This Is What Happens After A Bubble Bursts... | Cisco's Plunge - YouTube

Channel: unknown

[0]
INTRO: Today, there are a dozen companies with a
[2]
market cap above $500 billion, most of which are tech companies.
[6]
But, none of these companies were actually the first company to reach the $500 billion
[10]
mark.
[11]
The first company to reach this milestone was actually Cisco way back in 2000 at the
[16]
peak of the dot-com bubble.
[18]
This made Cisco the most valuable company in the world but after the dot-com bubble
[23]
burst, Cisco lost 77% of its value and it has never recovered to its former peaks.
[29]
Looking at the stock graph, it seems like Cisco has been making positive progress, but
[33]
this is actually rather deceiving.
[35]
You see, Cisco has been aggressively buying back their stock over the past 20 years.
[40]
So, the stock has to reach much higher levels for the company to be worth the same amount.
[45]
Currently, the price to beat is $118 meaning that Cisco has to rally nearly 100% just to
[51]
beat its dot-com peak.
[52]
So, here’s how Cisco became the world’s most valued company and their fall from grace.
[58]
THE FOUNDING COUPLE: Taking a look back, the story of cisco dates
[64]
back to a Stanford couple named Sandy Lerner and Leonard Bosack.
[68]
Sandy was the director of computer facilities, and Leonard was in charge of managing the
[71]
computers.
[73]
Throughout the early 1980s, Stanford students and staff commonly used something called the
[77]
Blue Box to link all the computers in the school.
[79]
The Blue Box was designed in-house by Andy Bechtolsheim and William Yeager.
[84]
Andy developed the circuitry while William developed the software.
[87]
The Blue Box was just a simple multiprotocol router, but 40 years ago, this was some pretty
[92]
advanced tech with significant commercial potential.
[95]
However, William didn’t want to sell the Blue Box commercially, and Andy had already
[99]
cofounded Sun Microsystems, so Sandy and Leonard decided to commercialize the product themselves.
[105]
And with that, the duo launched Cisco on December 10, 1984.
[109]
The name “Cisco” was a reference to San Francisco and the logo is of course the Golden
[113]
Gate Bridge.
[114]
Despite the quick start, the early days were not smooth by any means.
[117]
You see, neither Stanford nor William were happy to hear that these two had stolen their
[122]
technology and were trying to profit from it.
[124]
William claims that he never gave permission to sell the technology commercially, and Stanford
[128]
contemplated filing criminal charges against Cisco for intellectual property theft for
[132]
years.
[133]
But, eventually, the two parties would meet in the middle and Stanford would agree to
[137]
license the technology to Cisco in 1987.
[140]
With Stanford on their side, the couple could freely sell their router which was extremely
[144]
lucrative.
[145]
By the end of 1987, Cisco was selling $250,000 worth of routers every month.
[150]
But, the couple had a much larger vision for the company, so they partnered with venture
[154]
capitalists Don Valentine and Sequoia Capital.
[157]
During this funding round though, the couple lost majority control of the company, and
[161]
this was the beginning of the end for the duo.
[172]
Don Valentine brought in a new CEO named John Morgridge, and this guy did not get along
[178]
at all with the founders.
[179]
First of all, he went ahead and replaced several of the managers at Cisco many of whom were
[183]
friends with the founders.
[185]
And after Cisco went public in February of 1990, he went ahead and fired Sandy herself.
[190]
Leonard would instantly resign from Cisco in protest, but this didn’t really accomplish
[194]
anything.
[195]
The couple also sold all of their stock for $100 million.
[198]
To put that in perspective, their 30% stake would’ve been worth $150 billion at the
[203]
peak of the bubble.
[204]
So yeah, Sandy and Leonard got screwed over, but in a way, it’s actually quite poetic.
[210]
The couple stole the technology from Stanford and the VCs stole the company from them.
[215]
FLYING HIGH: Though the founders were completely out, this
[219]
wasn’t a bad thing by any means.
