Because if it didn't, that's a direct replacement of them.
Oh? Where'd you get that information?
If you mean because of AI, it doesn't seem to apply much to IBM. They are probably not great at what they do like most such companies, but they are respectable and can take the blame if something goes wrong. AI doesn't have these properties.
You can be prescient about failure in one area and still fail yourself. There's no gotcha.
Agreed if this is what they are doing, but what if theyre spewing claims to try and discredit an industry in order to quell their shareholder concerns?
A lot of the silicon being deployed is great for training, but inefficient for inference and the training to inference ratio for usage shows a clear tendency to go the inference way. Furthermore, that silicon, with the workloads it runs, doesn’t last long and needs replacement.
The first ones to go online might recover the investment, but the followers better have a plan to pivot to other uses.
I'm sure they can pivot to something else if the need arises.
Nobody got fired for buying something Gartner recommended, or for following EY's advice to lay off/hire
I don't see AI taking that blame away.
If you are doing anything in the Enterprise space, they probably have their claws in you be it on-prem or cloud.
And their work on quantum...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/baldwin/2025/11/25/inside-ibms-...
Not to mention they are still doing quite a bit of Mainframe...