Conference 7.286::digital

    New this time around are:
    
    	Ken selling 86,000 shares of stock, he sold smaller numbers before.
    
    Nearly everything else has happened before, including layoffs, which
    were less extensive and more discreet in previous times, and showing
    the door to multiple Vice Presidents.
    
    The "Digital is about to be taken over rumours" go in cycles. Previous
    prospective purchasers have included A.T.& T.and General Electric. GE
    tried and failed in computers before so why they should want to
    re-enter an industry whose margins are shrinking dramatically escapes
    me.
    
     

>    The "Digital is about to be taken over rumours" go in cycles. Previous
>    prospective purchasers have included A.T.& T.and General Electric. GE
>    tried and failed in computers before so why they should want to
>    re-enter an industry whose margins are shrinking dramatically escapes
>    me.
 
    Much the same was said about AT&T - but they still took over NCR.
    Please don't try to dispell rumours that:
    o	may be true
    o	will probably drive the stock up
    :-)
    
    	Andrew.
       
    

    Well someone is going have to have a tremendous amount of money if they
    want to try a takeover that will get them enough of a percentage of our
    share capital to constitute a "controlling interest" because with the
    liquidity which DEC has (a lot of the credit for accumulating it goes
    to Jim Osterhoff) immediately there's a whisper we can start buying up
    our own shares and force their price to a level at which the game is no
    longer worth the candle.
    
    As far as I know the above was one of the big reasons for the
    accumulation of so much cash.
    
                                     Max                               

    
    Actually, the logic makes some sense. Both AT&T and GE have done well
    in dealing in commodity markets. The problem is that I don't think GE
    has its own act together enough right now to make an acquisition of
    this size. 

    
    
      Regarding .1; It's all happened before, and I've been around to
    see it. I think what's different now is it's happening all at the 
    same time.
    
      I also remember the AT&T rumors back in the early 80s when stock
    was about where it is today. It was interesting to find out later
    that these rumors were a lot closer to reality then we thought at
    the time.
      Personally I think these "shakeups" are much needed and will be
    benefical in the long run (18 to 24 months), but in the mean time,
    it's going to be a little bumpy.
    
    
                                                 Phil...

    
    Actually, the company's high cash position makes it more attractive
    as a buyout candidate.  It's easier to leverage a buyout if there
    are some very liquid assets available from the acquired firm to help 
    start paying back the loans the acquirer had to incur to afford the
    buyout.  This is how a smaller company can buy out a larger one.  Or,
    at least it was in the '80s.
    
    As far as the company using its cash to buy back its own shares to
    stave off a takeover... would this be the best use of the shareholders'
    investment?  What if instead a buyout would raise the value of the 
    shareholders' investment by 75% within a few months.  In this case,
    the idea of a buyout may be very attractive to the owners of this
    corporation, and they may justifiably be in favor of it.  (However, as
    an employee, I would find it horrendous.)
    
    	Dave

    
    	Someone made the comment earlier in this discussion about 
    	why would a company like GE want to enter into an industry
    	with diminishing margins like the computer business?
    
    	Keep in mind, with regard to GE, we're talking about a company
    	who has made a lot of money selling toasters and coffee pots
    	and other commodity consumer products (I know they're in many
    	other higher margin businesses also), and from that perspective,
    	I doubt that they would see it as low margin.
    
    	At the time that GE tried to enter the computer business and
    	failed, it definitely was not a commodity business and it took
    	some different technological/business strengths that GE didn't
    	have at that time to succeed.  Today's environment is different.
    
    	A lot of our tradtional hardware business is moving rapidly
    	into commodity markets particularly at the low-end of PC's and
    	workstations and we could probably benefit a lot from someone
    	who knows how to make a lot of money selling toasters and 
    	coffee pots.
    
    	Mergers and acquistions tend to work if there is some synergy
    	to be gained by adding the capabilities of both companies 
    	together.  I could certainly see how a merger with a company
    	like GE might make sense for a portion (not all) of our business.
    
    	Chuck
    

    GE has been bailing out of the commodity businesses in the last
    10 years.  Most of the the toaster/TV items with the GE name are
    actually made by and sold by companies other than GE.  GE has sold
    the rights to its name to several manufacturers who are producing
    the so-called GE commodity items.
    
    Bob

    I agree with those who see a good solid match between GE's expertise
    and the rapid move toward a commodity-based computer market.  GE
    doesn't just make toasters....they are a major player in Aerospace,
    defense, power, etc.  Their biggest asset by far is that they have
    extremely good "big company" management.....something that we are
    sorely lacking in.
    
    

Hmmm....  Yes, GE.  Very Interesting.  I've always enjoyed that rumour whenever
it surfaced.  As a 19 year veteran of GE I have some observations from the
trenchs.

In many ways, DEC is a natural for GE.  GE executive management doesn't want to
waste it's time on businesses they can't have any leverage with (have to be
followers).  Therefore they require each business to be #1 or #2 (#3 can be
tolerated) in market share or have a very good plan for getting there (and
doing it).  DEC would be one of the few targets to meet this criteria in the
computer industry.

GE likes to be viewed as providing a little extra for a reasonable premium. 
They try not to operate strictly as the lowest cost producer (e.g. Emerson
electric).  They like the image of high quality, and well-engineered.  Fit.

GE is often mistakenly viewed by outsiders as either smokestack or in the
electrical industry.  Both are wrong.  Essentially, it's a combination of
high-technology manufacturing (& engineering) and sophisticated financial
services.  In essense, unlike so many companies, GE has a strong bias in favor
of engineering.  Another fit.

Why did GE leave the computer industry?  In the late sixties, GE had three
growth businesses sucking up its cash: Jet engines, Atomic power generation,
and Computers.  They concluded that they couldn't afford to stay in all three
industries.  In those days, atomic power plants were a very promising business,
and a perfect fit to GE's traditional market strength with electric utilities
(which they still enjoy).  [hey, anybody can make a mistake]

It really was between selling the jet engine business (where I was) and the
computer business.  One problem GE had with the computer business was their
accounting practices.  GE has always had stringent and conservative accounting
practices.  They like to remind Wall Street that their earnings figures are of
higher 'quality' than other companies'.  But the people running the computer
business were at a disadvantage.  GE required that all product development
costs be expensed in the year incurred.  In the infant computer industry,
everyone capitalized development costs.  In fact, Digital (per last years
Annual Report) still today capitalizes software development and amortizes over
3 years after the product ships.  This made it much more difficult for GE's
computer department management to justify major product investments to keep up
with the competition.

