Thanks xStainDx
Gateway expects to reduce its employee roster by about another 1,000 this year, but the action is not related to its acquisition of eMachines, it says.
Rod Sherwood, Gateway's CFO, told attendees at Morgan Stanley's Semiconductor and Systems Conference late on Monday that the company expects to continue reducing its employee count and is aiming to end up with a roster somewhere in the mid-5,000s. It finished 2003 with about 7,400 employees. Right now, the Poway, Calif.-based company has about 6,500 employees, a representative said on Tuesday. Going by Sherwood's figures, this implies that Gateway is planning to shed about 1,000 more employees this year.
Despite the timing of the news--Gateway is expected to close its acquisition of eMachines by as soon as Monday--the changes cited by Sherwood reflect restructuring efforts that stem from measures Gateway took last September to streamline its manufacturing, service and support and distribution organizations, the company representative said. Part of that action included closing down its PC manufacturing plant in Hampton, Va., and outsourcing its manufacturing of consumer PCs to a third party. Gateway has not yet said how the eMachines buy, announced Jan. 30, will affect its operations, other than in very broad terms. It said in its 2003 annual report, for example, that it expects eMachines to help it tap several new sales channels, including international markets.
But many analysts believe that once the eMachines acquisition closes, Gateway will abandon its namesake stores in favor of relationships with third-party retailers, which it will acquire along with eMachines. Analysts also expect Gateway to continue selling Gateway-brand products, including PCs and consumer electronics, direct to its customers as well.
News source: C|net
Gateway expects to reduce its employee roster by about another 1,000 this year, but the action is not related to its acquisition of eMachines, it says.
Rod Sherwood, Gateway's CFO, told attendees at Morgan Stanley's Semiconductor and Systems Conference late on Monday that the company expects to continue reducing its employee count and is aiming to end up with a roster somewhere in the mid-5,000s. It finished 2003 with about 7,400 employees. Right now, the Poway, Calif.-based company has about 6,500 employees, a representative said on Tuesday. Going by Sherwood's figures, this implies that Gateway is planning to shed about 1,000 more employees this year.
Despite the timing of the news--Gateway is expected to close its acquisition of eMachines by as soon as Monday--the changes cited by Sherwood reflect restructuring efforts that stem from measures Gateway took last September to streamline its manufacturing, service and support and distribution organizations, the company representative said. Part of that action included closing down its PC manufacturing plant in Hampton, Va., and outsourcing its manufacturing of consumer PCs to a third party. Gateway has not yet said how the eMachines buy, announced Jan. 30, will affect its operations, other than in very broad terms. It said in its 2003 annual report, for example, that it expects eMachines to help it tap several new sales channels, including international markets.
But many analysts believe that once the eMachines acquisition closes, Gateway will abandon its namesake stores in favor of relationships with third-party retailers, which it will acquire along with eMachines. Analysts also expect Gateway to continue selling Gateway-brand products, including PCs and consumer electronics, direct to its customers as well.
News source: C|net
You can get Winamp 5 at: www.winamp.com.
You can get WindowBlinds at: www.windowblinds.net SkinStudio (which makes skins) at www.skinstudio.net (SkinStudio is free).
You can get IconPackager at IconZone.com
No, it's because cheap people like you who are not willing to pay a fair price for PCs.
Yeah, OK, that makes sense....
That's because of Bush, isn't it?
STV
No seriously, Gateway really needs to shut down, but at least they have little-to-no debt, which is in their favor.
CEOs are seeing how much they can save money and put more money in their pockets. It's all in the name of greed.
A average yearly wage in China is $1,500 to $1,800 a year.
Compare that to American jobs, the average wage is $15,000 a year. So that's a HUGE savings for the CEOs.
So yeah, they'll outsource our jobs to foreign countries where labor is cheap and not only so, where countries like China has very little or no civil (or human) rights. Take the sweat shops for example, employees (or more like slaves) are being beaten, yelled at, threatened and some families have some family member being held hostage in order to force them to work for no wage at all.
The CEOs don't give a damn about the working conditions nor the lives of workers, just as long as their production cost are being kept way cheap and making a huge profit that the CEOs can stuff their pockets with.
