| 
Thomas Cole, "The Consummation of Empire", 1835-1836
  (source: thevelvetrocket.com) 
Pride, when
  permitted full sway, is the great undying cankerworm which gnaws the very  
vitals of a man's worldly possessions, let them be small or great, hundreds
  or millions. - P.T. Barnum 
If one looks only at headlines from a smartphone twitter feed, it would appear that High  Technology was having a banner year. The NASDAQ popped up to a new record level; Google stock recently exploded to the upside by more than 16% in a single day to hit its own all time high; and trendsetter Apple continues rolling out new smartphones, tablets and now smart watches. With VC and Wall Street money continuing to cascade into the coffers of Web 2.0 companies in the Bay Area and the city of San Francisco surpassing even Manhattan as the most expensive rental market in America, how could anyone say that "Tech" exuberance was in any way "irrational"? Yet only amateurs in finance surf waves. Surfers, after all, inevitably wipe out, get dragged across the reef and, on occasion, become shark bait. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPtlwoQDb-E 
We've all experienced first hand how the Seven Seas of High Technology are subject to  sudden squalls and dangerous currents. Winds can abruptly leap up to tear the strongest canvas, and there are indeed monsters lurking in the deep. To navigate this ocean and cut along the crests with billowing sail while others flounder and wreck, we need to read those winds and waves shrewdly, employ sextant and compass with skill and climb to the crow's nest to keep a weather eye on the horizon. 
USS Constitution (source: captainsclerk.info) 
This editorial series will once again study 17 companies in the
  semiconductor, system and  
software markets for High Technology. They all
  provide a mix of hardware, software and  
services as part of their offerings. 
Together, these firms also serve a vast spectrum of end user
  markets - the three C's of  
Consumer, Communications and Computing, Mobile
  Computing (which includes  
smartphones, tablets and wearables), Datacenters
  (including servers, storage and LAN),  
ISM (Industrial, Scientific &
  Medical), Automotive and Military/Aerospace. They are all  
considered to be
  either market share leaders or aggressive innovators (and sometimes both) 
in
  their sectors. Without question, each and every one of them can legitimately
  claim to be  
a bellweather of High Tech's current circumstances and a
  harbinger of things to come. 
We'll be looking at trends embedded in 8 1/2 years of
  quarterly revenue data as well as 
individual major announcements and
  strategic initiatives. The companies are  grouped into categories so that we can make some apples to apples comparisons as well. Combined with an assortment of macroeconomic data, this treatise will also provide short, medium and long term projections for each firm and for the industry as a whole. 
Please note: I don't own a single stock - not in these
  companies or any other. The deep  
hatred and suspicion of equities which my
  grandparents learned from the Great Depression  
was absorbed into my very
  bones from when I was just a tot. Furthermore, nobody is paying  
me for these
  opinions - they're all my own, with no outside interests involved whatsoever. Let's start off at the system level and look at some of the "ship of the line" companies in 
the industry. 
The Big Iron USS Missouri (source: Wikipedia) 
The firms in this grouping are IBM, HP and Cisco. At the top
  of the technology value chain,  
these three venerable battle wagons are
  indicators of the vigor of infrastructure spending for  
high technology
  worldwide. In a broader sense, they collectively measure the relative health  
of the entire global economy. 
The servers, workstations, mainframes, supercomputers,
  routers, gateways, printers and  
associated software & services offered by
  these firms are pervasive. Every categorizable market segment heavily depends
  on the offerings of these companies. One can even indirectly assess the
  strength of the mobile computing market thru growth in backhaul connections
  to carrier and LAN networks and, finally, to server farms - all sectors that depend on products from the Big Iron. 
Below is a chart of quarterly revenues stretching back to
  2008. Revenue in $B is on the Y  
axis, calendar quarters on the X axis. The
  raw data is quite revealing on both an individual  
and group basis. IBM 
Fires that shook
  me once, but now to silent ashes fall'n away. 
