Sultans of suing

 

We are sure that if we mentioned Dire Straits, every body would recall its unique style, mainly driven by lead singer and composer, Mark Knopfler. Some people consider him the best guitar player ever, and his live performances all over the world are memorable. Sultans od Swing, Tunnel of Love, Telegraph Road, Gold…Many hits come to our minds, but from them all, it is the famous duet with Sting, Money for Nothing, what draws our attention more, together with Private Investigations.

Buzz around another Mark comes back. The Mark Hurd again has bounced up again in the press, as some additional documentation around the fishy Fisher has come to light. Beyond an inappropriate relationship between hard Hurd and fishy Fisher, it looks as if hard Hurd disclosed confidential information to the latter. So fishy Fisher seems to be getting a second 15 minutes of glory Andy Warhol said everybody deserved. However, being represented by the famous attorney Gloria Allred, it appears to us that fishy Fisher has had to devote many more than a mere 15 minutes to the “Gloria” to just get again 15 minutes of “glory”… Not sure this is a good ROI, frankly.

As it is already well known by those who have followed the case, hard Hurd settled private whatever issue fishy Fisher had with him. This happened before he was fired by the HP Board, and likely was one of the mean reasons precisely to lose trust in the guy, and ultimately show him the door. The private settlement included an undisclosed amount of dollars to be paid by hard Hurd to fishy Fisher, cost which simply adds up to all other costs hard Hurd has had (including the intangible impact on his family and reputation) for not having thought it twice before behaving like a hormonally unbalanced chimpanzee during mating seasons.

Although Big Mouth Larry quickly came to the rescue, and saved for him the match ball against hard Hurd, we would still question if all the cost he’s taken was really worth it. Is hard Hurd any better personally and professionally than he was at the time in which praise and success were a constant in his service record?

Again that “Money for Nothing” tune in our heads, as we recall part of its lyrics: “Money for nothing, and your chicks for free…” Indeed the private settlement was something hard Hurd was perfectly ready to afford, and certainly big money for fishy Fisher. Certainly “money for nothing” for hard Hurd, given the ROI he got, though this time the chick was not for free precisely, was she?

After all the “private investigations” after the affair, maybe Mark (Knopfler) could eventually consider legal action against Mark (hard Hurd) for copyright infringement by the latter. Private Investigations and Money for Nothing have been in billboards and hitlists for years already. Just to keep lawyers busy, you know, as suing is starting to become a tradition for hard Hurd, we’d say.

By the way, if Knopfler really gets to legal matter, he could as well include copyright infringement about Sultans of Swing. At the end of the day, hard Hurd is really becoming one of the Sultans of “Suing” lately. True or not?

Technorati Tags: HP Board,HP,HP Way,Mark Hurd,Jodie Fisher,Ray Lane,Larry Ellison,Oracle,Management,Dire Straits,Sting,lawsuit

Caesar’s wife

 

Before becoming Consul of Rome, Julius Caesar was appointed Pontifex Maximus. He was appointed head of state religion. At that time, he was married to Pompeia, granddaughter of former dictator Cornelius Sulla. Thus, Pompeia was the head of state religion too, at least in matters related to women, in those years. Pompeia was Caesar’s second wife.

Some time after Caesar’s appointment to the job, Pompeia, as his wife, hosted the Festival of the “Bona Dea” (“the Good Goddess""), only for women attendance, to which men were forbidden to participate.

One of the start up politicians of the time, Publius Clodius Pulcher, disguised himself as a woman and entered the venue, apparently with the intention of seducing Mrs Caesar.

Not really producing any evidence of any wrongdoing, the episode was seized by Julius to demand divorce from Pompeia under the argumentation that “my wife ought not even to be under suspicion”. The real reason behind this break up and divorce were much more political, as politics of the time was mainly driven by family relationships worked out by marriages. Caesar was already deep into politics by that time. Historians strongly suggest he already had his next marriage (ie political alliance) in mind in his quest for power.

We have read the recent article in Fortune which analyses more in depth the story behind Mark Hurd ’s departure from HP a few months ago. Quite detailed and thorough.

Detailed enough to imagine a nice story.

In a given point in time, after having divorced its previous companion, the HP Board married Mark Hurd as the new CEO. In a certain point in time, Mark decided to have Festivals with other top executives from potential customers. Of course, those festivals were very exclusive, discreet, and reserved for the attendance of VIPs only.