IMB is or has laid off 1,500 American workers in Indianapolis and are out-sourcing their jobs to their Asian counterparts.
A bomb making company who builds smart bombs for the American military are outsourcing their company to China (now isn't that stupid? Any Chinese spy can pose as a worker and steal our trade secrets on how to build a smart bomb and build their own bombs in order to compete against our American military).
In Anderson Indiana, where it is a haven for manufactoring companies like Delco Remy have closed up shop and gone either South or to another country. There isn't any factory jobs left in that town, people are driving to Indianapolis for work which takes an hr to get there and an hr to get home.
Oldsmobile, one of the most popular American cars no longer exist because they got out-competed by foreign cars being manufactored on American soil.
In closing, we drove out the Redcoats (British Empire) because we no longer wanted foreign countries telling us how to run our country. Plus we also wanted freedom.
Now the Redcoats are back, only from a different country or should I say countries... people like Mexico and India are taking away our jobs because they're willing to work cheap, far below the cost of living today.
We need to get congress to hear our voice and say, "hey! enough of this!! We want our jobs back and we want American CEOs to stop outsourcing our jobs to foreign countries and more importantly, to have the CEOs arrrested for costing us our jobs."
Because if we don't raise our voices ladies and gentlemen, there won't be any jobs left for any National Born Americans, because they all got taken over by cheap laborers from another country.
OK ... here are some statistics. And NO, they don't come from some conservative think tank or some research group under the control of the Republican Party. They come from the Labor Department's. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* The peak unemployment rate during the recession that began in Clinton's term was 6.4 percent. The current unemployment rate is 5.6 percent.
* In the last year more than 2,000,000 new jobs have been added in the United States.
* Between 1983 and 2003 outsourcing went from 6.5 million jobs to about 10 million jobs.
* Between 1983 and 2002 jobs in-sourcing -- jobs coming TO the United States -- went from 2.5 million to 6.5 million.
* If you subtract the jobs coming to the United States every year from the jobs going out every year you come up with a "net" figure. The net outsourced jobs reached its peak in the early 1980's; a peak of about 4 million jobs. In other words, things were worse at the end of the Carter Administration then they are right now.
* During this same period ... from '83 to '03 a total of 38 million jobs have been created by private businesses in the United States. No other industrialized country in the world has matched this number.
So ... that's a pretty bleak picture, isn't it?
LET'S TALK ABOUT "YOUR" JOBS.
Jobs .. and the economy. Those seem to be the issues that are driving many, if not most, of those who are supporting the Kerry candidacy.
First of all ... I'm going to repeat this simply because it makes the whiners so unbelievably angry. Listen up. They're not your jobs! The jobs belong to the employers .. not to you! You have job skills and, presumably, a willingness to work. Your task in a free economy is to get out there and find some employer with a job who needs your skills ... and strike a deal.
If you do not have the particular set of job skills that an employer needs, or if you have priced your labor out of the marketplace, guess what? It's not the employer's fault. The fault lies with you. Either develop a new set of job skills that are actually in demand, or adjust your pricing. The employer knows what he's looking for. If you're not it .. it's your problem, not his.
Now ... you say you're going to vote for a Democrat this year because of jobs? You mean to tell me that you're going to vote against George Bush this year because you don't have a set of job skills that are in demand in our free marketplace? Yeah .. that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?
Tell me. Just what do you want the president to do? You information technology people out there .. just what are you demanding? Do you want companies to stop outsourcing IT jobs to India? OK ... tell me how to do that. These companies aren't shipping parts overseas and completed products back. All they do is ship information overseas by phone lines or the Internet. Then that information is modified and shipped back the same way. What do you want the government .. the president to do? Do you want some federal law that prohibits companies from transmitting information overseas by the Internet, having that information transformed or modified, and then shipped back? And tell me just how do you enforce that law? Does that law then apply to you also if you seek information from a company that is located overseas, thus depriving a domestic company of your business?