Cold upon the
  dead volcano sleeps the gleam of dying day. - Lord Alfred Tennyson 
IBM is a Titan amongst technology enterprises and actually
  played a significant role in  
shaping the history of the 20th century. Big
  Blue employees have garnered more science  
awards (including Nobel prizes) and
  patents than any company in history. The company  
invented DRAM, the
  relational database, the PC, floppy and hard disk storage devices,  
SOI
  (silicon-on-insulator) and copper interconnect for semiconductor chips, along
  with a  
multitude of other technological marvels. 
On the surface, IBM appears to be continuing along this path,
  recently announcing the first  
ever functioning 7nm microchip: 
Yet the very fact that IBM would make such an announcement
  subtly indicates what a  
disaster the current executive team has made of this
  once amazing firm. 
Big Blue sold off its microelectronics operations to Global
  Foundries earlier this year. "Sold Off" is in reality a malapropism,
  as the company cut a check to GF for $1.5B to take the division off their
  hands. Yet despite the divestiture of a group whose chips were a key differentiator in the performance of the company's servers, workstations,
  minis, mainframes and supercomputers (a differentiation stemming from the way
  the microelectronics group developed & characterized its silicon and
  designed its chips, achieving higher performance, lower power, lower cost
  and, above all, greatly superior data integrity from its microelectronics technology than the rest of the industry thought was even possible), IBM
  continues to perform basic research in semiconductors. The results of this
  R&D effort have at this point found use as a promotional vehicle. 
In recent years, IBM has also publicly committed itself to
  becoming a leader in Cloud  
services. The choice was more than a little odd,
  as Big Blue has never competed  
successfully in price-sensitive markets.
  However, Cloud computing has been a hot topic for  
the past few years and IBM
  has been using its presence in the segment as a promotional  
device. 
Finally, in March of this year, IBM announced an IoT
  initiative with a $3B budget and a  
2,000 person staff. A part of those
  resources will be focused on software work to align its  
Cloud services for
  analytics and datamining/data science with IoT-oriented applications  
and
  clients. What the rest of the enormous budget will be spent on is left a
  little vague. As  
a market, the IoT is also considered to be extremely price
  sensitive, raising questions  
regarding exactly what it is that IBM could
  successfully do in the sector. Nonetheless,  
the announcement served to help
  launch.....yup, you guessed it: a promotional campaign. 
Contrast all of the above with IBM's revenue history, which
  has been falling continually since Q4 2011 along a steepening declination.
  During this period, Big Blue has also heavily  
leveraged itself thru stock
  buyback programs, giving its executives an opportunity to  
unload options at
  temporary highs and having their equity portfolios replenished after the  
stock price settles back down. 
At first one might understandably conclude that Big Blue's executive
  management was  
simply stupid, lacking even a basic understanding of the
  company's technology base and  
how it is integral to IBM's brilliant
  century-long track record. But on further consideration,  
it becomes apparent
  that they know exactly what they're doing. Gini Rometty and her team  
are
  gutting IBM and cashing in on the remains. 
Hardware engineering supremacy from chip, to board/blade, to
  system and finally to cluster  
is what made IBM invincible in High Performance
  Computing. With its key customers in  
the Finance and Insurance markets, the
  quest for absolute perfection in hardware design  
to eliminate any possible
  sources of computational errors (an obsession bordering on  
mental pathology
  that also infected the company's software developers) ensured that nobody else in the industry - not Sun Microsystems, Dell, Unisys, DEC or any other
  high  
performance computing provider - could seriously challenge Big Blue's
  hegemony in  
datacenters and server rooms. 
IBM's mania with lossless data processing left its rivals
  shaking their heads at "ridiculously  
over-engineered" chips and
  servers. An IBM software engineer accusing another of writing  
 "lossy" code could be construed as an invitation to a fistfight. 
Yet the Rometty gang deliberately rejected this illustrious
  legacy, ratcheting back investments in chip technology and server hardware
  & software development for the sake of flashy & sexy public
  announcements and completely unsuitable new business ventures while heavily
  investing in stock buybacks, clearly unconcerned with the accelerating negative trend in earnings. The evidence of their gross negligence is
  incontestable - simply put, you don't drop 1/3 of your quarterly revenue in
  three years if you're doing things right. 
