Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

[semi OT] Gateway: From PC powerhouse to buyout bargain

 
 





















Tony Harding
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-28-2007, 08:58 AM


August 27, 2007
Gateway: From PC powerhouse to buyout bargain
Erica Ogg, for News.com
Taiwan is a long way from Iowa.

But not as long as the distance that Gateway--the farm-raised,
direct-sales PC company that grew into a major force in the U.S.
computer industry--has traveled over the past two decades.

When Acer agreed Monday to purchase the American PC maker, it wasn't
shocking, since more than a few pundits would say Gateway's acquisition
has been several years overdue. But at a $710 million purchase price,
it's a comedown for a company that in 1997 was offered $7 billion to
become part of Compaq (which was eventually acquired by Hewlett-Packard).

A string of bad quarters, a revolving door into the chief executive's
office and a schizophrenic business strategy have all led to Gateway's
end as an independent company after 22 years in business. The economic
downturn that began in 2000 hit Gateway particularly hard, and it never
quite recovered. Its identity as a company was constantly in flux after
that, expanding through retail stores, delving in the world of consumer
electronics, and acquiring low-end PC maker eMachines. But none of the
new strategies quite worked.
"Gateway's basically been up on eBay for the last couple years." --Samir
Bhavnani,
analyst, Current Analysis West

Now it will be up to Acer, a Taiwanese company, to resuscitate Gateway's
heartland image and compete with the PC industry's dueling giants, HP
and Dell. To people who've watched Gateway's aimless adventures of the
last few years, the new and focused management that will be at the helm
is probably a good thing, and a long time coming. "Gateway's basically
been up on eBay for the last couple years," said Samir Bhavnani, analyst
at Current Analysis West.

Founded in 1985, the company was built on a direct-sales model--a la
Dell--which was initially very successful. Gateway grew 20 percent to 30
percent from quarter to quarter at its peak in the '90s, making it the
Acer of its day--the fastest-growing PC maker at the time.

In 1997, founder and CEO Ted Waitt rejected a proposed merger with
Compaq, a deal that would have made Gateway the consumer arm of the
world's largest PC operation at the time. After turning Compaq down,
Gateway moved into software and services, financing and Internet
connections.

But it wasn't as adept selling its PCs in cow-print boxes directly to
business. In 1999, Waitt resigned and Jeff Weitzen took over as CEO.
Then in 2000 a steep decline in demand hit the PC industry. Gateway's
shipments dropped off quickly. The company went from moving 4.2 million
units that year to 3.2 million in 2001, 2.7 million in 2002, finally
bottoming out at 1.9 million in 2003, according to data compiled by IDC.

Then an economic recession hit. Things got worse. In 2002, Gateway began
stocking its Gateway Country Stores--which were formerly just places for
customers to place orders--with a variety of consumer electronics, such
as cameras, video recorders, and most notably, plasma televisions. The
company made a huge splash in the nascent plasma business by
undercutting other vendors by hundreds of dollars. The strategy was
applauded at the time, but it was a bust.

"At one time it was really focused on selling televisions and made a
pretty big bet on the digital home...HP and Dell placed similarly large
bets, but they also kept the focus on their PC business," said John
Spooner, analyst with TBR.

Then, switching gears, the company scooped up eMachines, a low-end PC
maker, in 2004. By then, Gateway had lost much of its shine, and much of
the leadership from the much-smaller eMachines was brought in to run the
company. "In reality, it seemed like eMachines was taking over Gateway,
with its management structure, the way they marketed themselves, and
priced themselves," Bhavnani said. eMachines Chief Executive Wayne
Inouye moved over to run Gateway, and seven of 13 of the senior vice
presidents appointed after the merger also hailed from eMachines.

Later that same year, the newly combined company announced it would
begin closing its retail stores, which also meant cutting more than a
third of Gateway's workforce. It was then that Gateway began cropping up
on retail shelves, and TVs and other consumer electronics were cut out
of the picture to focus better on its core business—PCs.