Ditto for manufacturing. I've already told you the story about the California company that makes computer mouses. (computer mice?) This company ships the components to China. The mouse is assembled in China and shipped back, then sold for around $40. Why? Because the assembly is cheaper in China than it would be in the US. So, you say you want the president to force this company to have that mouse assembled in the US? Fine .. then the price for the mouse goes up to about $70 a pop and sales drop. As the sales drop the jobs of the people in this country who manufacture the components for that mouse go away. Then the 100 marketing jobs this company supports in California also go away. You see, perhaps you can succeed in forcing this company to assemble these mouses in the US, but there just isn't any way you can force the American consumer to pay 80% more for the "made in America" version.
As Bruce Bartlett says in an article listed in my reading assignments, "No nation has ever gotten rich by forcing its citizens to pay more for domestic goods and services that could have been procured more cheaply abroad."
-x- Boortz.com
What about manufactoring jobs? Assembly lines and etc? Those types of jobs require very little training to do the job and to do it right.
Not many people can afford college to get the kind of training they need in some high tech field work. Most kids who graduate from HS come from poor families who cannot afford to send their kids to college and to make matters worse, some loan company will turn them down because their mommy or daddy had bad credit. Not exactly their fault, but it ties their hands because they can't get a loan to go to college.
Sure they could work at McDonalds and flip burgers while they study their exams, but in the long run they will owe colleges tonsloads of money that it would be like paying a 30 year morgage.
Since many can't afford college, they go to places like factory assembly jobs that's easy to learn, it can be a boring repeatitive work, but the pay could be well enough to get by the standards of cost of living.
Those types of jobs are ending up overseas because their counterparts can do the same job more cheaper. That's just wrong.
Sure, I'd buy a mouse for 70 bux that's made in America as opposed to a mouse for 40 bux that was made overseas.
Yes people would look for cheap products to buy that is made from overseas. But what about the quality of the products? I've seen too many overseas made products fall apart faster than the American made products. What's wrong with this picture?
And moreso, I believe the quality sucks so they would later fall apart sooner than later so the people would have to go out and buy the same product again which puts more money into the CEOs pockets.
Here's a picture, I buy an American made car and take well care of it, make sure the oil is changed at a timely matter and such. The car I bought lasted me 21 years before I had to buy another car.
A friend of mine bought a foreign made car and it lasted him 7 years before it fell apart. He had to go buy another car.
Let's look at pricing, I bought the car 21 year ago for 20 grand, my friend bought his car for 13 grand.
Since my car lasted me 21 years vs his car for 7 years. He spent $12,500 dollars more on a car in 20 years than what I paid for my car. So there is a HUGE difference in savings that people do not realize.
So like I said, I'd rather buy me a mouse for 70 bux that is American made because it's better quality and will last longer than the mouse that is made overseas and I would save me money in the long run.
The CEOs are making too much money that they don't even know what to do with it. Too much cash can be a bad thing. They need to set their salary that is well enough to stand above the cost of living and stop being so damn materialistic.
I don't need a BMW or a Mercedes or a bigass Mansion because that's just too much waste of resources. I like to keep my life simple as much as possible and it's less stress for me to deal with.
On a side note:
Not everyone can become a doctor or a lawyer and drive BMWs or live in a $200,000 dollar house.
Not every kid can become a basketball star and have a million dollar contract in their belts and have millions in advertising endorsements like Michael Jordon did.
Fame and fortune may be in some kid's dream, but it isn't in mine. In fact, I have never seen a happy rich person, most of them I met are just miserable and not only that, miserable snobs too. I don't wanna be like them. Thank you.
Therefore, people who do them need to make sure they don’t charge outrageous amounts for their services.
That’s my responsibility? I think not. My “mommy” and “daddy” couldn’t afford to send me to college either, so I worked to put myself through school. This isn’t about the “haves” and the “have-nots”. This is about those who do, and those who won’t. It’s your life, and it’s up to you to make it better. Don’t count on anyone else to bail you out.
So this means that other people should pay for them? No thank you. I don’t need any handouts, I don’t want any. Whatever my financial problems, they are mine to solve. It’s part of the truth of my existence. That said, I am under no obligation to provide any handouts either. This is not about greed. When I EARN something, it’s MINE, and you CAN’T have it. IF you want what I have, than damnit, go out and WORK FOR IT. Why does this concept escape the comprehension of blithering morons like yourself?
Then perhaps these people should take it upon themselves to learn new skills. Then we can send these “boring” jobs to countries that would love to have them. Just a thought.