GE management could have made an exception in their accounting practices, but
they steadfastly refused to do so.  The CEO at the time was from Finance.  In
more recent years, the story could run a little differently.  The current CEO
is an engineer, and Finance has been decentralized to a high degree.

One of the most important points to be made in considering this rumour is that
GE will not undertake an unfriendly takeover of any company.  The last time
this rumour circulated, I figured KO wasn't ready to sell out.  Now I'm not so
sure.

Wall Street would love to see it. (Buy some stock options if you like to gamble
on rumours.)  GE has an excellent track record in managing hi-tech businesses
that are in maturing industries.  This is precisely where DEC is in trouble.

One plus is that GE is not a slice and dice operation.  They wouldn't sell off
pieces needed for the whole to make a quick buck.  This would appeal to KO.

On the down side, there are massive cultural differences.  Middle and upper
management would be decimated in a couple year's time, I expect.  KO wouldn't
like this, I imagine.  And we'd all have a lot of adjustment to survive.  Most
significantly, GE trains its management and expects them to manage.  A lot of
ICs in Digital would find this a very different place to work over time.  And
if you think we've seen layoffs, these would be the good-old-days under GE
ownership.

But don't think for a moment that GE wouldn't like to get back into the
computer business.  If you can dominate in light bulbs, as GE does, the
computer industry today is a walk in the park.

Do I think I'll be working for Jack Welsh again?

Honestly, yes (unless Welsh leaves GE before KO leaves DEC).
I just don't know when.

Just how frustrated is KO?  I think that's the most salient issue surrounding
this rumour.

    
    Again, it's the owners, not the management, of a corporation that
    decide whether it can be taken over.  The current owners collectively sell
    controlling interest to the new owners.  The management, including the
    CEO, operate on behalf of the owners-- the shareholders.  However,
    in many cases management has acted to make takeovers difficult-
    things such as "poison pills."  Such "poison pills" may or may not
    be in the best interest of the company owners, who may actually see a
    potentially large return on investment from a takeover, but they are usually
    in the best interest of the management.
    
    	Dave

     But, think of the great deals we'll all get on light bulbs!

     Seriously, as a GE employee, one of the benefits is a rebate
     on major appliances, in addition to the ever-present company
     stores that sell light bulbs, etc.

     .11 was a good summary of GE's strengths and why DEC would be 
     a good match for them.  In the pre-Jack Welch days, GE probably
     couldn't have handled an aquisition such as DEC.  I'm pretty
     sure they could now.

     On the down side, if GE bought us tomorrow, probably 20,000 of
     us would be history within a year.

     -gary

>     On the down side, if GE bought us tomorrow, probably 20,000 of
>     us would be history within a year.

	Could be. I heard a rumor that 15,000 of us will be gone within
	the next month. Not sure I believe it but ...

			Alfred

    GE's track record in M & A has not been all that spectacular (NBC, RCA
    come to mind). They are quite unforgiving when any of their units
    generate losses. My previous assignment was at GE Capital (one of the
    financial wings of GE); one thing that stuck me was the low turnover rate
    (most people that I met had been working there for atleast 10 years or
    more). That just seemed remarkable.

>    come to mind). They are quite unforgiving when any of their units
>   generate losses. My previous assignment was at GE Capital (one of the
    
    You betcha.  I worked for GE for two years total. One year contracting
    here for GE Armament Div in Vermont bringing "good things to life"
    at 6000 rounds per minute. :^)  Tough work. Tough managers. Tough
    place period. Laid off (expected however being a job-shopper)
    
    One year (Permanent?) for the GE Robotics and Vision Systems Div. 
    in Orlando Fla.  One year...didn't look good on the books.
    OUT OF BUSINESS.   
    
    They DO_NOT fool around. In comparison, if DEC is a "people" company.
    GE is The Terminator.
    
    Mark

    
    re .12
    
    	Recently the "poison pill" has come under intense legal debate. The
    very premise of Management is to "maximize shareholder wealth". By 
    creating these lucrative loopholes, to appear un-attractive to potential
    buyouts, management is violating their obligation to the stockholders.
    There are some interesting court cases challenging these "golden
    parachutes" and LBO repelents. 
    
    
    					Fred Deady

    Odd.  I worked for GE Drive Systems Division in Salem, Virginia
    for not quite two years.  It was not tough management or unforgiving,
    and there were lots of old-timers who called it "Generous Electric".
    
    I left because I didn't want to live in Roanoke anymore, not because
    GE was impossible.
    			-John Bishop

	Experience in making/selling commodities is one thing;  being successful
	at rapidly creating and marketing high-quality goods and services in
	response to and eventually in anticipation of an ever-changing, ever
	more demanding world, is another.

	At the risk of beating the ground beneath this dead horse, a few
	items for New Management to focus on:

	1. Interoperability	 - protecting the customer's current investment

	2. Time to market	 - presence/mind-share + product availability,
				    the ability to decide to do something and
				    produce very good quality with off the shelf
				    components in less than a quarter, then
				    continually refine product/process/parts
				    to provide "best" quality at less cost

	3. Right product/service - either exactly what the customer is looking
				    for, or (better) exactly the thing that will
				    solve the problem they are trying to solve

	4. Quality		 - "my problem became their problem; they worked
				    it (expertly) and after it was fixed showed
				    me how and helped me to reduce my overall
				    time to market and/or cost"

				 - "it worked the way I thought something like
				    that should work - only better!"

				 - "they have the best, and, by the way, the
				    happiest, engineers/consultants I've ever
				    worked with"

	5. Long view		 - what business should we be in 50, 100 years
				    from now?  20? 10? 5?  what research, what
				    design, what education/training has to occur
				    for us to succeed?

	6. Design for reuse	 - protecting the stakeholders' investment by
				    getting the most for your engineering $

	[Read 1-4 in any order.  5 is both a reason behind 1-6 and a support
	 for the first 4.  6 is an often neglected, more often not understood,
	 means of making our products the most desireable by virtue of their
	 being both the most consistent and least expensive.  Enough detail...]

	The too, too gradual quality movement rising and abating periodically
	in various pockets of DEC appears to have been disrupted by the
	current long, drawn out "right-sizing" experience.  While before
	there was some question whether DEC would commit itself quickly
	enough to become a "tiger", strong, focused and agile enough to
	be the equal of any competitor, the current combination of lack of
	direction at the top and unwillingness to take risks at the middle
	and bottom of the company has changed the question to how long our
	size, financial position and customer base will keep us afloat.

