Jerks And The Start-ups They Ruin

Perhaps the premiere of Season 4 of “Silicon Valley” twigged me to share this post. but despite the title, the HBO series only connection may be the now viral “mean jerk time algorithm.” The real “Silicon Valley jerk” has been around for decades, buried with all the other dirty laundry. Uber’s Travis Kalanick has only brought it front and center at this moment. It is something of a conundrum as some of the jerks are also the most successful. We all now know about the “bad” Steve Jobs. Oracle for years had a very bad reputation that came directly from Larry Ellison himself. Microsoft was long known as a “sweatshop” with a highly negative culture led by Steve Ballmer. Even venture capitalists themselves have caught the disease as evidenced by Reid Hoffman and the late Tom Perkins of KPCB. The best assessment I have heard is that these aggressive unrestrained corporate cultures destroy their own goals. Or better yet, the saying that “culture trumps strategy.”


Perhaps the premiere of Season 4 of “Silicon Valley” twigged me to share this post. but despite the title, the HBO series only connection may be the now viral “mean jerk time algorithm.”     The real “Silicon Valley jerk” has been around for decades, buried with all the other dirty laundry. Uber’s Travis Kalanick has only brought it front and center at this moment. It is something of a conundrum as some of the jerks are also the most successful. We all now know about the “bad” Steve Jobs. Oracle for years had a very bad reputation that came directly from Larry Ellison himself.  Microsoft was long known as a “sweatshop” with a highly negative culture led by Steve Ballmer. Even venture capitalists themselves have caught the disease as evidenced by Reid Hoffman and the late Tom Perkins of KPCB.  The best assessment I have heard is that these aggressive unrestrained corporate cultures destroy their own goals. Or better yet, the saying that “culture trumps strategy.”

 

The tech industry has a problem with “bro culture.” People have been complaining about it for years. Yet nobody has done much to fix it.

That may finally change if the people in charge of Silicon Valley — venture capitalists, who control the money — start to realize that the real problem with tech bros is not just that they’re boorish jerks. It’s that they’re boorish jerks who don’t know how to run companies.

Look at Uber, the ride-hailing start-up. It’s the biggest tech unicorn in the world, with a valuation of $69 billion. Not long ago Uber seemed invincible. Now it’s in free fall, and top executives have fled. The company’s woes spring entirely from its toxic bro culture, created by its chief executive, Travis Kalanick.

What is bro culture? Basically, a world that favors young men at the expense of everyone else. A “bro co.” has a “bro” C.E.O., or C.E.-Bro, usually a young man who has little work experience but is good-looking, cocky and slightly amoral — a hustler. Instead of being forced by investors to surround himself with seasoned executives, he is left to make decisions on his own.

The bro C.E.O. does what you’d expect an immature young man to do when you give him lots of money and surround him with fawning admirers — he creates a culture built on reckless spending and excessive partying, where bad behavior is not just tolerated but even encouraged. He creates the kind of company in which going to an escort bar with your colleagues, as Mr. Kalanick did in South Korea in 2014, according to recent reports, seems like a good idea. (The visit led, understandably, to a complaint to the personnel department.)

Bro cos. become corporate frat houses, where employees are chosen like pledges, based on “culture fit.” Women get hired, but they rarely get promoted and sometimes complain of being harassed. Minorities and older workers are excluded.

Bro culture also values speedy growth over sustainable profits, and encourages cutting corners, ignoring regulations and doing whatever it takes to win.

Sometimes it works. But often the whole thing just flames out. The bros blow through the money and find they have no viable business. For example, Quirky, founded in 2009 by the 20-something Ben Kaufman. It raised $185 million to build a “social product development platform” that sold kooky gadgets but filed for bankruptcy basically because the “brash” and “unorthodox” chief executive had no business being a chief executive. One indication that Mr. Kaufman is a bro? Well, the first reference he lists on his LinkedIn page is: “He’s a dick … but hilarious.”

Zenefits, a human-resources start-up, and another bro co., raised $583 million, at a peak valuation of $4.5 billion, then crashed after reports that it had used software to cheat on licensing courses for insurance brokers, and operated a hard-partying workplace where cups of beer and used condoms were left in stairwells. Zenefits limps on, but its C.E.-Bro co-founder has left the company, and nearly half the staff has been laid off.

