[Info-vax] HP Securities Analyst Meeting 2012

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <506fd2d9$0$1078$c3e8da3$e074e489 at news.astraweb.com>,
	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot at vaxination.ca> writes:
> Listening to the web cast at the end, the Q&A
> 
> Cathy Lesjack confirms BCS will continue to decrease in revenues for
> foreseable future.
> 
> HP wants to introduce a tablet in 2013. Likely focused on Windows for
> enterprise.
> 
> No plans to introduce smartphone in 2013. If HP doesn't have a
> smartphone within 5 years, they'll be locked out of a huge market and
> suffer.

Unless, of course, smartphones aren't t heir core business. 

> 
> Where should Enterprise group invest ?
> Where are were going to make money 3 years from now ?
> Moonshot is the answer, this is where EG invested its money.
> 
> Whitman points to how R&D projects kept being pulled with previous
> management and points that under her, the investments and commitments
> won't change at the whim of the wind.  (read: Moonshot is where the
> investment is being made and that won't change).
> 
> Meg Whitman and Cathy Lesjack pointed to HP now being more stingy with
> investment and choosing their targets carefully. So this makes it mucj
> less likely that they would spend mega money porting HP-UX, NSK and VMS
> to x86 when those business units are seen as having no growth potential.

Is this somehow a surprise?

> 
> Donatelli reiterates the *sigificant* decline of BCS which will continue
> into 2013.

Is this somehow a surprise?

Doesn't help to lcok the barndoor after the horse has run away.

> 
> 
> When Whitman took over, she saw that Printing generated 35% of profits
> so this is where she has been focusing to fix problems. (HP hasn't had a
> new "all in 1" model in 7 years for instance).
> 
> Interesting that they will work to fix the printing business, but
> essentially abandon BCS, not wanting to spend the effort to fix it.

Probably tells you that BCS is generating much less than 35% of their
profits and is not worth any investment.

> 
> 
> Meg says the two growth engines of the company will be software and
> enterprise group.  Would be interesting to know if they expect the
> growth come from networking, storage or that moonshot thing. (Not:
> project Odyssey not mentioned in presentation).
> 
> 
> There were no questions on Oracle or Itanium. It really appears like BCS
> is the black sheep that is hidden in the closet and left to rot while
> networking, storage and X86/arm servers are given all the attention and
> investment.

Not the black sheep as much as the red-headed stepchild.

I have a small group of stocks that I watch (been doing this for over
a decade) and HPQ is one of them (IBM is another).  HP's performance,
especially lately, has not been impressive by comparison.

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>