Rometty's reign has become one of plundering the enterprise
  she was charged to  
conscientiously foster and protect. It may be too late to
  return Big Blue to its former glory, as  
an enormous wealth of talent,
  organizational experience and hard-won knowledge has  
been frittered away. But
  if this once mighty ship is to have any hope of remaining afloat, the  
board
  and shareholders need to take emergency action at this point and make Gini
  Rometty  
and her team take a long walk off a short plank. 
Source: btx3.wordpress.com 
Cisco 
This is a momentous period for the networking communications
  juggernaut. Though the  
company did recover from damage to client trust and a
  consequent three quarter revenue  
decline triggered by the late 2013
  revelation of NSA tampering with Cisco hardware  
mid-shipment, the last 4
  reporting periods have nevertheless seen company revenues flatten out and
  stagnate. 
The revenue data and the meek growth curve it reveals starkly
  illustrates how Cisco  
has prospered much less over the years than
  macroeconomic trends would have suggested. The explosive growth of mobile
  computing (both smartphones and tablets) should have had a pronounced effect
  on Cisco's products - after all, literally billions of wireless devices were bought by consumers worldwide which accessed the internet thru a backhaul
  connection to a basestation or access point, traverse a carrier and metro
  network to a LAN and download web pages and/or streaming media from a
  datacenter. That entire transmission path impacts the full gamut of Cisco's
  offerings. Yet the repercussion to revenues has been mediocre. 
Over the last year, Cisco has undertaken a massive internal
  reorganization to finally  
demolish the institutional barriers that have
  allowed the firm to operate like a completely  
disjointed amalgamation of
  acquired companies. Over time, this should have many positive  
effects
  regarding quality, cost and service support for its hardware and software
  products  
thru standardization in design, modeling, QA&R and
  manufacturing. 
The company recently made another profound organizational
  change - after 20 years at the  
helm, CEO John Chambers has stepped down. 
Will new CEO Chuck Robbins be able to drive the company's
  organizational streamlining to completion and derive tangible benefits from
  it? Is Cisco truly gearing up to participate in the IoT (or as they like to
  promote it, the "Internet of Everything") or is it all hype? Will
  Cisco software be properly tuned to support customer needs in maximizing
  efficiency, throughput and utilization of installed networking plant to
  reduce pressure on shrinking IT budgets for new equipment purchases, or will
  the company have an open source SDN standard forcibly shoved down its throat?
  Finally, will Cisco be prepared to jump into the opportunities that 5G is
  likely to present - in particular regarding microcell deployment, WiFi
  overlap and wireless network virtualization - or will it misread the
  prevailing winds & currents and strand itself in the doldrums? 
Though Cisco is now over 3 decades old, it cannot afford to
  recline into a peaceful, quiet senescence as if it were a public utilities
  company. Robbins does seem to understand that a tsunami of Big Data is headed
  his way and that the company's wireless and wired hardware & software
  will have to adapt quickly and dynamically in order for Cisco to rise above
  the swell and surge thru storm-tossed waters. We'll simply have to wait and
  watch further developments to gauge his success. 
Source: johnlund.com 
HP 
When I shun
  Scylla, your father, I fall into Charybdis, your mother. - Shakespeare,
  "The Merchant of Venice" 
Over the last 6-7 years, HP has been a tale of woe. Some of
  the changes it has had to deal with include: 
1. 4 CEOs 
2. Layoffs that have shed 44,000 employees 
3. Quarterly revenue shrinking from $33.6B in Q4 2008 to
  $25.5B in Q2 2015 
Earlier in the year I was becoming optimistic that Meg Whitman
  might be able to keep this ship from floundering. Clearly she is taking
  aggressive action to chart a course towards a viable future for the company -
  the separation into Consumer (PC/laptop/printer) and Enterprise
  (Server/Software/Services) firms seems to be on schedule for November and the
  radical re-architecting of computer hardware HP calls "The Machine"
  (heavily dependent on R-RAM and photonics) is apparently still a central
  focus of their applied R&D. 
Yet the revenue numbers tell a dismal tale indeed. Since Q4
  2010, the revenue decline has been almost a flat line down & to the right
  and in the last two quarters the trend has worsened. 
