backtop

Print 21 comment(s) - last by JKflipflop98.. on Jun 9 at 4:03 AM

  (Source: ecosummit.net)
Neither Google nor Motorola have confirmed the possible upcoming layoffs

Google has finally closed its $12.5 billion acquisition of Motorola Mobility, with China approving the deal just this past weekend.
 
Motorola is in a pretty tough spot right now. Earlier this month, the company reported a fifth straight quarter of losses, which included a net loss of $86 million USD for Q1 2012. In previous consecutive quarters, Motorola reported net losses in the low $80 million area. Motorola is having a hard time likely because of its inability to keep up with other Android-powered phonemakers like Samsung and HTC.

"I'm excited to announce today that our Motorola Mobility deal has closed," said Larry Page, Google CEO. "Motorola is a great American tech company that has driven the mobile revolution, with a track record of over 80 years of innovation, including the creation of the first cell phone. We all remember Motorola's StarTAC, which at the time seemed tiny and showed the real potential of these devices. As the company who made a big, early bet on Android, Motorola has become an incredibly valuable partner to Google."

Google also announced today that Motorola Mobility CEO Sanjay Jha has stepped down and Google executive Dennis Woodside will take over.

However, the deal closing may also mean layoffs for other Motorola Mobility employees in the near future. According to Tech Crunch, layoffs could be on the list of things to do after the deal closes.

But Motorola has already gone through restructuring since the announcement of the Google acquisition last year. When the announcement went public, Motorola had 19,000 employees. In fall 2011, about 800 employees were laid off.

Neither Google nor Motorola have confirmed the possible upcoming layoffs, but Tech Crunch noted that Google had previously ordered a 40 percent cut of DoubleClick staff when it acquired the company and its 1,600 employees. This could be a similar situation.

Source: Tech Crunch


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Shouldn't compete with your customers
By tayb on 5/22/12, Rating: 0
RE: Shouldn't compete with your customers
By kmmatney on 5/22/2012 2:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure that if Microsoft could build and sell computers, without being sued up the nose, they would in a heartbeat.


RE: Shouldn't compete with your customers
By Pirks on 5/22/12, Rating: 0
RE: Shouldn't compete with your customers
By TSS on 5/22/2012 6:02:59 PM , Rating: 4
Yeah i'm sure they are absolutely devastated, having their OS run on 95% of all the PC's in the world. I think i saw bill gates next to the freeway the other day with a sign that said "blow jobs for a buck".

See what i did there?


RE: Shouldn't compete with your customers
By Pirks on 5/22/2012 7:39:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
See what i did there?
You forgot to explain how come 95% of all the PCs in the world bring way less money to MS compared to what Apple makes off its devices.

I know MS has the monopoly on desktop, but Apple has monopoly on mobile and it's way more money.

So yeah, Gates sucks dicks for a buck, literally, if you compare his lame company to Apple's gargantuan revenues and profits and market cap :P


By gladiatorua on 5/22/2012 11:02:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You forgot to explain how come 95% of all the PCs in the world bring way less money to MS compared to what Apple makes off its devices.

I could explain, but you would not like it. Because it involves you being a sheep.
quote:
but Apple has monopoly on mobile and it's way more money.

What monopoly does Apple have exactly? Even in US no monopoly. If we consider global market......
quote:
if you compare his lame company to Apple's gargantuan revenues and profits and market cap

Why would any sane person compare companies to profits or market caps?
You are clearly a fat troll. Or a dumb person. I hope it's former.


By nolisi on 5/23/2012 2:12:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You forgot to explain how come 95% of all the PCs in the world bring way less money to MS compared to what Apple makes off its devices.


Um, cuz Microsoft doesn't make the hardware or support the PCs...

You're comparing a distributed profit model (software separate from hardware) to an integrated profit model (hardware and software integrated).

I sincerely hope an educational institution didn't grant you a degree.


By tayb on 5/22/2012 4:10:53 PM , Rating: 2
It's not about lawsuits. It's about showing preference to your own brand at the expense of your other customers. Do you think Samsung is happy that they will no longer get to be the "Google experience" phone partner?


By StormyKnight on 5/22/2012 11:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
This is true! Look at what happened with 3dfx. They decided to make their own vidcards instead of being a chip vendor. Bigtime SNAFU that ended up with their bitter rival nVidia buying them out.


