Hacker News Reader

Comment by pinewurst | Hacker News Reader

Hoping this is false! IBM is the worst of acquirers and they treat their people like utter garbage, especially the more experienced ones.

If there's any truth to this, it means those in charge have basically given up - assuming growth is capped and/or that the big return of a buyout premium would counter recent stock pricing setbacks.

(Update: now officially announced!)

View on HN

My last startup, blekko, was acquired by IBM in 2015. They treated our people well; many of them still work there.

It takes 6 months to be acquired by IBM, so I don't think recent stock market gyrations have anything to do with it.

My perception is that IBM (and HP, Oracle, etc) will buy a product company, and then IBM-ify it, and then just sit on that product for years with minimal improvements.

That is my fear for Red Hat. Successful product companies are hungry - IBM is not.

They call it bluewashing.

Also, this might be just IBM buying out its competition.. like oracle and all the others do most of the time.

Now official! It's at $190/share vs Friday's $116.68 close

https://www.redhat.com

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/ibm-acquire-r...

"- IBM to maintain Red Hat’s open source innovation legacy, scaling its vast technology portfolio and empowering its widespread developer community

- Red Hat to operate as a distinct unit within IBM’s Hybrid Cloud team"

Do truth-in-advertising laws apply if IBM were to change course from a stated goal?

No. They can do whatever they want.

Well no, but no law needed here. You see, this is part of the deal with Jim Whitehurst and rest of Red Hat management, otherwise, Jim would not pitch this to shareholders as a good deal. It would be a hostile takeover, which can fail, or lead at the end of IBM buying just a shell of the company.

So to back up their intentions, IBM probably had to give golden parachutes to Jim, Paul, and rest of Red Hat top execs, and probably huge golden parachutes ones at that. Jim is becoming part of IBM uper management and keeps leading the Red Hat business unit. If Gini starts some crazy moves to endanger Red Hat's well being as an entity inside IBM (as in IBM-fying the company), she will get at odds with Jim and RH upper management. So she can fire them all and pay up bilions in golden parachutes, at which point they will probably found a Green Hat company and hire away all Red Hat employees... or Gini can keep her word in the deal and leave Red Hat a separate business unit within IBM, one that grows revenues and profits, unlike most IBM business units. And IBM is a meritocracy, if Red Hat continues good performance, expect Red Hat execs taking top position, including next CEO role. In other words, I expect IBM to be Redhatized, and not other way around.

Only if you bought something from from them based on those promises.

Be sure to collect & notarize proof.

No. Once the deal closes they can do whatever they like.

>Red Hat to operate as a distinct unit within IBM’s Hybrid Cloud team

I read this as "everything aside from the cloud stuff will be gutted"?

52 week high is $177.

Red Hat has a significant remote workforce. IBM famously fired theirs. Can we expect IBM to do the same to Red Hat's?

They didn't fire theirs - they ordered them to move to an arbitrary office, most commonly not the closest geographically either, without relocation money. If you didn't move, it was considered a voluntary departure. There was often no room at these offices even for the minority who accepted the moves.

It was/is a deliberate attempt to dispose of senior, less portable people without having to pay layoff charges.

Who needs fusion power when you can run off the Watsons spinning in their graves at relativistic velocity?

Holy bleep, have any good references for this?

ProPublica did an incredible investigation into this:

https://features.propublica.org/ibm/ibm-age-discrimination-a...

https://www.propublica.org/article/investigating-ibm-digital...

The second link, which details how the reporting for the story happened, explains how older workers were often given 90 days to move thousands of miles to "an office" or else lose their jobs.

-- The results are stunning and should shock and scare all of us, whether we're in our 20s, 30s, or beyond. Because we all age -- this is a fact. And if the IBMs of the world can get off scott free, other companies may do this too.

Yes. It will take some time but I'd take an exit package and find a new job.

I've really got to wonder at the people who would stay at a company that treated them like utter garbage ... especially if they're experienced ... and especially in this job market.

Red Hat tends to employ people through offices in low/moderate COL areas or as fully remote. It would have been my #1 prospect after leaving the Bay Area. People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily.

as fully remote

Didn’t IBM have a massive crackdown on remote working recently? https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/09/ibm_workfromhome_cu...

> People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily.

Gonna have to disagree here. Raleigh is not a tech backwater. There’s plenty of comparable work to be found in the area.

What are some examples?

I think NetApp is in Raleigh, Dell too.

Fidelity, Apple, a handful of interesting startup hubs, Microsoft, Bronto, off the top of my head.

"those in charge have basically given up"

Yes but which company's leadership has given up? If this is the ordinary acquisition model, where the buying company (IBM) leadership stays in charge, then I say it's Red Hat's leadership that's given up. If it's the 'buy a company to get an entirely new leadership team' then it means those in charge of IBM might actually understand their dire situation. But I have no idea if they have that awareness.

Unless the leadership happens to hold quite a lot of shares, their stance isn’t going to matter too much.

Your don't buy/hire a leadership team to tell them what to do (unless you happen to like to waste time and money).

This happened at Apple (NeXT took over). Somehow with Disney/Pixar too if I'm not mistaken.

No, but you can certainly buy a brand, a customer base, a bunch of product trademarks or even a patent portfolio.

What happened with Apple and NeXT is the exception, not the rule.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com