Inouye left in 2006 and company chairman Rick Snyder stepped in as
interim CEO. Later that year J. Edward Coleman became the company's
fifth chief executive in six years.

Finally, the company got back to doing what it does best -- building
PCs. By then, it was worth one-tenth of its value at its peak. But
there's still that brand, the biggest reason Acer wants the company.
Acer will need it to compete in the U.S. market with Dell and HP.

"Who doesn't like the spotted dots, the cows, what they stood for,
seeing (founder) Ted Waitt in the commercials with the pick-up trucks?"
said Bhavnani. "It's a company that people rooted for."

Information contained in this CNET News.com report may not be
republished or redistributed without the prior written authority of
CNET, Inc. For Permission, contact .
Copyright 2007

--------------------------------------------------------

Ouch, from $7 billion to $710 million!
 
Reply With Quote
 
S.Lewis
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-28-2007, 03:40 PM

"Tony Harding" <> wrote in message
news:EAQAi.3898$...
> August 27, 2007
> Gateway: From PC powerhouse to buyout bargain
> Erica Ogg, for News.com
> Taiwan is a long way from Iowa.
>


<snip>

One of the articles I read yesterday also suggested that this is a
nationalistic pride/grudge match between Chinese-owned Lenovo and Taiwanese
Acer.

Truth be known, it's difficult for me to consider purchasing Lenovo
equipment w/o considering how it may benefit the Chinese government either
directly or indirectly. But that's a discussion for political forums.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Myers
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-28-2007, 05:00 PM
Notice a trend here? Continually increasing ownership of one-time US companies
by foreign interests. Lenovo and Acer are two from the computer sector. Also
there is Hitachi's ownership of the venerable IBM disk drive operation. My
bank, Citizens Bank, is now owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland. Halliburton's
move of HQ to Dubai makes one wonder who its major stockholders are. The ever
weaker US dollar compared to other currencies is surely a partial explanation
for the selling off of US businesses, with the dollar weakened by the
government's enormous deficit spending and the lop-sided balance of payments in
foreign trade.

In this whole business pretending to be globalization, there continues to be
one-way thinking about ownership. The US is almost wide-open vis a vis
ownership by foreign interests, the exception being ownership of a business with
national security issues (in theory). But on the other side, there are either
explicit (e.g. Chinese laws) or implicit (e.g. Japanese cultural) barriers to
ownership of businesses by foreign entities.

Of course, the inherent weakness of the US economic, educational, and cultural
millieu to truly understand and become involved in business in other countries
may be a factor, too.

But I do not want to turn this into a political discussion. I only want to
cite the painfully obvious facts and a few implications.

But, hey, can anyone articulate a coherent economic policy for this country
beyond the two words "laissez faire"?... Ben Myers

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:40:56 -0500, "S.Lewis" <> wrote:

>
>"Tony Harding" <> wrote in message
>news:EAQAi.3898$...
>> August 27, 2007
>> Gateway: From PC powerhouse to buyout bargain
>> Erica Ogg, for News.com
>> Taiwan is a long way from Iowa.
>>

>
><snip>
>
>One of the articles I read yesterday also suggested that this is a
>nationalistic pride/grudge match between Chinese-owned Lenovo and Taiwanese
>Acer.
>
>Truth be known, it's difficult for me to consider purchasing Lenovo
>equipment w/o considering how it may benefit the Chinese government either
>directly or indirectly. But that's a discussion for political forums.
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
S.Lewis
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 02:11 AM