A relatively unknown would-be starlet, Jodie Fisher, was hired by HP so as to greet guests to those festivals, and eventually supervise Mark’s agenda, ensuring he spent enough quality time with each person in the festival. Necessarily she herself spent a lot of time with Mark, with or without witnesses.

Not really producing any evidence of any violation of HP’s harassment policy, the episode was seized by the board to demand divorce from Mark… pity the HP PR spokespeople failed to make the historical parallelism. It would have been fun.

Still, though HP was not totally clear about the story, probably in the hope of letting it pass as fast as possible, smart journalists like those at Fortune open the door to details. A mere matter of trust, we may conclude after reading his article. The HP Board lost trust in Mark, even beofre anybody else did, even with no proof nor evidence at that time.

We agree that for any company, its CEO “ought not even to be under suspicion”. They in fact are an asset of the company they work for, aren’t they?

There is still, however, an interesting open question after the story. As the Festival’s episode was an excuse for Caesar to divorce Pompeia, a necessary step in his political career and quest for power, were there any quests for power behind the ousting of Hurd? We have no idea, but it would be interesting, in our opinion, to investigate a bit the likely candidates to marry the HP Boards at the time, and like enchanted frogs or toads, transform themselves into princesses or princes.

Technorati Tags: Mark Hurd,Carly Fiorina,HP,HP Way,Ray Lane,HP CEO,Management

 

A question of honor

 

Despite the sound title for this post, unfortunately we are not talking here about the known song by Sarah Brightman, are we? Wonderful performance in Las Vegas a few years ago, highly recommended to those who might appreciate good music.

No show in Las Vegas, but a bit further westward, we are afraid… up to Oakland, as readers do probably expect.

Despite SAP accepting to pay for the attorney’s fees nothing less that $120 million, jurors still have to determine the cost of damages to be paid to the oracle. At the moment, the oracle is claiming about $2.3 billion.

Today we got former Oracle’s President Charles Phillips testifying. Two highlights from his words today.

First, we has declared that the oracle’s software licensing would have been charged to SAP for a fee ranging from $3 to $4 billion. Other sources up that figure to $5 billion, but we will stick to Reuters. Well, we are certainly no experts in software fees, but even in the case that TomorrowNow’s full plan to take customers from the oracle’s had completely succeeded, it seems quite an unreasonable figure. We are not sure at all that the oracle would have had equivalent revenue for all those customers. Still, Mr. Phillips played the role he was expected to as a former top executive at the oracle, and the figure was thrown in to justify the $2.3 billion claim, and even make it look reasonable in front of jurors.

Second, and most important in our opinion, we would like to highlight the actual words by our Testosterone Champion: "There's sort of an honor among warriors here that we can compete fiercely, but we don't take each other's software," Phillips said.

Oh, puh-leeeze...!!!!!!!

In a gentlemen’s atmosphere, Testosterone Champion’s (TC for short) words would have been very welcome, would not have drawn any attention, and would have been understood as utterly polite. But since the beginning of the friction between the two software titans, back in 2007, we would not precisely compare it to a gentlemen’s duel in the times of Louis XIV, would we? Big Mouth

Technorati Tags: Phyllis Hamilton,Leo Apotheker,Larry Ellison,Charles Phillips,Mark Hurd,HP CEO,SAP,Oracle,Tomorrownow,lawsuit,management,court,trial

Larry’s corroding and aggressive words, to begin with, followed by all the documents and evidence that has been published so far.

If we review TC’s  relatively recent past, it does not really look that the word “honor” is something he has not had to look up carefully before declaring anything today. More than 8 years in an extra-marital affair, and his move to IBM ally Infor (while all the buzz around Mark Hurd to the oracle’s and so forth) do not precisely prove he’s ever known what “honor” really means.

We do not take each other’s software, but we may take ourselves to hang around for years with women other than our own wife, or we eventually take Oracle’s confidential info and use it at Infor?

We do not really believe people are made of two personalities, one of which develops at work the other one at home. When we talk about individuals, we are basically talking of single entities that will basically behave the same way in either scenario. So if you betray your family, which should be sacred for you, are you telling me you will be able to keep loyal to a company that just pays you a salary, no matter how big, should the occasion arise? We are afraid we will not swallow that one, TC…

Maybe Apotheker was not the best choice for HP, and maybe Apotheker is not really the right witness to call, but TC is surely not the best example to preach “honor”, as Mark Hurd was not either a paradigm of the Standards of Business Conduct he preached for years at HP.