	Some management upheaval, resulting in an establishment of direction,
	is likely.  INTERNAL ESTABLISHMENT OF A "SURVIVAL IS AT STAKE" TQM
	PROGRAM DRIVEN AND MEASURED WITH HIGH VISIBILITY BY KEN OLSEN would
	be my preference.  External imposition of same via new ownership after
	a decline of some length is less desireable, but it probably would
	mean long term survival for those that make it past the "consolidation"
	phase.  Purchase of DEC by an external entity that has not the intent
	nor the wherewithal to follow up on this is the short road to the end
	of the company.

	What is NOT likely to happen is that somehow by sheer weight of our
	point product design brilliance alone we will be able to predict which
	way technology, production, solutions, or business are going, much less
	keep pace with or lead them.

     
    IMHO is G.E. takes Digital over there will be 40,000 on the streets in
    a year. I have seen them buy up companies here in silicon valley gut
    them and lay everyone off. Names ?? Off the top of my head Calma and
    Intersil.

    I had spent 7 years at NBC in Burbank at the time of the GE takeover.
    It took us about one year to finally figure out what GE stands for....
    
    
    
                     GOODBYE EVERYBODY!!!!!!!
    
    
    If it comes true, head for the exits as fast as you can. Believe me,
    I've been there. During the year between takeover and the time I
    finally quit, five middle managers died of heart attacks... one
    at the company Christmas party in the middle of the dance floor.
    If you think the stress level is high now... just wait.
    
    Craig
    Outa Here
    

Whether GE has what it takes or not, I don't know.

From a consumer perspective, they rank just above Radio Shack. Some of
the most garbage electronics I've seen them sell makes me question
this kind of buy-out. Even Sony has the wisdom to market the
cheap stuff under another label. Ofcourse, with our non-existant
awareness of our corporate name, maybe any image is better than none!

In terms of companies that sustain innovation and entreprenuership, 
3M and Sony appear far better. But I don't think a buy-out is
appropriate for Digital.

But back to the notebase, it is strange times and perhaps a return
to the uncertainty of the 30s, but thankfully not the fiscal policy.

erik

    I have a friend who went to the same night class i went too last
    quarter, he works for GE, somewhere in Mass. he is an MSEE, quite
    bright, and he kept telling how bored and little real work there is to do 
    where he worked, lots of paper work shuffle and no organization, and he's 
    been looking for work to leave GE.

    might not mean much, but the way he described the place for me, i kept
    saying , Boy, Am i glad i work for Digital.
                                                                          
    /Nasser
    

    
    
      Boy, I really opened a can of worms in .0 regarding the G.E. rumor.
    Working on the G.E. Aerospace account (technical program mgr. for
    2 large, long term programs) I see, everyday, how messed up they are.
    As a number of people have said in this note, it might be a "good fit"
    but I really don't see it happening. Although the big push is systems
    integration, and they do that real well. It makes me stop and say,
    HHHMMMMMMMM...
    
       I think it's interesting that the G.E. rumor has "driven" this note,
    when my intent was to point out MY opinion of the large ship vs. the
    many boats. Anyone have any comments one that.
    
       I'll start it off by saying, not only are we NOT a large ship with
    a large crew that is having a tough time turning around... We are many
    small boats all going in different directions. And to add to that, each
    boat has a crew of 5. One person rowing, one person stearing, and 3
    people telling those 2 to go in a different direction!
    
                                          Just my opinion, Phil...

    i keep reading about us not sailing in the right direction, so iam curious
    if we know what the right direction IS ?

    ok, a problem seem to have been identified (or a symptoms of a problems)
    lets now apply some logical steps to solve the problem(s):

    1) Define the problem clearly. (example, is the engine old?, or is the boat
       in the wrong sea all togother ?)
    2) analyze the problem .
    3) identify constraints on possible solutions.
    4) identify goals of solution.
    5) design solution that meets constraints and goals (i.e. optimal) .
    6) test the solution against constraints and goals.
       goto 5 if test failed.
    7) implement the solution
    8) sail !

    or something along those steps..

    /Nasser

                                             
    

    I don't see nor can I comprehend a GE buyout, My gut feeling would be
    a takeover from across the grat pond; i.e. a "Sharper Image","Sony"
    or Matsushita. By the way didn't one of the Japanese big 5 all ready
    hold 7% of Digital Stock??? IMHO if GE took over we would then be like
    UNISYS where Sperry and Burroughs would be very vauge memories of what
    used to be.

    GE has put a big Ad. in this week edition of Electronics Times, they are
    looking for companies who are hiring to take over the employment of
    some of their engineers whom they are laying off from their Aerospace
    division.
    
    speculation: may be they are getting rid of GE Aerospace division so that 
    to concentrate on something new i.e. COMPUTER business ! 
    
    p.s. as evidence of the bad economy we are in, more and more companies
    put Ads not looking for employees, but looking for employers to hire
    their employees whom they are laying off ! 
    
    if we have 4 more years of Bush, companies in the US will be a
    place one go to to hire from, not to be hired to !
    
    strange times indeed .
    
    /nasser 
    

    
    
        Regarding .26; I don't think, as a company, were going in the
    wrong direction, I think were going in many different directions.
    
        As far as G.E. Aerospace is concerned. The commercial side is not
    doing real well, and there have been, and will be more lay-offs.
    But the M&DSO (Military & Data System Organization) has more programs
    then it knows what to do with, and "a whole bunch" of new ones they
    are looking at bidding. Most of them they have some presents in
    already.
        I still wouldn't want to work for them directly. It's tough
    enough being part of the account team.
    
    
                                                  Phil...

    RE: .28 Take it to soapbox, this is not the place to voice your
    (probably uneducated) opinion on politics.  
    
    
    RE: Basenote-we need something, but I do not think we need a buyout.  I
    tink your analogy of many tiny boats is valid and is key for us to get
    back on track.  I've seen goals set for different organizations which
    are directly opposed to one another.  We need to start working as the
    oceanliner where everyone is striving for the same thing, the success
    of the company.
    
    Mike

    re:28 <<More GE news:GE is looking...
    re:30 <<Take it to soapbox
    
    Now this is one of the primary reasons why these notes conferences are
    so beneficial.
    One person writes a reply containing several thoughts.
    Another sees only the political overtones and deems it inappropriate.
    I choose to be intrigued by the implications of two corporate cultures.
    I respectfully submit that the statement "GE is looking for a few good
    EMPLOYERS" is an example of "Strange Times" indeed!
    
    When you contrast stories like this, about a very large corporation
    which would care enough to assist its employees who must be "transit-
    ioned out", with the horror stories that have been circulating in these
    notes files lately, makes one wonder if all that "people oriented
    company" hype isn't merely so much lip service.
    