Cry me a river. It’s not wrong. Deal with it. Let’s say you and I apply for the same job at Dell. We both want the same tech support position. We’re both fully qualified to do the job well. But I want less money to do it, you want more. You’re saying that’s wrong? It’s wrong that I get the job over you because I can do it cheaper?? I’m sorry, but screw you. Your inability to handle competition is your problem, not the company’s or the government’s problem.
Wow. Such thoughtful and intelligent economic policy. I’m sure you’re perfectly happy to charge that mouse on a credit card for money you don’t have, because with an idiotic spending mentality such as that, you wouldn’t have any cash on hand.
The trouble with your so-called “point” here is the fact that it is completely devoid of any logic. You may be perfectly happy to pay extra for that mouse, but I’m not. Why spend extra money that can fill my gas tank two times over? (Please… don’t bother with the “because it helps the American economy” bit. It won’t help if the majority of people out there are cheapskates like me because they have to be.)
Your completely stupid argument is what’s wrong with this picture. For every overseas product you’ve seen that falls apart faster than the American equivalent, I say look at Sony vs RCA in electronics. Or Honda vs. Chevrolet in automobiles. You need to get a grip. Reality does not backup your wishful thinking.
This is so completely full of horses**t that any response here is a complete waste of time.
Good for you. Consumer Reports would love to talk to you, because year after year, Japanese cars are the products typically associated with this type of comment. American cars are not bad products, but most people don’t take care of their cars like you do. Japanese cars have accommodated for this notion since the 1970’s where American car are now just starting to understand that concept. It’s part of the reason American car companies were handed their collective butts.
This proves nothing. You’re saying it fell apart because it was not built in America. Did he take care of it like you do? Were both cars driven the same way EVERY TIME? Unless you can reproduce the exact circumstances with both cars, you can’t have a basis of comparison beyond your childish view of the world. This doesn’t even count as a nice try.
SO. WHAT.
Oh, this is so charming. You mean all your scheduled maintenance was free? Sorry, I don’t buy that. Why are you mentioning the cost of operating the car for him but forget to mention yours? If you’re so sure there’s a savings then say so. Show us what the difference in operating costs was. Why hide what you spent? (Perhaps because the truth is different than what you’re coughing up here.) Even if you can’t prove a savings beyond a reasonable doubt, at least you wouldn’t appear this transparently stupid.
Again: American made does not automatically mean better. But if you believe that, knock yourself out. A product is better than the competition because of design and function, not because of who made it. You really need an education.
Just WHO the hell do you think you are? Why don’t you take your arrogance and use it to get ahead in life? (AS IF) Go get rich and then you can do this with your money if you want. But save your selfish and greedy demands for like-minded idiots. Don’t think you can dictate what people can do with their earnings and expect to have them kiss your ass for it. Tell ya what buddy: Why don’t you tell your favorite actor, rock star, or football player to take your advice? See how well that flies. Or better yet, tell that to your parents. Even if they are poor by your standards, they don’t REALLY need a telephone, or cable TV, or a car, do they? Those are luxuries to people who DON’T have them, therefore, no one else should have it either. By God, please stay home on election day.
Fine. Live your life how you want. That’s your choice, and you have that right.
So do people who own those luxuries. Thay have earned them and they have the right to enjoy them.
Why don’t you deal with it and stop whining like a low-life loser who thinks the world owes something?
So what? Not everyone wants to, according to you.
So what? Not everyone wants to, according to you.
If this were true, then you wouldn’t be behaving like a jealous child. But, let’s say it is true and you are happy the way you are. Your biased observations about “rich” people aside, why don’t you just leave it at that?
They were primarily focusing on selling their own branded flat-panel TV's and such for awhile, and lost sight of their computers.
Now, one generally pays hundreds less for a Dell system vs. a comparable Gateway. Wasn't always the case.
Especially with eMachines, Gateway has to focus on the super-low budget / minimal-need market rather than trying to keep up with the likes of Dell, Compaq, HP....
In this case, don't think it has anything to do with them outsourcing / exporting jobs.
For most people's purposes (email, word processing...) this all might not be a horrible strategy, just low-margin. Bottom budget computer works for most these days with current standard capabilities, and might help pull down others' prices even more.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.