The company is anticipating further layoffs before it
  separates into two corporate entities - perhaps as many as 14,000. What is
  inexplicable is why the company continues to waste cash in stock buybacks -
  $660M last quarter and much more than that over the previous 18 months -
  instead of investing in more R&D, new product development and capital
  expenditures. 
Though Whitman has a laudable track record in previous
  positions and is obviously undertaking drastic measures to save HP, she has
  failed to take one critical step: cleaning out the executive ranks. Instead
  of fattening their compensation thru stock buyback gimmicks, Whitman needs to
  realize that significant numbers of them represent 'talent' not worth
  retaining and must begin tossing them overboard. Unless she finds the resolve
  to do this, the separated companies will both continue to struggle, reducing
  HP to a derelict hulk before long. 
Source: imgbucket.com 
Wintel 
Montague Dawson, "The Flying Cloud" (source:
  artrenewal.org) 
A daring pilot in
  extremity; Pleas'd with the danger, when the waves went high He sought the storms. - John Dryden 
Over the last 4 decades, Microsoft and Intel have triumphed
  over competitive challenges and anti-trust attacks to maintain their throne
  atop the PC world. Yet as the market for laptop and desktop personal
  computers continues to shrink for the third year running, both companies seem
  to be finding ways to avoid being sucked down under the waves along with it,
  as the following revenue data clearly illustrates. 
Microsoft 
There are a couple of things in the Microsoft data that
  immediately draw the eye - namely: 
1. Revenues follow a consumer market pattern of spiking every
  Q4. 
2. If one draws a line connecting calendar quarters over the
  years (Q1 to each successive Q1 and so forth), the trend is consistently
  positive from Q3 2009 onwards. 
What's even more amazing is that Microsoft continues to grow
  despite taking a full broadside from the failure of its acquisition of
  Nokia's phone business. The company has written off 95% of the $7.9B purchase
  cost and is laying off 80% of the inherited employee base. 
Some would conclude that this was inevitable, as a software
  company has no business trying to develop and sell hardware. Yet such a
  sentiment is without merit in the case of Microsoft. Surface tablet sales are
  growing energetically in the face of a shrinking market and fierce competition.
  Xbox sales also continue to climb vigorously. 
On the software side, Bing search engine advertising revenue
  is sustaining its push into Google's market share, while the Azure Cloud
  service is maintaining strong growth momentum. What all of this tells us is
  that Microsoft has found the formula to compete successfully in any high tech
  market, whether it be a segment dominated by one or two strong players, is
  highly price sensitive or is saturated and in decline. Stated differently:
  under Satya Nadella, Microsoft has become a master of adding concrete and
  differentiating value to its product offerings. 
Bing's continuing success against Google's search engine hints
  at a much broader long term strategic vision for Microsoft. Earlier this year I contrasted the efforts of the two companies in Voice
  Recognition, Machine Vision and Artificial Intelligence, where Microsoft is
  handily outmaneuvering Google in every respect. 
Microsoft's work on the Hololens Virtual Reality headset
  threatens to blow Google Glass completely out of the water. Furthermore,
  liquidation of almost all of the Nokia assets is not being accompanied by a
  shutdown of the Windows Phone effort. Microsoft has made it clear that it
  will continue development of advanced hardware and software for smartphones.
  Combined with its Surface Pro achievements, it is clear that Microsoft sees
  itself as becoming a leading player in the convergence of smartphones and
  tablets into a future Personal Processor that will serve as a centerpiece for
  consumer interaction with the Web, the IoT and the digital universe to be. 
What we are witnessing with Microsoft is a steady changing of
  the guard between itself and Google. It would not surprise me in the least if
  within the next decade Microsoft - once written off as an aging relic of the
  dusty old PC era - switched places with Google as a harbinger and leader of
  the Digital Age of the future. 
Intel 
Jan Porcellis, "Ships in a Storm on a Rocky Coast"
  (source: commons:wikimedia.org) 
I tell you naught
  for your comfort, 
Yea, naught for
  your desire, 
Save that the sky
  grows darker yet 
And the sea rises
  higher. - G.K. Chesterton, "The Ballad of the White Horse" 
While its erstwhile partner in the PC oligopoly sails towards
  a bright and shiny horizon, Intel is still charting its course and struggling
  against wind and wave. Despite ongoing success in datacenters and the effort
  to broadly position the company as a 1st tier player in the nascent IoT
  market from the chip level up to software for data analytics, earnings
  continue to meander aimlessly after the Q3 2011 peak. 