    Where's that guy who's looking for examples of corporate culture?
    Next conference door down, I believe.
    
    fwiw

    My problem is with the Bush comment which was made.  I felt it highly
    inappropriate for this string of notes as well as this notesfile
    dealing with Digital.  
    
    
    Mike

    re .3
    
    
    >Please don't try to dispell rumours that:
    >o	may be true
    >o	will probably drive the stock up
    >:-)
    
    
    Sorry, but I always try to discredit rumors, whether they are true
    or not.  Can't stand the smug look on the gossip monger's face, I
    guess.
    
    :-)
    
    Dick

    Re: .30, .32:
    
>    RE: .28 Take it to soapbox, this is not the place to voice your
>    (probably uneducated) opinion on politics.  
    
    
>   <<< Note 1604.32 by GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER "Daddy=the most rewarding job" >>>
>
>    My problem is with the Bush comment which was made.  I felt it highly
>    inappropriate for this string of notes as well as this notesfile
>    dealing with Digital.  
    
    Mike,
    
    Some of us might happen to agree with the Bush comment, and might
    even feel some culpability for the current economic disaster lies with
    him and his marionette predecessor.  That issue notwithstanding, in my
    opinion, it doesn't warrant being rude.
    
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even you.  But I don't think
    it's right or fair to use that right as an excuse for a lack of common
    courtesy.  Lighten up.  Some of us no only think Bush's poor leadership is
    partially to blame, but also have the education to know there's an 'h'
    in the word 'THINK'. :-)
    
>    RE: Basenote-we need something, but I do not think we need a buyout.  I
>    tink your analogy of many tiny boats is valid and is key for us to get
     ^^^^
    
    tim
    

    re .34   ditto
    
    re .28   I know Nassir and he is not uneducated.  Damn good at his job
             too.
    
    re the boats.  ditto.  But the boats will all go in different
    directions until we get one competent captain and do away with the
    present captain (K.O.) and all his inept first (but second rate) mates.

    RE: .30, .32
    
    Mike, could you please tell us where and when you got your critique
    license: anyone is entitled to any opinions and its expressions,
    written or spoken; much blood has been spilled to this end. So please, be 
    considerate and show some manners, regardless of the argument or
    author, and if for some reasons, you cannot, please keep your comments
    OFF these notes.
    
    fd. "We need a Home Too"
    
    
    
    

    Yes, .28, I wonder why our enlightened "management" (I cannot resist
    putting it in quotes) can't seem to find a few bucks to do some
    nation-wide serious soliciting of new employers.  This is particularly
    needed as to my personal experience far too many of the people being
    canned are top-notch performers.  But I suppose that would require a
    certain degree of openness which has yet to be shown in the whole
    TSFO implementation fiasco.  The salaries of the departing VP's
    should more than cover the cost.
    
    Also, on the Bush comment....I'm a registered Republican and serious
    conservative.......but also agree that four more years of Bush neglect
    will bring the domestic economy to a total halt.  It's not politics.
    It's the truth!

    It's amazing how Mike's comment about "taking it to Soapbox" has produced
    so much of the rhetoric and snide comments that are so commonly seen in
    "the box".

    Regardless of what caused this company to be in the condition it's in,
    it's still nice to be working for a company that allows Notesfiles to
    be maintained so that employees can share their views.
    
    f.m. 

    My point was that bringing ones opinion on President Bush into a
    discussion on what is going on with the company is only going to
    have people discussing President Bush and his policies.  There is
    plenty of room for discussion either in it's own note in this file, or
    another file.  I log into this notesfile to find out more about the
    company I work for, not to get someones opinion on the current
    administration.  So George Bush is responsible for the state of the
    company?  Come on.
    
    RE: Tim, regarding my typo, what can I say, I am not a good typist-I
    have clumsy fingers and all.
    
    RE: As to referring to me as mr god, give me a break, I saw something
    which I thought was inappropriate for this topic and I brought it out
    in the open.  I guess I should have done it in a more graceful manner
    (too much soapbox I guess) and for not doing so I apologize.  I still
    think political discussion in this note will be counterproductive, so
    therefore this will be my last response to this topic.
    
    Mike

Regarding a possible takeover by GE:

	If David Letterman's feelings about GE are any indication (and I 
	believe many of his jabs at NBC's corporate parent are much more than
	innocent fun), I'm not sure GE would be a very good company to rescue
	Digital.

Regards,

Jim

    Thank you for NOT taking it to Soapbox. Soapbox is NOT a rubbish pile
    for the detrius and insults from other notes conferences. Yes, it is
    more robust in discussion, but, hey, the discussion is here, so just be
    civil!
    
    Thanks
    
    	- andy

    Regarding GE... 
    
       .11 does a very good job of describing what GE's strengths WHEN 
    	   everything is going well.  Not all of GE's operations are 
    	   managed as well.
    
    I (and about 3 other engineers here in Hudson) were parts of GE's
    effort to get back into another business that they got out of in the
    seventies - ICs.  Part of the recruiting story was that GE had decided
    that the decision to get out of ICs and computers in the mid-seventies
    was a mistake.  The Intersil and Calma acquisitions were part of this
    push back into the field, as were major programs in NY and NC.  GE
    had its own VHSIC-like program - perhaps GE was slighted to be left out
    of the mainline VHSIC deal.
    
    The IC operation in NC was given free rein for several years, but was
    then told to start turning a profit.  The RCA merger complicated things
    as well - eventually GE decided AGAIN to get out of semiconductors, and
    sold the whole operation to Harris (the opinion from old friends that
    have stayed on is that Harris is doing even a worse job of running the
    show).
    
    What happened ?  My impression is that management failed us.  The
    engineering staff quality was comparable to Digital.  But our
    direction was formed from a bottom-up consensus - not enough market
    oriented, top-down decision making.  Engineering made decisions because
    we lacked an effective marketing group.  Direction from the top levels
    was inconsistent with market realities - granted, the market was hard
    to predict.
    
    So, the thought of being involved with another foray by GE into a field
    they got out of in the mid-seventies does NOT enthrall me.  GE does run
    somethings very well.  Others they can muff seriously - so don't make
    them out to be a panacea for our ills.
    
    I also see many parallels in the new PCU/PBU setup and the situation we
    went through in NC when the operation was told to turn a profit.  We
    were a captive semiconductor house, dabbling in the external market,
    lacking enough internal volume to cover the enormous capitalization
    that a semiconductor fab requires.  We in Hudson are doing much better 
    than that operation was, but the ink color is the same (red).
    
    \chuck 

    I forgot to also mention that I too heard the GE/DEC rumors in the
    mid-eighties when I was at GE - we were a VMS shop, so the idea was
    very interesting for that reason too.
    
    I also want to comment on the public view of GE - many people still see
    GE as toasters, TVs, and radios - not very accurate.  Black and Decker
    now has the small appliances, and I think the TV's went to a European
    company (including the RCA TV's).
    
    GE hi-tech does try to project high quality - especially in areas such
    as medical equipment, appliances, numerical control, robotics, and
    such - these just aren't in the public eye as clearly.
    
    \chuck 

    Also, my comment about taking it to soapbox was not to criticize that
    notesfile rather to suggest that the subject matter fit in that file as
    opposed to one about Digital the company.  I rather enjoy soapbox.
    
    Mike

    RE: .43
    
    >I also want to comment on the public view of GE - many people still see
    >GE as toasters, TVs, and radios - not very accurate.  
    
    Many people still think Digital makes watches.  
    

    re: .40
    
    As I mentioned in a previous note, I used to work for NBC. The
    relationship between Lettermann and GE is much worse than it appears
    on-the-air. I've got a great "out-takes" reel, if someone's got
    a 2" Quad cartridge VTR handy (any old Ampex ACR-25 or RCA TR-100
    will do!).
    
    re: the boats ....et al
    
    GE is a very purposeful, single minded organization. There is also
    no place in their corporate mind-set for passion, mercy, or humanity.
    It is a very cold bottom-line orientation which would result in massive
    layoffs at Digital if GE were to take us over. The number 40,000 does
    not seem unrealistic based on what I've seen elsewhere within GE.
    Although I've been on board for less than two years, and have almost
    no tenure, I can see that there is significant fat in this company,
    and that it would be far better off with a smaller 'Navy'... fewer
    boats but, steaming in the same direction.
    
    This company is very vulnerable to takeover tactics. We've splintered
    into several distinct camps.... VMS hackers on one side, and the Ultrix
    hackers on the other. Each one argues passionately that its operating
    system is best,... and actively tries to pull business from the other.
    On the hardware front, the same rift exists between CISC and RISC
    forces... SCSI peripherals engineered for VMS workstations aren't
    allowed on Ultrix workstations (SZ16's). The plain truth is that
    neither of these operating systems is very good. While our software
    engineering group "hacks in fast-forward", Microsoft runs away with the
    bulk of the desktop business by implementing a relatively simple single
    strategy, and by providing customers with WHAT THEY WANT!
    
    We at Digital, smug in our self-assurance, don't even bother to
    make the world aware of our products. We pontificate about our superior
    architectures and open solutions to each other and the
    'installed-base'. Sales from word-of-mouth and bad catalogs is not
    enough to sustain a $13B company in a depressed economy.
    
    I used to be impressed with Digital. Now I'm not so sure.
    I wanted to work in a creative environment, with people whose skills
    I respect and value. I want challenging work, not corporate politics
    and infighting. What I find is... Lemming Day at the Beach....
    
    Craig
    

    Re: .40
    
    On Letterman's Anniversary Show two years ago, his Top Ten List dealt
    with "The Top Ten Misconceptions About My Show".  Number 1 was
    
    "People think I'm kidding when I say GE sucks"
    

	Boy, I HOPE G.E. isn't another pat-people-on-the-fanny,
	love-and-hugs, lose-money-like-crazy, never-fire-for-non-performance,
	non-competitive-product-producer like DEC !    

	I'd welcome a tough-minded approach to business here.  After
	all we ARE in business !  This means profit, minimizing waste,
	and changing direction and staffing with market changes.

	Anything less means you're playing kindergarten.

	Regards,

	Steve H

>           <<< Note 1604.48 by CSC32::S_HALL "Wollomanakabeesai !" >>>

>	Boy, I HOPE G.E. isn't another pat-people-on-the-fanny,

Perhaps more Americans should be aware that the f word above is 
a vulgar term in British English, and use of it here
may break corporate regulations regarding obscenities.

Craig.

>            <<< Note 1604.49 by METSYS::COCKBURN "Craig Cockburn" >>>
>
>Perhaps more Americans should be aware that the f word above is 
>a vulgar term in British English, and use of it here
>may break corporate regulations regarding obscenities.
>
>Craig.

         Perhaps you would be kind enough to provide us with a list of all of 
    your vulgarities and obscenities so that we might avoid using them in
    the future.
    
                                       Greg

>    Nah, it will not happen that way in the corporate world.
>    They will axe groups and people randomly based on politics and what
>    they "think" should be done, without regard to reason. First they get
>    rid of the other company's leaders, then they go for the rest. They
>    will want "yes-men" all down the line.
    

	How is this different from what we have now ?

	How can GE succeed in its large endeavours with a setup like
	this ?  I think it's unlikely.

	A colleague of mine's dad works for GE.  He has apparently
	done some work for them that involves helping plants
	"streamline", "downsize", or whatever.

	My friend says his dad once encountered a guy at a plant
	that "planned for the yearly shutdown."  The exchange went
	something like:

	"Well, what else do you do ?" he was asked.

	"Well, I plan for the yearly shutdown...the maintenance,
	 schedules, and so forth."

	"How long does the shutdown last ?"

	"Two weeks each August."

	"And you plan for this all YEAR ?!"

	"Yep.  There's lots to plan..."

	"YOU"RE OUTA HERE !"

	Folks, this is HEALTHY !  We've got all sorts of overhead in
	this company.  The fact of its existence never makes it
	to the folks who decide how the company should be run.  No
	doubt the VPs hear that each organization is running like a top.

	From District Managers on up, I suspect that it's all roses
	and bon-bons ( that's not a British cuss-word, is it ? ).

	Steve H

    Totally off the subject, but a couple of you have piqued my interest. 
    What is the full entry for "Soapbox", please?  Is that a 'real'
    notesfile?  Sounds lively!
    
    Marina
    Who is still a VERY novice noter...
    

    Soapbox is a very real file. It's at PEAR::SOAPBOX. Hit KP7 to
    add it to your notebook. I'd suggest reading it a bit before
    entering notes there though so you know what you are getting
    into. It's an interesting conference.
    