 

Questions? Ask Mark

 

The Chosen One has apparently declined to attend the oracle’s party… Too bad, we think.

People have a remarkable tendency to talk about famous individuals and celebrities, particularly if the gossip around is not related to an immaculate reputation. Mass media are made by people, and addressing people. They are not an exception. And if someone with the fame and reputation of Big Mouth Larry finger points someone in particular, that person is ultimately screwed.

HP is claiming that the Chosen One would be getting distracted from his new duties as CEO. Well, a guy born in Germany, educated in Israel, living in France, now moving to California, having been able to reach the CEO job at SAP, enjoying a team of executive assistants and backed by smart people leading the different businesses HP is made of, speaking five languages (one of them German, another one Hebrew, which is written “backwards”) can live with that for a few weeks, we think.

HP’s argument sounds weak. And a poor defense is sometimes equivalent to a strong offensive from the enemy. A weak defense is just providing ammunition to the Pontifex Maximus. Not showing up defaults to the Pontifex being right, and unwillingness to assume responsibilities after having left his former employer. We agree the Pontifex is not really proving elegant at all, and his style matches, in our opinion, much more the one you see in Gangs of New York than an educated discussion. But precisely for that, we would not advise to give a poor excuse to stay off.

If the Chosen One is innocent, he should actually leverage the opportunity to demonstrate his innocence, particularly in a case like this one, where Big Mouth Larry is providing a hell lot of free publicity.

Standing up as well can have the total opposite effect than the one insistently sought by the Pontifex Maximus: Strong leadership and principles. Something that, by the way, HP badly needs. If the Chosen One wants to show he cares for his new company, he should think of his reputation as an asset he is not the sole and single owner of. His reputation and his style is as well an asset of whatever company he works for in a given point in time.

Keeping the cleanest possible reputation is, therefore, something he accepted owing to his employer and his fellow employees since the moment he signed his contract and assumed responsibility. Step up, Léo. You are obliged to do so to yourself, your family, your business partners, your customers and, of course, the employees you lead. In case you had questions, Léo, you can always give Mark Hurd a call about the topic.

  

 

,

Technorati Tags: apotheker,phyllis hamilton,lawsuit,trial,larry ellison,management,hp way,hp,oracle,ceo,sap,tomorrownow,copyright

Appeasement does not win wars

 

In 1938, Sir Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister, together with Edouard Daladier, French Premier, met with Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in Munich, to discuss upon German demands prior to what later would become World War II. The agreement they came up with after a few days was reported by the British politician as “The Peace of Our Time”.

Basically, what the two Western representatives had done was giving in to every demand from the Germans. The main issue at the stake was the partition of Czechoslovakia, and, shamefully enough, the Czech representatives were not even allowed to participate in the meetings.

Sir Neville came back with a feeling of triumph that was as well backed by the majority of Great Britain. He was in fact welcome as almost a hero. The savior of peace.

you can read appeasement in his face…

Chamberlain’s future successor, Sir Winston Churchill, knew better. In a speech in the House of Commons, he regarded the agreement as a total defeat: “We have suffered a total and unmitigated defeat”, said he. He foresaw the consequences of the agreement. Most Historians actually cite the Munich Pact as the peak in the disastrous Appeasement Policy led by British and French governments. About one year after it had been signed, the world was at war.

Today it has been announced that SAP has agreed to pay for legal costs after the TomorrowNow trial. We talk of $120 million, which is not a small quantity just for legal expenses and fees. Consistent with SAP’s non-contest position, it could be imagined that SAP attorneys are trying to show goodwill after they admitted formally long ago they played inappropriate practices. As a side effect, they may be seeking to placate the beast they have in front of them, Big Mouth Larry, Pontifex Maximus from the oracle, and eventually get a better conclusion at the end of the trial.

Because it has to be well understood that these $120 million are just that: Legal costs. Nothing to do with the $2 billion the Pontifex demands upon business damages. That is precisely what the trial is about. And, at the moment, the Pontifex has not given in an inch in that demand, despite taking the $120 million, of course, like Germany did not change its plans after having got the Western approval for annexing the Sudetenland in 1938.

