Conference 7.286::digital

    
    
    This is probably just another example of "revisionist history".

    "Using the enclosed blade please remove the page containing the article
    on Lavrenti Pavolich Beria and replace the page with this expanded
    article on the Bering Sea".
    
    In older account of the start of Digital, one can read that Digital was
    co-founded by Ken Olsen, Stan Olsen, and Harlan Anderson.

    Looking at the format, I don't think it's appropriate to put his name
    next to Palmer's.  I guess we'll have to wait for a few months and see
    if he shows up in "This month in Digital history".
    
     NAME:                           Digital Equipment Corporation
     HEADQUARTERS:                   Maynard, Massachusetts
     PRESIDENT AND CEO:              Robert B. Palmer
     FOUNDED:                        August, 1957
     OPERATIONS:                     800+ Facilities in 97 Countries
     WORLDWIDE OCCUPIED SPACE:       43.3 Million Square Feet
     EMPLOYEES:                      102,100 Worldwide
     NYSE SYMBOL:                    DEC
     FORTUNE 500 RANK:               28TH
    

     <<< Note 2472.3 by XLIB::SCHAFER "Mark Schafer, ISV Tech. Support" >>>
                          -< don't upstage the Boss! >-

>    Looking at the format, I don't think it's appropriate to put his name
>    next to Palmer's.  I guess we'll have to wait for a few months and see
>    if he shows up in "This month in Digital history".
    
>     NAME:                           Digital Equipment Corporation
>     HEADQUARTERS:                   Maynard, Massachusetts
>     PRESIDENT AND CEO:              Robert B. Palmer
>     FOUNDED:                        August, 1957
>     OPERATIONS:                     800+ Facilities in 97 Countries
>     WORLDWIDE OCCUPIED SPACE:       43.3 Million Square Feet
>     EMPLOYEES:                      102,100 Worldwide
>     NYSE SYMBOL:                    DEC
>     FORTUNE 500 RANK:               28TH
 
I agree that I wouldn't put it next to Palmer's name, but underneath
example:

	PRESIDENT AND CEO:		Robert B. Palmer 
	FOUNDED:			August, 1957
	FOUNDED BY:			Kenneth Olsen	   

    Actually, Digital Equipment's Fortune 500 rank is 27.  (HP is 24 and
    IBM is 4).  They may be using numbers that are a year or two old.

    
    
    	Shades of NEWSPEAK circa 1993.  And the beat goes on.

    I don't understand how we can be 27th ranked when we haven't
    beenshowing a profit?

>                     -< How do they choose the rankings? >-

    Fortune magazine ranks based on a number of criteria. The main one, I
    believe, is revenue. I'm not sure profit is used for ranking. Perhaps
    someone who's read the magazine ranking more recently then I can fill
    in more.

    			Alfred

    The ranking is based on worldwide sales for the four calendar quarters
    of 1992 of United States-based publicly-held industrial companies.
    
    Industrial is defined as having greater than 50% of sales from
    manufacturing and/or mining.

    Alfred, unless FORTUNE have changed the rankings lately, you are
    absolutely right !    The key criteria is revenue, although they use
    such other things as: Net Assets, Number of Employees, Stock
    Outstanding, Net Liabilities, Ratios (about five or six of them)
    among other.   I think the total number of criteria items is about
    20 items with Revenue being the first one they have in their lists.
    
    Net Income (Loss) is also published.  It is around the middle of the
    items.  If it is a loss they will highlight in red (that is why you
    are said to be black or red (earnings or loss).   However, to be honest
    it is not consider a key item in the ratings, at least.   For example
    when GM, Crysler, Ford been in red they have not lost their 500
    rating although they have been in the 'red' for over a two/three 
    (sometimes more) year period.
    
    Another twist to this, is that if one company (ie.Matsuchita Ltd.) is
    incorporated into smaller companies (Mitsubishi for cars, tvs, etc).
    Fortune will published their ranking individually.   I bet that if they
    consolidate Matsushita Ltd. will be ranked at # 1 buy the classical
    mile.

>	I bet that if they consolidate Matsushita Ltd. will be ranked at # 1
>	buy the classical mile.

	I think that Matsushita *is* way up there - in teh "International
	500." Last I knew, the Fortune 500 was only for American companies
	(whatever that means - probably those incorporated in teh USA).

	I believe that conglomerates (such as ITT are considered to be
	single entities). It may change depending on just how the individual
	components are integrated in a business sense.

	Roy

    re: .10
    
    The Fortune 500 rank is based only on sales.  The other ranks reflect
    the relative position in profit, assets, equity, market value, return
    to shareholders, etc. within those 500 companies based only on sales. 
    No ratios, no weighted averages.
    