    		Alfred

    Ah,yes,SOAPBOX,"the cesspool of knowledge"
    
    Ken

    rep .52
>	Folks, this is HEALTHY !  We've got all sorts of overhead in
>	this company.  The fact of its existence never makes it

    	Steve, since your replies today were entered at 9.28AM and
    13:35PM, do you ever worry your boss doesn't see you as overhead?
    	

    re: my .46 and the .48 reply
    
    You seem to have missed the point. When GE acquired NBC, it was the
    first place network with a solid lock on the 18-36 year old demographic
    group that advertisers drool over. Look where GE management has taken
    it! GE chokes the creativity out of any organization it takes over.
    When that trend becomes clear, the good people pack their bags and
    leave.
    
    NBC grabbed first place largely because it had a president (Grant
    Tinker) with the guts to give independent producers the freedom to
    develop risky projects: remember Hill Stree Blues..... Bob Wright,
    the dullard that GE brought in to replace Tinker, has managed to
    chase the creative people over to Fox. Managing a high-tech,
    or high-concept business requires more than just keeping an
    eye on the bottom line. You have to have an acute sense of the business
    and know where what-you-sell comes from. GE's success in light-bulbs
    doesn't necessarily translate into success in computers, or television
    broadcasting.
    
    Craig
    

    Re: -1
    
    And even GE's light bulbs eventually burn out :-)
    
    K
    

    AAARGHH
    
    I had to say something right now even though I only read 42 of the 58
    notes:
    ref .39
    Nobody seemed to get into a political discussion until you brought it
    up.  That's the way I see it.
    
    ref .34
    Agree whole-heartedly.
    
    More of my own 2cent's (pretty soon it will be a dollar's worth):
    
    You cannot discuss the state of any company divorced from the economic
    circumstances.  I think even if Digital was at the cutting edge of
    technology in the current times we would probably be doing marginally
    better than we are right now.
    
    AND YES!  I do believe that Mr Bush and his government is responsible
    for a lot of the economic mess we are in right now.  But then again: we
    elected them!  (SORRY couldn't help not adding the last two lines :-)
    
    Dan Grigore

    Sorry Dan, but you are incorrect.  We have to quit making excuses and
    face the fact that the reason we are in the state we are in is because
    we lost our message and advantage.  We've made it too damn hard to to
    business with us.
    
    Let's hear your theory on why it is the presiden't fault.  Saying it is
    so, does not make it so.  We'll trash this note yet!!! :')
    
    
    Mike

    Could we stay focused on the "Strange Times" please.  Digressions into
    US politics are a pleasant avoidance of the features we really need to
    pay attention to.
    
    Our industry is changing underneath our feet.  Some of the values,
    behaviors, and attitudes we are used to are no longer effective.
    Sorting out what is needed and what is not need is a very difficult
    effort.
    
    What is new that works?  What is old that works?  What is old that we
    must stop doing?

    
    Nothing makes a company work harder to get its act together
    than the threat of an unfriendly takeover and the potential of
    large sackings (this is the word they use to use before it became
    layoffs, rightsizing, downsizing, outplacement, workforce
    restructuring...given the propensity for stealing new buzzwords from
    everywhere these days they will probably call it "Spontaneous Employee 
    Transition Interdiction" next), particularly when those sackings are
    likely to be of management.
    
    We should look forward to the THREAT of takeover. However, I'm not 
    particularly sure I want the actual event.
    
    John

    Leading off re .61
    
    In order to re-orient Digital towards new realities where customers have
    far more control and influence over what is considered "valuable" in
    the computer commodity market, Engineering needs to relinquish its
    "leading role in Digital culture". This will be as difficult for us to
    do as it is for the Communist Party to be eased out of its "leading
    role in Soviet society".
    
    Engineering has a "product development" mind set that has been dominant
    throughout the company. Even under NMS we're still doing planning
    according to what products we can develop rather than what solutions
    customers want to buy and how much they'll pay for them.
    
    This, of course implies an elevation of the status of Marketing and
    Sales, something no true Digital employee could stomach { :-) }, since
    the only acceptable solution to any problem is a new product or
    architecture - why else would we have LMF :-) ! The Digital mind set
    has the 2-5-2 part numbering scheme firmly embedded in it and has no
    way of grappling with problems that don't relate to a part number.
    
    Customers, since they now have so many alternative sources for
    computing, are imposing their values as never before. Declarations by
    Digital Consulting Engineers, Architects, the CCITT or International
    Standards Organizations are viewed as irrelevant unless customers
    realize something useful as a result. Vendors are scrambling to build
    the alliance of the week in a desparate attempt to retain control.
    
    Unfortunately the Digital Culture has never valued Sales and Marketing.
    Those with Marketing job titles have been described as "engineers in
    suits" or worse. In my early years at DEC I personally heard Ken Olsen
    tell two New Digital Sales Respresentatives training classes that he
    wanted to replace them by catalogs! I have not many Digital marketeers
    who can tell me "what's keeping customers awake at night" without
    resorting to a stream of DECbabble.
    
    This should have stirred up enough folk to get back to the topic in
    hand.......

    
    >In my early years at DEC I personally heard Ken Olsen
    >tell two New Digital Sales Respresentatives training classes that he
    >wanted to replace them by catalogs!
    
    This is the best example of why DEC can't generate more revenue.  
    If the CEO has such contempt for sales people, how can one expect 
    sales to increase?  "Valuing Differences" indeed!!  Heck, he slammed
    sales people again during the DVN, something about sales people
    not spending time in classrooms.
    
    A good sales rep is out there closing business, PERIOD!  
    
    I've been supporting sales for seven years in different companies.  
    I understand the down side of letting a sales and marketing organization
    run amok (just look at Unisys!) But DEC needs a happy medium. 
    
    The sad fact is that I think it won't happen as long as KO is at the 
    helm.  
    
    -Ed_who_may_have_just_bought_a_pink_slip!
    

    A customer can get a comparable product at a comparable or lower price
    without going through all the crap that Digital puts them through. 
    Need we wonder what is wrong?
    
    We need to make it easy for people to do business with Digital.  We
    need one system that tracks it all and we need to spend less time
    looking at reports to obtain useless information.  We need less numbers
    involved in doig business.  We need to simplify, simplify, simplify.
    
    
    Mike

    re: .64

>    >In my early years at DEC I personally heard Ken Olsen
>    >tell two New Digital Sales Respresentatives training classes that he
>    >wanted to replace them by catalogs!
>    
>    This is the best example of why DEC can't generate more revenue.  

    I take the first quote above to mean that this happened quite a while
    ago.  The industry was such, way back when, that this was a possibility.
    It's way different now.