"Ben Myers" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Notice a trend here? Continually increasing ownership of one-time US
> companies
> by foreign interests. Lenovo and Acer are two from the computer sector.
> Also
> there is Hitachi's ownership of the venerable IBM disk drive operation.
> My
> bank, Citizens Bank, is now owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland.
> Halliburton's
> move of HQ to Dubai makes one wonder who its major stockholders are. The
> ever
> weaker US dollar compared to other currencies is surely a partial
> explanation
> for the selling off of US businesses, with the dollar weakened by the
> government's enormous deficit spending and the lop-sided balance of
> payments in
> foreign trade.
>
> In this whole business pretending to be globalization, there continues to
> be
> one-way thinking about ownership. The US is almost wide-open vis a vis
> ownership by foreign interests, the exception being ownership of a
> business with
> national security issues (in theory). But on the other side, there are
> either
> explicit (e.g. Chinese laws) or implicit (e.g. Japanese cultural) barriers
> to
> ownership of businesses by foreign entities.
>
> Of course, the inherent weakness of the US economic, educational, and
> cultural
> millieu to truly understand and become involved in business in other
> countries
> may be a factor, too.
>
> But I do not want to turn this into a political discussion. I only want
> to
> cite the painfully obvious facts and a few implications.
>
> But, hey, can anyone articulate a coherent economic policy for this
> country
> beyond the two words "laissez faire"?... Ben Myers
>


<snip>


It's damned sad is what it is - at least to me.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Myers
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 02:32 AM
Yep, let's tar and feather members of BOTH parties for looking out for their own
self interests and not those of the country at large or the citizenry. Whatever
happened to "government of the people, by the people and for the people"? We
live in an oligarchy masquerading as a democratic (small D) from of
government... Ben Myers

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:11:07 -0500, "S.Lewis" <> wrote:

>
>"Ben Myers" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> Notice a trend here? Continually increasing ownership of one-time US
>> companies
>> by foreign interests. Lenovo and Acer are two from the computer sector.
>> Also
>> there is Hitachi's ownership of the venerable IBM disk drive operation.
>> My
>> bank, Citizens Bank, is now owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland.
>> Halliburton's
>> move of HQ to Dubai makes one wonder who its major stockholders are. The
>> ever
>> weaker US dollar compared to other currencies is surely a partial
>> explanation
>> for the selling off of US businesses, with the dollar weakened by the
>> government's enormous deficit spending and the lop-sided balance of
>> payments in
>> foreign trade.
>>
>> In this whole business pretending to be globalization, there continues to
>> be
>> one-way thinking about ownership. The US is almost wide-open vis a vis
>> ownership by foreign interests, the exception being ownership of a
>> business with
>> national security issues (in theory). But on the other side, there are
>> either
>> explicit (e.g. Chinese laws) or implicit (e.g. Japanese cultural) barriers
>> to
>> ownership of businesses by foreign entities.
>>
>> Of course, the inherent weakness of the US economic, educational, and
>> cultural
>> millieu to truly understand and become involved in business in other
>> countries
>> may be a factor, too.
>>
>> But I do not want to turn this into a political discussion. I only want
>> to
>> cite the painfully obvious facts and a few implications.
>>
>> But, hey, can anyone articulate a coherent economic policy for this
>> country
>> beyond the two words "laissez faire"?... Ben Myers
>>

>
><snip>
>
>
>It's damned sad is what it is - at least to me.
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
S.Lewis
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 02:36 AM

"Ben Myers" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Yep, let's tar and feather members of BOTH parties for looking out for
> their own
> self interests and not those of the country at large or the citizenry.
> Whatever
> happened to "government of the people, by the people and for the people"?
> We
> live in an oligarchy masquerading as a democratic (small D) from of
> government... Ben Myers
>


Further OT. Hereyago, Ben :

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3890986.story



 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Myers
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 02:19 PM
Yeah, but a good rant against both US political parties is uplifting, and
certainly keeps one or the other of the parties from accusing me of favoring one
or the other. But I may end up wiretapped... Ben

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:36:49 -0500, "S.Lewis" <> wrote:

>
>"Ben Myers" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> Yep, let's tar and feather members of BOTH parties for looking out for
>> their own
>> self interests and not those of the country at large or the citizenry.
>> Whatever
>> happened to "government of the people, by the people and for the people"?
>> We
>> live in an oligarchy masquerading as a democratic (small D) from of
>> government... Ben Myers
>>