We will see on Friday, when the Pontifex is supposed to step in full majesty and glory into Court. Incidentally we should mention that he will as well have the advantage of having known about a theoretical deposition by Apotheker on previous Thursday. We are not sure about the benefits of not appearing personally.

We are not sure that SAP and Apotheker are 100% aware of what is going on. Appeasement might work when the ultimate objective of both parties is to prevent war, when war is more a threat than a really likely possibility. And as far as we know, we truly believe the oracle has set for aggressive war. Consciously giving in, as the Russians did in 1812 against Napoleon and 200 years later against the Germans, does only make sense if you simultaneously devastate the territory you give up. Certainly appeasement won’t help at all if your way of appeasement includes a $120 million cheque.

Appeasers do not win wars.

Technorati Tags: apotheker,SAP,tomorrownow,larry ellison,phyllis Hamilton,trial,management,court,copyright,oracle,pontifex maximus,appeasement,hp,hp ceo,oracle ceo,neville chamberlain,edouard daladier,munich agreement,munich pact

They might hear…

 

Many times in their lives, in many different aspects of it, people have gone through having an idea, having a contribution to make to someone else, trying to improve things, attempting to feel valuable for themselves.

In those few cases where an eloquent and awkward, yet devastating silence is not the easy answer of those who already have made their minds up, it is not uncommon to get a polite smile back together with nice sounding words: “I hear you, but…”

These words are usually just a standard introduction to enumerating all the reasons that person has to let you know in front of everybody in the room how stupid you have been for attempting to speak up, and to make sure you understand your opinion will be treated with kingly disregard. The real plain translation is more about “I already made my mind up; I have been magnanimous enough to let you know about my thoughts.Now shut up, and do as you are told”.

Someone said that courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is as well what it takes to sit down and listen; he was awarded a Nobel Prize, by the way.

How many times will we still miss a reply starting with “I listen to you, and…”

Fear does not exist

 

Someone spoke to us today about fear. It shocked us; frankly, we did not expect that sort of comment. It was not the moment to talk about that, it was not the conversation to engage to that topic, but I made us think about it.

We have a theory about the subject though. We were surprised today to know that someone had fear, because we do not believe in fear. We actually think fear does not exist.

For us, what people call fear is just the psychological reaction to lacking information about whatever thing generates that so-called fear precisely.

If we take a look to History, we realize the urge people have for knowledge, for knowing what might be going on in a given moment, for what might come in the future, for the cause of a given effect, for the future effect of a given cause.

And when people did not know why something happened, when they did not know the cause of certain effect, they reacted typically following two patterns.

Either they invented an explanation for it, which would stay valid until someone came up with a better theory or they allowed an uncomfortable feeling that hey happened to call fear to justify their ignorance.

The first approach is actually the basis of old mythology… and scientific progress afterwards. The need for knowledge made people invent gods and myths that moved waters, caused rain, or even separated day and night. And those who remained ignorant were subject to manipulation of the myth-creators. When people do not understand something, they tend to worship it… (Incidentally we must say that this probably is why so many politicians love statistics and supposedly scientifically-based studies… or why so many top managers here and there adore Excel worksheets and PowerPoint presentations…)

The second reaction is very similar to the one that children have at night, when everything is dark… When obscurity surrounds you, you are not able to see, and not seeing is equivalent to not knowing. Not knowing is precisely the origin of that feeling called fear. And this is why the most common action from parents that have children afraid of dark is simply switching a light on. (Incidentally we should mention that terror movies should not be sponsored by electricity companies in the hope that they will charge consumers more in their regular bills.)

If someone tells you about being afraid, what that person is really telling you, even without knowing himself or herself, is that he or she misses information or knowledge about whatever it is that frightens he or she.

That person is telling you basically that regarding that matter, he or she is in darkness, and that he or she needs help. The mere fact that he or she admits fear is a positive request for help, for if he or she did not want that help, fear would not have been confessed.

When someone tells about his or her fears, turn a light on for him or her… maybe that person is so much into darkness that does not even realize that there is a switch somewhere to be turned on.

We are in the age of information; somewhat ironic that we talk about ignorance, isn’t it? Still, enlightening darkness is as important as ever… Turn the switch on: It might be lighting a bulb, or it could be starting your PC so you can send an email.

Do that for the person that needs to know, and you will prove trust. And trust is one of the pillars of a much stronger and important psychological reaction, let’s put it this way.