Uber’s public downfall began in February, when Susan Fowler, a former engineer at the company, wrote about enduring sexual harassment and discrimination there. Other employees came forward with stories. One involved a manager groping employees’ breasts. Mr. Kalanick’s own bro-hood became part of the story when a video surfaced showing him berating a Uber driver who complained that Uber’s price cuts had driven him into bankruptcy. Mr. Kalanick said the driver needed to take responsibility for his own life.

As this was happening, Google’s self-driving car unit sued Uber, alleging it had stolen its ideas. Then word leaked that Uber had been using a sneaky software tool to deceive regulators in cities around the world. All this is as much a part of “bro culture” as the poor treatment of women; the point is to get away with as much as you can.

Hoping to right the ship, Uber appointed one of its board members, Arianna Huffington, to join former attorney general Eric Holder and others to investigate the sexual harassment claims. Mr. Kalanick has apologized and vowed to “grow up.” (He’s 40.) Most important, Uber has announced that it is planning to hire a chief operating officer, ideally a steady hand like Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer of Facebook. It’s a great idea, but it should have happened years ago. Now it may be too late.

Ms. Huffington insists the board has full confidence in Mr. Kalanick. But should it? He’s a college dropout with a spotty track record and a reputation for pugnacity. His record at Uber includes racking up enormous losses — reportedly $5 billion over the last two years. Despite this, the bluest blue-chip investors (including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) have invested a total of $16 billion in Uber.

Bro C.E.O.s are better at raising money than making money. So why do venture capitalists keep investing in them? It may be because many of the venture capitalists are bros as well.

Venture capitalists used to be tech engineers who had made a bundle, retired early and took up investing in start-ups as a kind of white-shoe hobby. The new breed are competitive alpha males who previously might have gone to work as bond traders. At the same time, there are fewer women. In 1999, 10 percent of investing partners at venture capital companies were women. By 2014 the number had declined to 6 percent, according to the Diana Project at Babson College. This is probably one reason that, despite many studies showing that women run companies better than men, none of the 15 biggest American tech companies valued over $1 billion has a female chief executive.

Uber’s collapse should not come as a surprise but it does offer a lesson: Toxic workplace culture and rotten financial performance go hand-in-hand. It’s possible for a boorish jerk to run a successful company, but jerks do best when surrounded by non-jerks, and bros do best when they hire seasoned executives to help them. Without “adult supervision” and institutional restraints, the C.E.-Bro’s vices end up infecting the culture of the workplaces they control.

This poisonous state of affairs will get fixed only when investors start getting hurt. A crash at Uber, the most high-profile tech start-up in the world, could provide the jolt that finally brings the tech industry back to its senses.

Uber’s Travis Kalanick Plumbs New Depths As Silicon Valley’s Biggest “Jerk”


Even in the early golden years of Silicon Valley, there were “Silicon Valley Jerks,” and unpleasant corporate cultures.  Larry Ellison and Oracle are the first to come to mind. Oracle was known as a very hostile, unpleasant place to work and there was a revolving door of senior executives who were fired by Ellison or who resigned. Microsoft has always been known as something of a “sweatshop,” with an excessively competitive and hostile culture, which may finally be changing with the new CEO, though his comment about women and promotions caused a flap.  We now know about the “Bad Steve” Jobs, though Apple has not had the kind of negative reputation of some of the other companies.  The late Jeanette Symons of Ascend Communications was notorious for her anti-social behaviour but also founded one of the most successful Internet infrastructure companies in history.  Even Intel, which has been generally regarded as a very positive corporate culture has had its share of “jerks.”  Former Intel VP Jack Carsten had the perverse reputation for being the catalyst for numerous resignations from Intel, and new startup companies that resulted.

But those examples pale in comparison to the current crop of new Silicon Valley entrepreneurs.  Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber has transformed himself into the poster child for this problem. What is most disturbing, perhaps for Uber’s investors, is a stunning lack of attention to the perceptions around Uber’s brand image. Last week, Buzzfeed broke the story of an Uber senior executive who apparently planned a smear campaign against journalists, in particular, Sarah Lacy of PandoDaily.  The exec spoke of internal Uber meta data known as “Godview” that would be used, which raised questions about personal data privacy, and has now led to a formal inquiry from U.S. Senator Al Franken.  SFGate, the Web arm of the San Francisco Chronicle has also posted an article posing questions about Uber’s employment and “partnership” arrangements with drivers.  Kalanick may now have a headache, but he is not alone.  Who can forget venture capitalist Tom Perkin’s statement that the treatment of the rich in the United States was like the persecution of the Jews by Nazi Germany? The infighting among founders at Twitter has been an ugly airing of dirty laundry, and the ostentatious “nouveau riche” behaviour of others has caused ripples of resentment though the Valley and San Francisco.  Much of the criticism seems to center on the venture capitalists who have encouraged these personality types, but in fairness there are venture capitalists who are as appalled as everyone else, and refuse to invest in arrogant “God’s gift” personalities. I have also written two earlier blog posts about this problem, from my own personal perspective, having survived one of Silicon Valley’s jerks.  Links to my two previous posts are shown below.

From SFGate, via Business Insider, Saturday November 23rd, 2014, by Alyson Shontell

There’s a notion that some people become successful company founders because they have the right “Startup DNA.”

The DNA is comprised of characteristics like “resilience” and “ability to accept risk.”

Another characteristic many top entrepreneurs share is arrogance. Or worse, just being a huge jerk.

While reporting a long profile of Travis Kalanick last winter, Business Insider found a lot of people who thought Kalanick was a legendary CEO.

Friends compared him to Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison.

But some who were in awe of Kalanick also said he was a jerk.

“Sometimes,” one acquaintance said of Kalanick, “–holes create great businesses.”

Inside Silicon Valley, arrogance runs rampant and investors seem to reward ruthless behavior with piles of cash.

There are numerous examples of founders who have had moments of terrible behavior that later became infamous. The founders might not be jerks all the time, of course. Everyone has moments when they behave boorishly. But sometimes the stories are so unbelievable, it can leave a lasting negative impressive of the person — that whether criticism is deserved or not.

For instance, Mark Zuckerberg, who is now worth tens of billions, famously ousted his friend Eduardo Saverin from Facebook. He also stole his business idea from the Winklevoss twins. “Yah, I’m going to f– them,” he told a friend over IM about the pair. “Probably in the ear.”

Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel wrote a number of misogynistic-sounding emails when he was in college to his fraternity brothers. Once, Spiegel was so angry with his parents, he reportedly cut himself out of family photos.

Twitter’s co-founders back-stabbed each other repeatedly: Founder Noah Glass was booted out of the company. Ev Williams and Jack Dorsey were both given, and then stripped of, the CEO title. And Jeff Bezos, who runs Amazon, wreaks havoc in his organization by sending a single-character email: “?”

Even Steve Jobs, one of the world’s most-praised entrepreneurs, was said to have two sides. Jobs’ biographer, Walter Isaacson, portrayed the late Apple CEO as “Good Steve” and “Bad Steve.” An example: Jobs once stormed into a meeting and called everyone “f–ing dickless –holes.”

Robert Sutton spent a lot of time conducting research for his book, “No –hole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One that Isn’t,” What he found was disappointing.

“Even people who worked with Jobs told me that they’d seen him make people cry many times, but that 80 percent of the time he was right, ” Sutton said. “It is troubling that there’s this notion in our culture that if you’re a winner, it’s okay to be an –hole.”

It is troubling that there’s this notion in our culture that if you’re a winner, it’s okay to be an –hole.

The Atlantic’s Tom McNichol agrees. He wrote an article titled: “Be a Jerk: The Worst Business Lesson from the Steve Jobs biography.”

Here’s an excerpt:

The ease with which people can possess astonishingly contradictory qualities is one of the mysteries of human nature; indeed, it’s one of the things that separates humans from, say, an Apple computer. Every one of the components that makes up an iPad is essential to the work it produces. Remove one part and the machine no longer performs its job, and not even the Genius Bar can fix it. But humans are full of qualities that are in no way integral to their functioning in the world. Some aspects of personality have little or no bearing on whether a person performs well, and not a few people succeed in spite of their darker qualities.

So, is it possible to be nice and to be wildly successful in business? And in Silicon Valley, where people praise Steve Jobs’ bad habits and founders rag on the homeless, can you be financially rewarded if you’re nice?

One venture capitalist whose firm implemented a “no –holes policy” passed on an investment in Uber. This person said Kalanick didn’t click with any of the partners and that he acted like he was “God’s gift.”

Other investors struggle with the decision to invest in personalities over returns.

“I want not to invest in jerks,” says former Silicon Valley investor, Eileen Burbidge. Burbidge is now a VC at London’s Passion Capital, which has invested in startups like Lulu and Go Cardless.  “Personally I believe life is too short. [But] I have wondered if this is actually a bad philosophy as an investor. I’d like to think not but I’m supposed to back founders for the best ROI, not personality.”

I want not to invest in jerks …But I have wondered if this is actually a bad philosophy as an investor. I’m supposed to back founders for the best ROI.

Mark Suster, a Los Angeles-based investor, also isn’t sure what to make of jerks in business. He lists “integrity” as a bonus characteristic when it comes to top entrepreneurs’ DNA.

“I believe that integrity and honesty are very important to most venture capital investors,” he wrote on his blog, Both Sides of the Table. ” Unfortunately, I don’t believe that they are required to make a lot of money.”

Many agree that being an overly aggressive entrepreneur tends to pan out.

“As much as [Travis] is inspirational, he is controversial,” a former colleague of Kalanick’s said. “If he were less brash, I don’t think he would get half as far as he did.”

Adds another Kalanick acquaintance: “There is absolutely no way [Uber] would have gotten where it is without Travis and his arrogance. Not without him being like, ‘I’m going to take over the world.’ He has the Steve Jobs mentality that ‘It’s my way or the highway.'”

One person who firmly believes you can be nice and succeed is Paul Graham. He runs top startup accelerator Y Combinator and he’s made Sutton’s “no –hole” rule popular in tech. He has backed billion-dollar startups such as Dropbox and Airbnb.

paul graham kevin roseGraham says well-known founders like Jobs and Bezos can’t be judged by their terror tales. “Famous founders who seem to be –holes might not be,” Graham told Business Insider via email. “I’m not saying they are or they aren’t, just that it is extremely hard to tell what a famous person is really like. You can’t judge them based on anecdotal evidence, which is all you ever have.”

Graham chooses not to invest in jerks because he doesn’t want to be around them. Investors and founders end up spending a lot of time together. Getting rid of one or the other can be more difficult than getting a divorce from a spouse.

“The reason we tried not to invest in jerks initially was sheer self-indulgence,” says Graham. “We were going to have to spend a lot of time with whoever we funded, and we didn’t want to have to spend time with people we couldn’t stand. Later we realized it had been a clever move to filter out jerks, because it made the alumni network really tight. We’ve funded over 630 startups now, and when founders of different startups meet there is an automatic level of trust and willingness to help one another. Much more than alumni of the same college for example.”

His take: Be nice and you can find success.

“It’s certainly possible to build a multi-billion dollar startup without being a jerk,” Graham says. “We’ve funded several, and the founders are all good people.  In fact, based on what I’ve seen so far, the good people have the advantage over the jerks. Probably because to get really big, a company has to have a sense of mission, and the good people are more likely to have an authentic one, rather than just being motivated by money or power.”

Larry Ellison’s Extremely High Tech 2013 America’s Cup Defense on SF Bay

This year’s America’s Cup Defense is a Tour de Force of technological innovation both on and off the water, Read on and I will explain. The America’s Cup events are hosted by the St. Francis Yacht Club on San Francisco Bay, and the defending team BMC Oracle, led by none other than Larry Ellison, Chairman and founder of Oracle in Silicon Valley. The qualifying races on Marina Green and San Francisco Bay. Every aspect of this has been planned in advance to showcase bleeding edge technology, and to turn the yacht races themselves into the spectator event The America’s Cup has never been,


oraclecatBMC Oracle 72 foot America’s Cup Catamaran on San Francisco Bay

This year’s America’s Cup Defense is a Tour de Force of technological innovation both on and off the water,  Read on and I will explain. The America’s Cup events are hosted by the Golden Gate Yacht Club on San Francisco Bay, and the defending team BMC Oracle, led by none other than Larry Ellison, Chairman and founder of Oracle in Silicon Valley.  The qualifying races are being held on San Francisco Bay. Every aspect of this has been planned in advance to showcase bleeding edge technology, and to turn the yacht races themselves into the spectator sport The America’s Cup has never been,  IMHO, it is all classic Larry Ellison.

In 2003, I had just agreed to join New Zealand Trade & Enterprise to operate its high tech incubator facility in Redwood City.  My first official event was a head to head America’s Cup yacht race on San Francisco Bay.  Larry Ellison with his boat, Oracle, had challenged the Swiss team of Alinghi to a head to head race on the Bay. In what became known as the “Fiasco in Frisco,”  Alinghi lost miserably to BMW Oracle.   But the background story was even more interesting, and that 2003 race on the Bay can be looked back on as Ellison “beta testing” the idea of holding an America’s Cup Defense on San Francisco Bay.

Alinghi was skippered by Russell Coutts, a Kiwi, and a number of other Olympic class sailors from New Zealand.  In the midst of the previous America’s Cup Defense in the Hauraki Gulf off Auckland, New Zealand, Coutts had jumped ship from Team New Zealand to skipper the Swiss boat, which caused unprecedented uproar in New Zealand, where only two things matter: rugby and sailing.  When Coutts and Alinghi arrived in San Francisco for the Oracle race, New Zealand decided to officially “bury the hatchet” with Coutts.  New Zealand’s Ambassador to the U.S. at that time, John Wood, came out to San Francisco from D.C., and we threw a classic Kiwi party at the Maritime Museum to honor Coutts and his Kiwi mates.  In my first official event for New Zealand, I got to see all of the Kiwi traits and the politics played out.

Fast forward to 2013.  Coutts was fired by Alinghi in 2004, and now skippers BMW Oracle for Ellison. Shortly after it was announced that the America’s Cup Defense by Oracle, would be held on San Francisco Bay, it became clear that Ellison was determined to make every aspect of the yacht races a showcase for the latest Silicon Valley technology.

First, the Bay itself is a stunning backdrop for the event, like no other past America’s Cup venue.  Spectators line up from The Golden Gate and Fort Point all the way down to the America’s Cup wharf past Pier 39.  No other venue has been able to do this.  In an amusing sidelight.  Ellison bought a huge Pacific Heights home with a huge window overlooking the Bay, with the intent of hosting America’s Cup parties there. The only problem was an elderly couple who lived below and whose trees blocked the view.  In California, normally, there is no legal recourse: the owners of the trees are safe in the right to leave them as they are.  But Ellison hired a Marin County attorney, a “tree” specialist, in an effort to force the neighbors to cut down their trees.   I believe the jury is still out.

Second, the new 72 foot catamarans are completely new technological marvels.  Capable of speeds in excess of 37 knots, the cats employ huge kevlar wings rather than sails. A professional Kiwi sailor and friend, described these America’s Cup boats as “man killers.”  Indeed, my friend was right, as a famous British sailor was killed in May when his boat turned “turtle” in the Bay and he drowned.  Numerous additional safety measures have since been implemented.  These catamarans also employ “foils” which enable them to rise up out of the water completely and sail on their tiny wings, enabling the amazing boat speeds.  Foiling is the key to winning this America’s Cup.

Finally, the television technology has already been nominated for an Emmy.  Years ago, when the America’s Cup was held in San Diego, Silicon Graphics experimented with advanced animated graphics for television, and there was live video from the boats, but it was only a small glimpse into the technology being employed for this year’s America’s Cup.. If you have not yet watched a few minutes of the racing, do yourself a favour and do so. You will become hooked on America’s Cup yacht racing.  That has never happened before because it was nearly impossible to convey what was going on, and to make it exciting. No more.  As you watch a race on the Bay, you will see colored lines and arrows on the water, making the progress understandable. Even more amazing, there are arrows showing the airflow over the boats wings, and arrows on the water displaying the treacherous tidal flows in and out of San Francisco Bay as the boats race.  Now I know why no one ever escaped from Alcatraz.

The Italian Team, Luna Rossa beat Sweden’s Artemis to lead up to the finals, but the smart money is on Emirates New Zealand and BMW Oracle as the boats to watch.. Grab some popcorn and watch the fun on your HD TV, wishing you were down on the Bay, watching the races live.

Multidimensional Mobile Market War: Silicon Rust Belt

In this, my third post on the dramatic and fascinating developments, shifts, and impacts of the Multidimensional Mobile Market War, the precipitous decline of the leading personal computer industry competitors, has become even more pronounced than anyone suspected. Last week, IDC and Gartner were in more or less violent agreement that the bottom had very suddenly dropped out of the PC market.


Tech's Rust Belt

Winners and Losers: Tech’s Hot or Not List

Read more in the Wall Street Journalhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323809304578431211400776432.html?KEYWORDS=Tech%27s+Rust+belt

In this, my third post on the dramatic and fascinating developments, shifts, and impacts of the Multidimensional Mobile Market War, the precipitous decline of the leading personal computer industry competitors, has become even more pronounced than anyone suspected.  Last week, IDC and Gartner were in more or less violent agreement that the bottom had very suddenly dropped out of the PC market.

In my previous post I speculated that Michael Dell‘s attempt to take Dell Computer private was in major trouble. Carl Icahn and the Blackstone Group had already thrown a monkey wrench in Dell’s effort to buy back personal control of Dell. Then came the SEC disclosure statement that showed that Dell’s situation was more dire than previously known. This week the Blackstone Group announced that they no longer had an interest in Dell and were pulling out.  The final chapter of this may be that Dell Computer will run out of cash and simply be forced to shutter its doors.  Please keep in mind that Microsoft is a key strategic investor in Michael Dell’s privatization plan.

Then we turn to Microsoft itself and its problems. Microsoft has been grappling with major strategic problems as it attempts to transition away from personal computers into smart mobile.  Windows 8 has been a disappointment.  I gave my wife a Windows 8 laptop, and she immediately complained that the “Start” button was gone, and nothing was intuitive.  Microsoft has just announced that Windows 8.1 will include the return of the “Start” button. You can’t make up stuff this dumb. Nokia is struggling to re-establish a survivable market share in mobile using Windows 8 as its OS… IDC has been forecasting that Microsoft is unlikely to establish more than a 8% mobile OS market share by 2015. This is catastrophic for Microsoft.  Facebook‘s decision to implement an HTC Android device is yet another nail in Microsoft’s attempts to reinvent itself.

Some articles and blogs have argued that Intel is also at a “strategic inflection point,” as Andy Grove would have said, with its legendary reputation grounded in the PC business, as with Microsoft. While this is true, Intel’s short term results belie the  historically volatile and cyclical nature of the semiconductor market. What is clear, is that Intel saw the future some time ago, and that it has a coherent long term strategy. Intel has been diligently plowing its profits back into research and new market development programs. Most important in these new markets is the Atom low power chip for mobile, and perceptivity computing. The Intel Hillsboro facility we used to call “Jones Farm,” the Intel Labs, is famous for leading the industry efforts on the Universal Serial Bus (USB), Universal Asynchronus Digital Subscriber Line (UADSL), PCI bus, Bluetooth, and now a host of new market efforts, including energy harvesting technology.

I speculated last week that Lenovo must be rethinking the wisdom of it’s decision to buy IBM‘s PC business.  This appears not to be the case.  It has been reported this week that IBM is now in talks to sell its server business to Lenovo.  This revelation is also important in understanding IBM’s strategy. IBM appears to be completely disconnecting from its legendary past in computing hardware, and exclusively embracing “The Cloud”  and software as a service (SAAS).

Then we must consider the case of Hewlett Packard.  Over the last two years, HP has engaged in a schizophrenic death dance with the PC business, that has damaged the credibility of the HP brand, something many of us could never have imagined.  HP’s bizarre decisions to purchase the Palm OS for over $2 Billion, and British software company Autonomy, for over $11 Billion, which some have described as the greatest business blunder in history, surpassing Time Warner‘s blunder in purchasing AOL, leave observers shell shocked. But even more bizarre in my humble opinion (IMHO) is HP’s repeated blunders and reversals in the PC and tablet businesses.  HP has been in and out of the PC and tablet businesses so often that the HP brand credibility has been completely trashed.  With IBM now apparently getting completely out of hardware and concentrating entirely on The Cloud and SAAS, via IBM Global Services, it forces HP to yet again rethink its PC business, if it is to compete successfully with IBM.

Finally we must consider the situation of Oracle, a perennial big player in enterprise software and services. It’s CEO and America’s Cup sailor, Larry Ellison, recently acquired Sun Microsystems, its traditional hardware partner.  The logic of Ellison’s decision to acquire Sun escapes me.   Based on the fringe SPARC proprietary semiconductor architecture, Sun was never able to achieve the cost/volume advantages of Intel. Oracle should have focused on becoming hardware independent, as IBM seems to doing.  Instead, Oracle’s financial performance is under pressure, and they are lumbered with Sun hardware.

The spectre of a Silicon Valley Rust Belt seems to be one likely outcome of the Multidimensional Mobile Market War.  Who will be a victim and who will be a survivor is not yet clear.  If only from a historical point of view, I would put my bet on IBM and Intel, who both have decades long reputations for reinventing themselves. I would also be looking at the strategic directions both IBM and Intel are taking, as potentially good indicators of the future.