>
>Further OT. Hereyago, Ben :
>
>http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3890986.story
>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Harding
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 02:50 PM
Ben Myers wrote:
> Notice a trend here? Continually increasing ownership of one-time US companies
> by foreign interests. Lenovo and Acer are two from the computer sector. Also
> there is Hitachi's ownership of the venerable IBM disk drive operation. My
> bank, Citizens Bank, is now owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland. Halliburton's
> move of HQ to Dubai makes one wonder who its major stockholders are. The ever
> weaker US dollar compared to other currencies is surely a partial explanation
> for the selling off of US businesses, with the dollar weakened by the
> government's enormous deficit spending and the lop-sided balance of payments in
> foreign trade.
>
> In this whole business pretending to be globalization, there continues to be
> one-way thinking about ownership. The US is almost wide-open vis a vis
> ownership by foreign interests, the exception being ownership of a business with
> national security issues (in theory). But on the other side, there are either
> explicit (e.g. Chinese laws) or implicit (e.g. Japanese cultural) barriers to
> ownership of businesses by foreign entities.
>
> Of course, the inherent weakness of the US economic, educational, and cultural
> millieu to truly understand and become involved in business in other countries
> may be a factor, too.
>
> But I do not want to turn this into a political discussion. I only want to
> cite the painfully obvious facts and a few implications.
>
> But, hey, can anyone articulate a coherent economic policy for this country
> beyond the two words "laissez faire"?... Ben Myers


Anyone else remember Crichton's "Rising Sun"? The Japanese were buying
up the USA then.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Harding
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 03:12 PM
S.Lewis wrote:
> "Tony Harding" <> wrote in message
> news:EAQAi.3898$...
>> August 27, 2007
>> Gateway: From PC powerhouse to buyout bargain
>> Erica Ogg, for News.com
>> Taiwan is a long way from Iowa.
>>

>
> <snip>
>
> One of the articles I read yesterday also suggested that this is a
> nationalistic pride/grudge match between Chinese-owned Lenovo and Taiwanese
> Acer.
>
> Truth be known, it's difficult for me to consider purchasing Lenovo
> equipment w/o considering how it may benefit the Chinese government either
> directly or indirectly. But that's a discussion for political forums.


True, but why single out Lenovo for special handling? Lenovo was
manufacturing ThinkPads for IBM years before IBM sold their PC division
off to them. Hardly seems like an inscrutable plot when the US company,
IBM in this case, couldn't figure out how to price PC devices & services
even after 25 years experience.

Where are Dell's laptops made?
 
Reply With Quote
 
wm_walsh@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      08-29-2007, 03:33 PM
Hi!

> True, but why single out Lenovo for special handling? Lenovo
> was manufacturing ThinkPads for IBM years before IBM sold
> their PC division off to them.


Hmm...the MAC address on a 3000 N100 series system is listed in the
public OUI database as belonging to Hon Hai Precision Industry
(Foxconn). Makes me think that Foxconn did the actual build, which
surprised even me.

I suppose you could say the 3000 series aren't "real" Thinkpads but
they are sold right alongside the Thinkpad line.

> Where are Dell's laptops made?


My LatD800 seems to have been basically built in Malaysia, with
customizations to its build applied in Tennessee.

William

 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
YAGSS (Yet another Gateway Support Story) Mike B Gateway 2 08-21-2007 03:41 PM
A New Gateway Lee Gateway 17 03-20-2007 08:35 PM
Buy a Gateway at retail, except some of the worst support in the industry. RMZ Gateway 15 03-04-2007 04:55 AM
Considering moving from a Dell to a Gateway.... read this first. RMZ Dell 25 02-10-2007 04:16 PM
Considering moving from a HP to a Gateway.... read this first. RMZ HP 1 02-09-2007 02:36 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 AM.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43