    There's no highlighting in 'red'.  There's a "Money Losers" page
    listing General Motors, Ford Motor, IBM, DuPont, and DEC as the top
    five of the 145 companies of the Fortune 500 who lost money.
    
    Matsushita and Mitsubishi are listed in the International Fortune 500.

    
    Business Week rates them by Market value, share price x #shares.
    You get a whole different picture.
    
    Jon
    

Could we try to get back to the base note ?

My original note was regarding the fact that Ken's name seems to have
been dropped from recognition.  No matter how many things change, 
that can't change the fact that he had part in founding the company
and should still be given credit for that. Many good things had happened
over the years while he held the reigns and I don't feel that should be
forgotten when it comes to listing anything to do with the history of
Digital

						Sue...

Assuming there is an effort to remove 'traces of Ken', some might say
that Digital is doing Ken a favor. If you had a child 'gone bad' you
too might wish that they would cease pointing to you as their
father.

Lee

    almost reminds one of american revisionist history

These are times of change for Digital, and we should reflect that whereever
and whenever appropriate.

Do we still see Messrs. Hewlett and Packard listed as  HP founders in D&B,
Moody's, Fortune listings, Business Week listings, et.al.?

Do we still see Messrs. Jobs and Wozniak listed as founders of Apple in similar
publications?

How about Alexander Graham Bell for AT&T?

Information on company founders, past leaders, etc. is typically provided in
a historical context.  Historical information is typically not relevant in the
context of current operating environments which is what BW, Fortune, et. al.
typically report on.

KO rightfully desreves his place in the history of Digital, the history of the
computer industry and our hearts (after all, it's because of his vision in 1957
that we all have jobs today).  Today's corporate leadership (BP, et. al.)
rightfully deserves its place in the current corporate, business and technical
literature.

Let's ensure that we don't forget our roots, but let's also ensure that we look
forward to our new vision.

Gerry

    So, who founded IBM?

    Thomas Watson Sr.
    

    RE: .18
    
    When Thomas J. Watson (1874 - 1956) joined the Computing-Tabulating-
    Recording Company (CTR) in 1914 as general manager, he found himself in
    three different businesses at once.  CTR was the result of a merger in
    1911 that had included the Computing Scale Company, the International
    Time Recording Company, and the Tabulating Machine Company.  The first
    company dealt in commercial scales and meat and cheese slicers, the
    second in industrial time-recording equipment, and the third in punched
    cards and tabulators.

    ... by 1924, when he restyled CTR the International Business Machines
    Corporation, punched-card products were well on their way toward
    becoming the firm's main business.

	IBM's Early Computers
	Charles J. Bashe, Lyle R. Johnson,
	John H. Palmer, and Emerson W. Pugh
	The MIT Press
	1986
    

    ... by 1924, when he restyled CTR the International Business Machines
    Corporation, punched-card products were well on their way toward
    becoming the firm's main business.
    
    >>>
    
    ..and if my memory serves me correctly, IBM's infamous 704 & 705
    systems were deemed profitable to the corporation if they could reach
    total sales of 16 systems. Sales eventually went into the thousands and
    those systems became the cash cows that helped make IBM as large as it
    is today.
    

If I remember correctly, the parent company from which IBM was eventually
spawned is known to us today as NCR.  But I could be mistaken.  Does anyone
know for certain.

Gerry (over forty-something and losing my memory already)

>If I remember correctly, the parent company from which IBM was eventually
>spawned is known to us today as NCR.  But I could be mistaken.  Does anyone
>know for certain.
    
    You are mistaken. NCR and CTR (the earlier name of IBM) both existed at
    the same time. Thomas Watson Sr did work for NCR before he went to IBM.
    
    			Alfred

  If you had watched PBS's "The machine that changed the world" you would have
  caught an interview with THomas Watson Jr's interview where he was describing
  IBM's entry into computers in the first place for mass production. It appears
  that Thomas Watson Sr, the father, was not convinced that computers had a 
  market at all. He was happy with selling cash registers. The only person in
  the company who could disagree with him and still keep his job was his son.
  With great difficulty the Sr was brought around and IBM became a competitor
  to UNIVAC in computers.

  I don't know why, but this story reminds me of DEC and IBM's great reluctance
  in accepting that the rules of the computer market have changed. :-)

  Nari

    About NCR and IBM:
    Watson Sr was working for Patterson at NCR. He was even instrumental in
    dealing with the threat to NCR coming from used equipment dealers.
    He was so successful doing it that NCR was sued and lost.
    I am not sure if Watson Sr left of his own will or if NCR had to fire
    him in order to show some disapproval from the scheme... anyway, for
    those interested in the story, check "IBM, the colossus in transition"
    by Sobel.

    
    I have a nice IBM brass letter opener, it was my grandfathers that he
    got while he worked at Macy's in the 1940's, a quality promotional item
    to be sure.
    
    
    
    
    Mike