By JKflipflop98 on 6/9/2012 4:03:09 AM , Rating: 2
There is some truth to this. Intel has to worry about this as well. Intel makes entire computers, they just can't assemble and sell them because they'd be competing directly with Dell, HP, and all the rest. Directly competing with your customers is usually a bad thing, especially when they view you as a very large threat.


using or abusing the legal system?
By sarfralogy on 5/22/2012 12:51:39 PM , Rating: 1
To provide a quick background, FRAND patents are not novel but have recently been called into question in these patent wars. If a company has a patent on something that is declared essential for an industry standard, then the company must license the patent to third parties under FRAND terms, that is, fair, reasonable and non-discriminating terms. Any companies that hide their essential patented technology and use it to hinder competition entering the market or to extract high license fees can be guilty of antitrust violations. Basically, the patent holder cannot pick and choose which companies can use essential technologies because otherwise the company would gain an unfair advantage over the entire industry. The company must try to charge about the same amount to each party requesting a license. The FRAND concept is one way to prevent the abuse of power in an industry. http://bit.ly/IYHYrE




RE: using or abusing the legal system?
By insurgent on 5/22/2012 6:02:30 PM , Rating: 2
Compare these FRAND patents to patent for rectangles with rounded corners, or patents for data tapping or handling calendar events...the system is ridiculous.


By ritualm on 5/23/2012 12:34:38 AM , Rating: 2
Good job, you're tricked by a known DT comment spambot.


You've been saved!
By InvertMe on 5/22/2012 12:30:34 PM , Rating: 2
Now you're all fire.

Good day.




RE: You've been saved!
By geddarkstorm on 5/22/2012 1:15:33 PM , Rating: 2
"You lose! Good day, sir!"


This will be interesting to see...
By retrospooty on 5/22/2012 12:32:45 PM , Rating: 2
how this works out. Moto has had some pretty bad steps lately, but definitely has the potential to make some great products. Looking forward to the Razor HD. Thin, large high def screen, battery from the maxx, snapdragon krait. this could be the one to buy.




By DiscoWade on 5/22/2012 1:30:58 PM , Rating: 2
My Atrix is an example of both. The car dock you can buy for it is a great idea that works really well. However, the antenna on it is horrible. I can physically see the 1000 ft AT&T tower where I'm sitting right now and I still don't get 5 bars on the phone whereas my Blackberry always got 5 bars.


Decoding the words of Larry
By Tony Swash on 5/22/12, Rating: -1
RE: Decoding the words of Larry
By nolisi on 5/22/2012 1:38:54 PM , Rating: 2
No bias here whatsoever.


RE: Decoding the words of Larry
By Tony Swash on 5/22/12, Rating: -1
RE: Decoding the words of Larry
By nolisi on 5/22/2012 3:33:12 PM , Rating: 5
Ever heard of a "biased opinion"? An opinion itself can contain bias or it could be completely self formed. I can draw the picture of bias for you if you need, he supplies all the elements in his commentary:

quote:
Thanks to Apple's iPhone!


Actually, not really. Windows Mobile and Blackberry basically did all the same things that the iPhone did at its introduction (if not more) for years prior. Apple only provided a nice exterior, a new interface, and a centralized point of purchase for stuff. I could get new apps on a Windows Mobile phone, the only difference is that Microsoft wasn't pocketing part of the proceeds through a centralized purchase point. This was about the only thing novel about the iPhone, and it is a good and profitable idea, but not a new one. Other than that, they leveraged Google heavily (Maps, Search, YouTube) for the magic that was the iPhone.

So already, he's laid out his favoritism towards the iPhone.

quote:
If you use Android, Google will know everything you buy. Ever!


Wow, incredible. He completely ignores Apples push to centralize all purchases through various Apple provided apps (hell you don't even have a choice browsers) and only accuses Google of recording information.

And finally:

quote:
Google, which loves to claim it stands for freedom and openness, so much so that it withdrew from China,


Completely ignoring the fact that Google was under attack from the government and at one point during the conflict, opened up Google search completely. It was the Chinese goverment that censored them and ultimately forced Google out.

Now carefully read this next part before you respond- you have a habit of ignoring what people say in your responses and arguing things people never said.

I'm not saying Google doesn't have points of not being open.

I'm not saying Google doesn't record info.

But I'm going to point out the fact that on Android, I do have a choice of browsers and application sources without breaking the device. That's a hell of a lot more open than Apple. And sticking Google with the stigma of recording user info in your opinion while failing to mention Apples is either stupidity or bias. Given the preceding facts that anyone paying attention to the smartphone "wars" should be aware of, I think I can safely conclude bias.


"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki