IBM's hiring! Expects 10,000 new jobs next year

CNET ^ | 10/15/2003 | Ed Frauenheim

[ArcLight]

IBM on Wednesday met analysts' average earnings estimate for the third quarter and said it saw the need for about 10,000 new jobs next year.

Big Blue reported earnings per share from continuing operations of $1.02, up from 99 cents per share in the third quarter of 2002 and in line with the average estimate of analysts polled by researcher First Call.

IBM's revenue from continuing operations for the third quarter of 2003 was $21.5 billion, up 9 percent year-over-year but shy of analysts' average expectation of $21.9 billion.

Although IBM has been cutting jobs, CEO Sam Palmisano indicated that the company is also looking to add positions.

[ArcLight]

Rather good news, methinks.

[Support Free Republic]

Thank you Freepers!

[Rose in RoseBear]

Pingpingping!

[Bear_in_RoseBear]

Good news for India, maybe.

[Theo]

Of course, none will be Americans.

[Elkhound4]

hopefully these 10K jobs are here in the USA?

[Willie Green]

But it doesn't say WHERE the jobs are gonna be.

IBM looks to move jobs abroad

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I hear the Dems now: "Shut up, you idiot, that news isn't supposed to come out until mid- November 2004."

[Moose4]

Yup...probably 7,000 in Bangalore and 3,000 in Mumbai.

Sorry. I'm being Bitter Cynical Angry White Male Programmer Guy today.

}:-)4

[1rudeboy]

I'm glad you used the word "maybe." It identifies your comment as a knee-jerk reaction.

[JohnSmithee]

"I'm glad you used the word "maybe."

It's a simple trend. If anything you could figure out the probability of new hires here in the US by what IBM has done in the recent past.

[EggsAckley]

Tom Dashole is deeply saddened.

[TopQuark]

The usual from unionist plant Willie Green

[q_an_a]

10,000 jobs at one tech company. someone call willie and tell him that there are still good paying jobs in america.

[1rudeboy]

If anything you could figure out the probability of new hires here in the US by what IBM has done in the recent past.

Oh really? I never thought of you as a protectionist, but your understanding of probability-theory makes me wonder.

[Bear_in_RoseBear]

I have no idea what you're implying.

[JohnSmithee]

"If anything you could figure out the probability of new hires here in the US by what IBM has done in the recent past."

Oh really? I never thought of you as a protectionist, but your understanding of probability-theory makes me wonder.

---

I have a perfectly good understanding of probability theory. I took two semi-rigorous courses as an Undergrad as part of a degree in mathematics. I scored just about 100% on every single test I took.

Anyway, like I said it's a simple trend. Since I don't know the raw data on hires/fires per country for IBM, I have no idea if it would tend to favor American hires or not. For you to jump to such a conclusion displays your bias.

[1rudeboy]

Well, let me work you through it:

You read an article that claims IBM is planning to hire 10,000.
You respond that it is good news for India, maybe.

Seeing that none of us knows where these jobs will be, don't you think it's presumptuous to assume that they will be Indian? Don't sweat it, though, 4 of the first 9 responses were knee-jerk reactions (and 1 of the 9 was a fund-raising post).

[JohnSmithee]

"Seeing that none of us knows where these jobs will be, don't you think it's presumptuous to assume that they will be Indian?"

Not really. Read my other posts on interpretating simple trends. There may be a misconception of how much outsourcing is taking place, but based on that perceived trend, India would be the most likely recepient of these jobs. Nothing presumptuous whatsoever.

[1rudeboy]

Well, then. What degree of confidence would you assign to a "study" that purported to claim it predicts the location of a company's new hires based upon only its most recent personnel-moves (not hiring or firing, mind you, but "out-sourcing")?