The voyage to calmer waters promises to be a hazardous one, as
  Intel has evidently finalized its plans to lay off 3% of its 106,000 person
  workforce and extend its hiring freeze (begun early this year) for an
  indefinite period. The company announced that layoffs would be concentrated
  in the PC group, which strongly suggests that any analysts predicting a
  recovery in the second half of the year in the PC market are going to look
  awfully stupid over the next two quarters. 
Yet there is a silver lining - the layoffs are likely part of
  a general reorganization that includes a massacre in the executive ranks: 
Intel has been long criticized for having a very insular
  corporate culture that has a poor track record in dealing with change. One
  can see stark evidence of this with Intel executives who were carefully
  groomed internally and then ventured out into leadership positions for other
  semiconductor firms with almost universally disastrous results. 
This insularity may have been necessary to keep the company
  properly focused during the 1990's and the heyday of the PC market, but will
  prove fatal to Intel should it continue in these times where comfort with
  change, dynamism, risk-taking, flexibility and responsiveness will be de
  rigueur for the company to prosper. The fact that the executive staff is
  experiencing such a violent shakeout bodes well for Intel as a whole and
  suggests that CEO Brian Krzanich - blunt and unsympathetic as he appears to
  be - understands what needs to be done and has the resolve to carry it through. 
A second silver lining can be found in the revenue history.
  Though Intel is not growing like its historic partner Microsoft, it at least
  is not taking on water and seemingly on the verge of being engulfed to slide
  towards the ocean's abyss where the general PC market appears to be heading. 
The company is, in fact, taking bold strides towards the
  future. The Altera buyout is still on track and holds enormous potential for
  Intel's prospective technology directions, as described in detail here: 
Finally, the potentially revolutionary 3D Xpoint memory
  technology announcement with Micron directly impacts all of Intel's market
  initiatives, including the datacenter and the IoT: 
Nobody really knows too many details about 3D Xpoint - whether it is a phase change memory, a variant of RRAM or something else. Both Micron and Intel are being very coy about the details. We'll find out eventually, of course. Considering the reputation of the two companies, it's very likely that this new memory technology will indeed be just as revolutionary as its initial promise suggests. There is no shortage of incredibly smart people in the ranks of Intel. The company looks like it's doing all the right things in a long term strategic sense to remain the largest semiconductor company in the world thru the 21st century. In the short and medium term, however, Intel is evidently battening down the hatches, trimming sail and pointing its bow into the wind. For the moment I remain optimistic - but cautious. 
Area 51 
Certain Silicon Valley companies have had such an influence on
  the direction of high technology that they become the stuff of legends. One
  such fable that is whispered behind closed door conference rooms in San Jose
  and Santa Clara is about a bona fide flying saucer alleged to have landed at
  the notorious Area 51 Air Force facility north of Las Vegas, Nevada at the
  end of the 1980's. These quietly muttered tales claim that when its crew
  disembarked, they found jobs in the R&D labs of Apple and Google. 
Source: cinemablend.com 
Despite their diametric management styles, Apple and Google
  have the same raison d'etre - to define the future of technology in order to
  build a better tomorrow. They differ profoundly in their product
  offering/technology mix and their revenue results, as can be seen below: 
Apple 
The holiday seasonality of Apple's revenues is even more
  extreme than that of Microsoft. It has evolved into the kind of consumer
  electronics giant that the likes of once-great Sony can now only dream of
  emulating. Even mighty Samsung is merely a fast follower by comparison,
  completely overshadowed and breathlessly scrambling to keep pace with Apple's
  gargantuan footprints. 
It was Apple who revolutionized the technology industry and
  turned desktop PCs into consumer appliances thru the introduction of the
  windowed GUI (though my inner nerd is still nostalgic for the old DOS command
  line.) After a painful and chaotic 12 year period from 1985 to 1997, Steve
  Jobs returned to the company he founded and made his previous success seem
  trivial by completely changing the world we live in with the iPod, iPhone and
  iPad. 