[221]
While John Morgridge had a lot of beef with the founders, he knew exactly how to grow
[225]
the company.
[226]
At first, John targeted corporate clients with large scientific departments.
[230]
Cisco promised to unify their science departments by linking all of their tech together.
[233]
Around the same time, local area networks or LANs were blowing up in popularity, and
[238]
Cisco became one of the go-to companies for setting up and linking LANs.
[242]
Between 1991 and 1992, Cisco’s sales nearly doubled from $183.2 million to $339.6 million.
[250]
Similarly, their net profit jumped from $43.2 million to $84.4 million.
[256]
This explosive growth won Cisco the title of second fastest-growing company in the US.
[260]
But, it didn’t take long for mainstream competitors to enter the scene with the biggest
[264]
one being IBM.
[265]
You see, IBM had been growing their own network business for years called System Network Architecture
[270]
or SNA.
[271]
SNA was a proprietary network that was specific to IBM computers, and given that SNA was limited
[277]
to IBM computers, Cisco more or less ignored the network.
[280]
But, in September of 1992, IBM announced that they were going to license their Peer to Peer
[285]
Networking protocol used in SNA.
[288]
Cisco instantly fired back claiming that they were going to modify their own Peer to Peer
[291]
Networking protocol so that it can be used with SNA.
[295]
Despite this fiery start though, Cisco gave in within just 12 months and ended up helping
[299]
IBM develop and license the protocol.
[302]
Aside from cooperating with IBM, Cisco decided to partner with AT&T as well.
[306]
In 1993, we saw the emergence of a new data communications protocol called ATM or asynchronous
[312]
transfer mode.
[313]
ATM allowed for high-speed transfers of data, voice, video, and images without the use of
[319]
routers.
[320]
Instead of fighting the new technology and embracing routers, Cisco decided to enter
[323]
a joint development project with AT&T and StrataCom.
[327]
Together, they developed the standards for the new technology and ensured that it could
[330]
be used with existing networks.
[332]
These high-level partnerships combined with the rapidly growing network space allowed
[335]
Cisco to continue flying high throughout the 1990s.
[338]
By 1998, Cisco crossed the $100 billion mark in market cap, and in 1999, they would go
[344]
on an acquisition spree.
[346]
They bought a total of 17 companies that year with valuations as high as $6.9 billion.
[351]
It seemed like a trillion valuation was just around the corner, but then, the dot-com bubble
[356]
burst, and that marked the end of Cisco’s domination.
[359]
RETURNING TO EARTH: Though Cisco’s stock price plummeted, the
[364]
executives were still quite optimistic about the future.
[367]
After all, it’s not like the crash was specific to Cisco.
[370]
So, Cisco turned their focus onto new avenues for growth which led to the consumer space.
[375]
Back in the early 1990s, regular consumers had basically no need for routers and network
[380]
devices, but with rapid internet adoption, everyday consumers were quickly becoming a
[384]
larger part of the picture.
[385]
So, in 2003, Cisco spent $500 million to acquire the consumer router and network company Linksys.
[391]
Soon after, they launched their Human Networking advertising campaign.
[395]
This campaign basically marketed Cisco’s vision of not just linking together technology
[400]
but linking together humans from around the world.
[402]
It’s not really clear how effective the campaign was at increasing sales, but glancing
[407]
at the comments, it looks like people really liked the music they used in the ads.
[411]
Anyway, aside from targeting consumers, Cisco also looked for new ways they could target
[415]
corporate customers.
[417]
They had already linked together infrastructure, so the next natural step was to link together
[421]
people and that brings us to the Webex acquisition.
[423]
In March of 2007, Cisco acquired WebEx for $3.2 billion and this got Cisco into the video
[429]
conferencing space.
[431]
On top of all this, Cisco was also trying to expand into emerging markets.
[435]
For example, Cisco spent $1 billion to establish a globalization centre east in Bangalore India.
[440]
They also purchased several companies from emerging markets such as Starent Networks.