    To me, the response to it kinda brings home the point that it's not
    only do the "big boys" who have to change their attitudes on how to do
    things.  Us little folks have to let go of a lot of the past and notice
    and respond to the realities of TODAY.  We can't automatically assume
    that all of the homilies, parables, and slogans of days gone by are
    applicable TODAY.

    Let's give ourselves a chance by moving in the directions that are
    asked of us NOW, based on TODAY'S information, not by hanging on to
    obsolete data from a long dead market.

    -joet

    
    It's not just folks at the top.  In engineering we find it very hard to
    accept that 1 or 2 engineers with PC's can develop customer solutions
    in less time than we can do a phase 0.  We have a culture that insists
    we need ever increasing body counts and expense to put out products
    with the Digital Quality label, when the opposite has always been true
    (less is more).  We are getting our clocks cleaned by people who
    deliver solutions far cheaper, and with far more V1 functionality than
    we do.
    
    Here in networks i can think of 3 large efforts that will be hard
    pressed to break even within the next few years - DNS, DECnet-Phase V,
    and DECmcc.  The product costs are enormous, the user community has
    struggled with product complexity (which far outweights product
    functionality) and we almost have to give some of it away to make
    any market presence.   All 3 were over-architected, over-staffed, and
    over engineered.  It is no wonder we have so many customers looking for
    simpler, cheaper solutions.
    
    For anyone who saw the Bill Gates memo that floated off the internet
    a few months agao, at least there's one CEO out there who properly
    recognizes who the competition is, and why the bigness of his company
    will have a tendency to put him at a competitive disadvantage. 
    However, i still hear far too many senior managers in this company
    willing to recognize this situation.  I just hope NMS works quick
    enough to drive the message home.
    
    	bob
    

DECnet Phase V, DECmcc, DNS.

Three prime examples of our process addicted engineering management (and
engineers as well, I supose).  If the system isn't working, what do we do? 
Throw more process at it!  There's little wonder that someone on a PC can
get so much more done.

I once worked for a guy who was absolutely obsessed over the notion of
being the "first" manager in a long while to follow the prescribed
architecture and phase review processes to the letter, and he presented it
as if adhering to the process was more important than the product itself. 
Not surprisingly, while everything suffered from this approach, the thing
that suffered the least was the process.  Too bad we can't sell process.

Me, I gotta get back to the week's worth of process work that I have to do
to close out a bug that I spent a day fixing.

    
    
      I never imagined my note (note 0) would have generated so much
    discussion. I find this both good and bad. Good, because any discussion
    I believe is constructive. Bad, because there seems to be a lot of
    discontentment out there.
      I think some of the last few replies have been interesting, regarding
    engineering, sales, product, time to market and price.
      The way I see it we (DEC) are in an interesting situation. Unlike
    IBM, who also has it's share of problems, and whos CEO is a "marketing"
    person, our cheif is an engineer. What does that mean? Well I truely
    believe you do what you know! The company was founded, and has been led
    by an engineer. 
      Now on the other hand you have SUN. Why is SUN so successful? Is it
    because they have a quicker turn around, faster time to market, biggest
    percent of the hottest market (desktop)? Or are they exactly like us 12 
    to 15 years ago? Does anyone remember those times when we were the
    "gaint killer" who could do no wrong? 
      Times have changed, and so has DEC. What's happened is we grew. When
    you get to a certain size things become more diffecult, the red tape
    gets thicker and heavier. IBM has had to go through these changes. I
    think they are going through another round right now. It's different 
    there because their focus is on marketing. SUN will have to deal with
    this within a couple of years. As their installed base grows and they
    need to provide more/better services, they won't be able to turn their
    product line around/over as quickly. I was reading in today's USA Today
    that DG is on the come back trail. 
    
      I guess what I'm saying is, were in this situation partly because
    of the economy, partly because of the problems within our industry and
    partly because of who we are as a company (our leaders backgraounds).
    Unfortunatly I don't have all the answers, but I do think that if we
    can get past the internal "bickering" and fix the customers problems,
    we'll be back on track.
    
    
                                     Phil...
    

    Strange times, indeed! Here's a laugh (...or is it?) There's some
    rumors circulating:

         End of quarter shipping activity is very light

         People in the mill cleaning out their desks

         Mitsubishi buying Digital

         KO out by October 6th

         17,000 being given 2 years pay and out the door

         Car Plan A plan going to $50/week, with a an established
         history of 30K miles/year required to keep a DECmobile. Car
         Plan B going to $350/month.

    As for me, I don't buy the rumors, but I think they do contribute to
    the strange times we are facing.

    
    
    
       I just got off the phone with my counterpart down in the Federal
    Programs Office, in Landover. He told me he also heard that Ken was
    leaving and that Mitsubishi was going to "buy out DEC". What makes 
    his comments interesting is he heard this on CNN. He said they made
    it quite clear that this was all "unconfirmed", but he also said
    CNN has a way of getting this type of info. Just one more thing to
    think about.
    
    
                                       Phil...

    This is interesting stuff......I heard the rumors yesterday here in
    Atlanta.  A lot of my current work group came in through All Hands
    on DEC and the COD program; many of my peers do have contacts in
    diverse areas of this company.....and the info (rumors) they've heard
    in the past, have turned out to most accurate.                                     
    
    I'm not trying to make light of this, because I could well be one
    of the "alleged" 17,000 who get to say adios....but once I heard
    about Mitsubishi, this goofy mental image came to mind.
    
    I have this mental picture of all employees at the ALF location
    (you think it's easy working at a site with a location identifier
    that is the same of an Alien Life Form); standing outside in our
    humongous parking lot, all dressed in white jump suits with blue
    and black stripes up the side.....doing calisthenics and singing
    the company song before the start of the day, ala Gung Ho :-} :-}
    
    I realize levity may be in bad form at this time, but it's better
    than beating our heads against the wall.  Before I had heard the
    rumor about Mitsubishi......I had been hearing *consistently* that
    DEC would be laying off 15,000 people in addition to those *already*
    gone....not the 9,000 that was mentioned in the Globe a few short
    months ago.
    
    If we think it's difficult to be on this side of the coin; try to
    have a little compassion for KO.  Current situation aside, this
    company was his idea....his baby.  I've only met the man once....
    but somehow I *don't* think the idea of becoming richer at this point
    in his life makes his boat float these days......he's definitely worth
    a bundle, but has anyone ever observed him living like "The
    Donald"? 
    