To date, Tim Cook has done a credible job of maintaining
  Apple's business momentum. The revenue numbers prove Apple's intuition is as
  sharp as ever. The iPhone 6 grew not from an organic expansion of the
  smartphone sector, but by stealing significant market share from rivals -
  especially Samsung. 
The runaway success of Apple's latest smartphone line hints
  that the company may be able to maintain its current position as a force
  shaping the 21st century (akin to the role IBM served in helping craft the
  world of the 20th.) The appeal of the iPhone 6 and its larger screen -
  originally greeted by most pundits with jeers and predictions of total market
  failure - strongly suggests that Apple's developers have an instinctive
  understanding of the imminent convergence of tablets and smartphones into a
  portable Personal Processor. Such a product would completely up-end not only
  the entire mobile computing market, but the desktop space as well. If anyone
  can figure out the right combination of screen sizes, ports, modular wired
  and/or wireless peripherals (one of which is likely to be some sort of VR
  headset), functionality and (most critically) supporting hardware &
  software technology for such a product within the next 5 years, it will
  almost certainly be Apple. 
Something else which points to the company's greater
  clairvoyance of the future of technology is Apple's approach to AI. Following
  in the trail first explored by Siri, Apple is focusing on AI functionality as
  a capability native to mobile platforms. Having a sentient digital assistant
  lending a hand in every aspect of your life and hauling around that
  electronic 'pal' on your favorite mobile platform makes perfect sense. This
  is in stark contrast to research underway at Google, Microsoft and other firms,
  where the focus is on developing algorithms, databases and software routines
  for an AI that would reside on large server clusters - an approach which
  draws comparisons with sinister electronic brains such as the HAL9000, Skynet
  and other unpleasant examples from the pages of Science Fiction. Apple's
  approach is instinctively more appealing and, assuming they can get it to
  work, almost guaranteed to attract a much stronger following. 
Yet the company's short term prospects are distinctly
  worrisome. The tablet market saturated in 2014 and is markedly declining,
  with iPad sales suffering more than its rivals: 
Fewer consumers are willing to spend their increasingly scarce
  discretionary income on tablets. Furthermore, those who do are finding that
  competitive offerings - which often combine laptop and tablet functionality
  at aggressive prices - simply offer much more 'bang for the buck.' Simply put
  - the Apple brand name is no longer enough to compensate for the poor value
  proposition of an expensive and low functionality iPad. 
Some had put their hopes in Apple finding a new consumer
  electronics star in its Watch offering, but as predicted, those hopes are
  proving to be ill-founded. Currently it appears that the Watch does not offer
  compelling value over offerings from FitBit and other wearables competitors.
  It was also anticipated that even the low end version of the Watch would
  simply not find mass appeal among cash-strapped consumers and that the Watch
  line would find itself limited to Apple technophiles and a subsegment of
  fitness-obsessed high income consumers - a prognostication that is currently
  proving to be judicious. 
It would be reasonable to expect that Apple's revenue will now
  resume the plateauing trend it was exhibiting before the iPhone 6 release and
  the subsequent Q4 2014 spike. I forecast that Apple's Q4 revenues will not
  exceed $60B again and will even go into a period of modest retreat until a
  converged iPad-iPhone device hits the market - and such an offering likely
  won't be available in the near term. 
Google 
Fortune, which
  has a great deal of power in other matters but especially in war, can bring
  about great changes in a situation through very slight forces. - Julius
  Caesar 
On the engineering/technology front, Google has indisputably
  earned its place in the Area 51 category alongside Apple. The company's
  search engine re-architected the Internet by vastly expanding its usefulness
  to non-technology based industries as well as consumers. The Android
  operating system was instrumental in making smartphones ubiquitous. 