[444]
Despite all their efforts though, Cisco hasn’t really gone anywhere in a long time.
[449]
If you look at their revenue graph, it hasn’t moved in a decade, and their net income graph
[453]
doesn’t paint a better picture either.
[455]
So, what happened?
[458]
STAGNATION: One of the biggest factors holding back Cisco
[462]
is being spread too thin.
[464]
Throughout the early 2000s, Cisco constantly focused on expanding into new sectors and
[468]
industries, but they didn’t execute any of these particularly well.
[472]
For example, remember how Cisco bought Linksys for $500 million in 2003?
[476]
Well, they sold it to Belkin in 2013.
[479]
The acquisition amount was not revealed, but it likely wasn’t that favorable for Cisco.
[484]
Similarly, the WebEx acquisition didn’t go too well either.
[487]
Cisco’s vice president of engineering, Eric Yuan, suggested transforming Webex into a
[492]
mobile-friendly video system.
[494]
And given that Eric was one of Webex’s first 20 employees and knew the industry inside
[498]
and out, it probably would’ve been a good idea to listen to him.
[501]
But instead, Cisco rejected his idea and Eric ended up quitting and founding Zoom.
[506]
As you can see, it’s not like Cisco was entering bad industries.
[509]
In fact, they were entering great industries, but they weren’t executing well in any industry
[514]
which made it easy for competitors to overtake them.
[517]
Speaking of competitors, we have Cisco’s second shortfall which is market saturation.
[521]
One of the keys to Cisco’s fast growth was that there was very little competition in
[524]
the 80s and 90s.
[526]
But now, the server, router, and networking markets are extremely saturated.
[530]
Basically, every tech company you can think of has their own server business whether that
[534]
be Netgear, Dell, Huawei, or Lenovo.
[537]
This increased competition has made it much more difficult to secure market share and
[540]
shine above the rest.
[541]
But, by far the biggest problem with Cisco is that their core business is losing relevance.
[546]
Historically, the core of Cisco has been selling networking hardware to corporate customers,
[550]
but many corporate customers no longer need Cisco’s hardware.
[554]
Instead of buying hardware from Cisco and using the hardware to offer cloud and server
[557]
solutions, corporate customers are just building their own hardware.
[561]
Companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have no desire to rely on Cisco for hardware.
[566]
Now, it’s not like they’ve cut all relationships with Cisco, but with time, they’re becoming
[570]
more and more independent.
[572]
And unless Cisco finds a new way to appeal to these customers, it won’t take long for
[576]
their stagnation to turn into a decline.
[580]
UNCERTAIN FUTURE: Despite all of these shortfalls and lack of
[584]
growth, Cisco is still one of the biggest companies in the world.
[587]
Currently, they hover around the low 30s on the fortune 500 list with a market cap of
[591]
$250 billion.
[593]
Looking forward, while Cisco’s networking future isn’t so clear, most Cisco investors
[597]
argue that Cisco is no longer a networking company.
[600]
Even though a majority of Cisco’s revenue still comes from providing infrastructure,
[604]
Cisco investors argue that what’s more important is where Cisco is investing their money.
[608]
And the vast majority of Cisco’s investments today are in services, applications, and security.
[614]
Whether these investments will actually pan out is yet to be seen, but even if they don’t,
[618]
Cisco is by no means in danger of collapsing.
[620]
They’re still extremely profitable and it would take decades for such a company to fall.
[625]
But if their shift away from networking doesn’t work out, it becomes more and more unlikely
[629]
that Cisco will ever return to their former glory.
[631]
But that’s just what I think.
[633]
Do you guys think Cisco can make a comeback to the top 5 or top 10 companies in the world?
[638]
Comment that down below.
[639]
Also, drop a like if you’re glad that you didn’t buy Cisco stock in 2000.
[643]
And of course, consider joining our discord community to suggest future video ideas and
[647]
consider subscribing to see more questions logically answered.