
>
> Ah well, at least I've still got a job, unlike some of my ex-HP
> colleagues.
>