The company has released an array of other products and
  services that are widely popular: 
- Google Docs, which is a free competitor to Microsoft Office 
- Google Maps 
- Google Translate 
- Google Earth 
- Google+, a social networking service 
- Google Chrome, a free web browser with small code size and
  high functionality 
- Google Wallet, a mobile payment application that has been
  enhanced and renamed Android Pay 
- The Nexus One smartphone 
- Google Glass 
There is much to praise about the above hardware and software
  offerings - I even use most of them. However, all of them suffer from a
  common problem: collectively, they've earned only a negligible amount of
  money for the company. The hardware products have all failed in the
  marketplace, while Google's software products are by and large free. 
Google Glass is the latest in a string of new product fiascos.
  Despite a very good ergonomic design, the product proved to have the wrong
  combination of functionality and aesthetics for the wearables market. Glass
  was a classic case of technology hubris, a 'build it and they will come'
  product development which upon release generated concerns over invasion of
  privacy, suffered heat dissipation problems and provoked fashion criticisms
  that were collectively severe enough to induce Google to withdraw the product
  from the market. Since then, distinctly less ergonomically attractive
  offerings from Toshiba, Sony and Epson have made significant progress in
  developing specialized applications, establishing market niches and building
  customer credibility, leaving Google in their wake with torn sails, broken
  masts and ruined rigging. 
Winslow Homer, "The Gulf Stream", 1899 (source:
  Wikipedia) 
The company has also come under severe criticism this year for
  spending a fortune on R&D without any tangible results to show for it.
  Even some of its research efforts appear misaligned or lagging in
  technological leadership. Glass has been overshadowed by not only its direct
  competitors but by Microsoft's Hololens VR headset. Even Google's AI research
  - a natural extension of its search engine capabilities - is being
  overshadowed by Microsoft's own AI work, as discussed earlier in this
  editorial in the Microsoft section. 
Google has a terrible track record for releasing new
  money-making products. It is still a one-trick pony with a gigantic
  advertising business based on its search engine - which, incidentally, has
  been steadily losing market share to Microsoft's Bing for a while now.
  Granted, the search engine and advertising business still haul in trainloads
  of cash. But when one compares Google's valuation ($436B, with a P/E of 29.93
  as of 8/7/15) against that of fellow Area 51 member Apple ($659B, with a P/E of
  13.36 on the same day), it's clear that investors have much higher
  expectations of the company than it appears capable of delivering. 
Uneasy lies the
  head that wears a crown. - Shakespeare, "Henry IV, Part 2" 
Earlier this year, Google hired Morgan Stanley's Ruth Porat as
  new CFO, with a compensation package markedly superior to that of any of
  Google's founders or other executives, including the CEO. At this point, I
  can only conclude that the board of directors have set the stage for a
  mutiny. It's worth noting that Q2 revenues were somewhat less impressive than
  they appeared at first glance: 
In what appears to be a last ditch attempt at indulging their fascination for R&D while finding a way to monetize it and also keep their jobs, Google has rebranded its company as a sort of technology conglomerate called "Alphabet" - basically Google surrounded by a satellite system of quasi-startups: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/google-alphabet.html?utm_content=buffer21d4a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer Another failed product launch or a downturn in quarterly revenues will likely spell the end for one or more of Google's founders and see Ruth Porat take the reins as CEO of the new Alphabet. If this reorganization fails, the company will soon be pushed out of its technology leadership position by Microsoft. 
............................................................................................... 
There are still 10 companies in 3 groupings to review -
  Nvidia, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Mediatek, STMicro, NXP, Infineon, Altera, Lattice
  and Xilinx. We'll go over them in the next installment, and then conclude
  with a macro overview and forecast from our favorite lady who lives on the slopes of Mount Parnassus. 
_____________________________________________________ Postscript: 
Dear readers, 
I had originally submitted the above editorial to "Seeking Alpha", hoping they would use it and I would  
consequently get paid something for writing it. They rejected it. 
As a result, I'd like to ask a special favor from you. If you get a moment, send the link for this editorial to, say,  
3-5 people you know who might find this of interest just to have some light fun at the expense of the  "Seeking Alpha" editors. ;-) 
Thanks, my readers, for your support. I hope you enjoy these admittedly weird blogs.  :-) | 
Thursday, August 13, 2015
High Tech "State of the Union", Mid 2015 Assessment - Part 1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)












 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to comment or critique!