    On the other side of the coin; how do we KNOW that working for a
    Japanese owned company would be all that terrible?  I don't know if it
    holds true today, but a few years back when Nissan decided to open
    a truck manufacturing plant in Tennessee......the Teamsters union
    did everything they could to get into that plant.....and the employees
    wouldn't give them the time of day; primarily because Nissan did a
    tremendous job of selling their concept of total team responsibility
    and accountability (I'm still trying to decide if the Japanese stole
    this idea from KO).....but it worked.....too bad DEC lost that concept
    somewhere along the way.
    
    I know I'm rambling....but I'm trying to keep an open mind about all
    of this.  Let's face it, we could speculate here until the cows come
    home, reality indicates that none of us know the true picture....
    those that DO know the true picture, aren't going to tell us in a
    VAX Notes conference :-)
    
    
    Karen
    

    I don't believe Digital being sold to any foreign owned company would 
    be allowed. Due to all of our government and DOD contracts I believe 
    the Federal Trade Commission (is that the right agency?) would veto 
    any foreign takeover.
    
    Any Govt. regulation people out there able to confirm or deny this?
    
    - John		
    

Re: .71

   I'm sure Digital employees would give 200% too, if we thought management
   was providing real leadership.  I find it hard to get myself to row 200%
   when  I  see  only  luke  warm interest from the top in fixing political
   infighting  problems,  not  to  mention  process problems.  Years ago (I
   started  17+  years  ago)  we had that spirit, but that spirit has to be
   supported from the top.  I've not seen the support come from the top for
   at least 5 years, and maybe 10.

   I believe  the  people  at the top also want that spirit, but they don't
   know  how  to  support  it.   They had it but lost it and are mystified.
   Well,  if  that's  true,  they should go find somebody who does know and
   find  out  how.   If I don't know something in my job, I go ask somebody
   who does.  What's the big deal?

   I'm gratified  to  see  that  Jack  Smith  has now met about half of the
   people  he  committed to contact when I spoke to him last summer, but as
   far as I can tell, he has made no progress on his other committments.

   Like Dick  Joseph's  memo  suggested,  let's see all of upper management
   take  a  10-15%  pay  cut and stock option reduction.  That'll speak far
   more than anything I've seen in the last 5-10 years.

   Ron Brown's  rebuttal  (to  Dick  Joseph)  had  some good points in that
   employees need to take responsibility for their own advancement and to a
   large  exent that's true, but employee initiative must not be quashed by
   management  political games.  I believe Ron Brown ignores this very real
   occurance.   I  believe  Digital  still  has  lots of employees who have
   initiative  to  do  the  right thing.  We need a management process that
   supports this employee initiative. I don't believe we have that yet.

    
    	WOW...Rumors sure spread like wildfire....'specially on these
        networked computers......
    
    	Someone from CNN is probably getting the 'RUMOR MAIL' 
        circulating thoughout the NET....hmmmmmmmm I guess that
    	would be an 'unconfirmed report'

    
    
      For follow-on "take-over" rumors, see note 1611.

re: .67,.68,

> DECnet Phase V, DECmcc, DNS.

    	While you're at it, why not throw in VMS, Ultrix, and Alpha?
    After all, the you're looking at nearly the same scale of software
    engineering effort involved.  Sure it takes awhile to produce products
    of this scale, but DEC is also one of the few companies in the industry
    which is able to successfully undertake software engineering efforts
    such as these - and that's something to be proud of.

    	What worries me is we finally have some new cash cows which have
    begun to mature and are ready to be milked for the rest of their product
    lifetimes, yet some are panicking and would rather slaughter them for
    quick beef money instead.  This is truly short-sighted thinking.

    	I can't exactly speak for DECnet Phase V, or DNS, but here is what
    some of the customers are saying about DECmcc (reposted with permission):

               <<< ENUF::$1$DUA4:[NOTES$LIBRARY]NETMGT.NOTE;1 >>>
                            -< Network Management >-
================================================================================
Note 280.11                    DECmcc and OSF/DME                       11 of 11
ZPOVC::RAMARAJ                                       21 lines  25-SEP-1991 10:07
                     -< We are bashing them with DECmcc! >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I had a chat with some major defence and commercial customers here.
    Everyone feels the same way, OSF DME delivery may be abt 3-4 years
    away, and it does not solve the enterprise management that DECmcc does
    now.
    
    As stated in .10, committment is enough, when it comes out or if comes
    out , give it to us.
    
    HP is telling everyone here that their user interface is chosen and
    that HP Openview will be the best user platform to get trained first,
    untill OSF DME materialises.
    
    Too bad they are not doing a good job against us.  We have been to
    quick to rebut that and we are doing good sales here.
    
    We have a great product now, DECmcc(although the User interface needs
    improvement, waiting for DECmcc V1.2), lets push it hard.
    
    MCC Admirer
    Raj
    ACT Singapore

    
    	re: .78 - i'm familiar with all 3, i'm listed as a co-inventor
    for a few patent-pendings on the one you worked on.  I could give
    a pretty good lecture on how yours in particular took far too much
    time and money, but i won't!  I'm not particularly eager to see
    much gained knowledge and expertise go down yet a 3rd time due to
    too much moaning over things that happened.  And your project in
    particular is potentially in a great position to exploit an as of
    yet unfulfilled marketplace.
    
    	That said, all 3 of these projects suffer from overcomplexity
    either in design, implementation or project structure-management.
    They each contain explicit road-maps of things "we should not do!",
    particularly in terms of project management/structure. 
    
    	Last, before you go off in a defensive rage, be sure that if
    you are indeed marketing ducks, they don't bark like a dog!  While
    some indeed may like barking ducks, the ones that don't are the ones
    you should be paying the most attention to, and grow from their advice!
    
    	bob
    
    

    
    I blew away my reply (.80) I got a little upset with the tone of .66
    because it implied that replacing sales with catalogs was an old
    model of selling.  Given the realities of DOS and UNIX, the catalog 
    may be more possible today than in the days of VMS and the PDP.
    
    The fact still remains that sales and marketing need to have a more
    important role at Digital.  All the feelgood/pop-psychology of the
    "little guy" making a difference can't address this.  This kind of
    policy needs to be set by the people at the top.  I heard KO admit
    that sales and marketing need to do a better job.  The NMS will help, 
    but I think some positive feedback from the top would help a lot more.
    
    Frankly, Gary Eichhorn's leaving DEC is *VERY* upsetting to me.  The
    SCO UNIX & AD433MP products are perfect examples of how DEC needs 
    to market.  I've also heard that Dom LaCava may not be long for DEC
    too.  This is sad.  People like Eichhorn and LaCava need to be promoted.
    Maybe KO needs to spend more time encouraging young, energetic "snake-oil"
    vendors. 
    
    -Ed