Less than five months after going public, Groupon’s stock is trading at more than half-off.

Today, the daily deals company’s shares slid another 3.2 percent, or 48 cents, to close at $14.54 a share. That’s less than half the $31.14 that some investors paid at the stock’s high point, just after it went public in early November.

At today’s close, the company’s stock hits a new low, though it slumped to similar levels at the end of November.

The stock has not recovered since last Friday, when Groupon revised its results for the fourth quarter due to higher-than-expected return rates during the holiday period.

Today, lawyers announced that multiple class actions have been filed against the Chicago company. The law firms, however, don’t have a lead plaintiff, and are looking for someone who participated in the company’s IPO and suffered financial losses. The complaint charges that certain officers issued materially false and misleading statements regarding financial results.

As part of the announcement on Friday, Groupon reaffirmed its guidance for the first quarter, and is still expecting revenue of up to $550 million, and net income from operations of up to $35 million. The company will release its first-quarter results on May 14.

Okay, okay, we get it: Morgan Stanley got the coveted left-hand lead position on Facebook’s blockbuster IPO filing. Goldman Sachs is there, too, but in the third-place, always-a-bridesmaid spo,t and is crying big salty tears about the injustice of it all.

It’s hard to feel badly for overpaid investment bankers, and focusing on them is kind of like endlessly discussing the lawyers who processed your mortgage, when the focus should be on the house you’re buying.

Does anyone except a few Richie Rich ZIP Codes in Manhattan care about this one deet of the initial public offering of the social networking giant?

Nope, but there is so little real news ahead of the IPO filing expected today that this is what we are chomping on this morning, as everyone awaits the big doc drop at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Sources said it is likely to come this afternoon rather than this morning, though. And, perish the thought, all that dotting of I’s and crossing of T’s could delay it to tomorrow, even (unlikely, but mebbe!).

Sigh.

Tidbit: Facebook was actually founded the first Wednesday in February of 2004 in an undergraduate dorm room at Harvard University, like today but eight years later.

Thus, here’s a boring Facebook history timeline chart to look at:

Okay, that was really dull.

What up? The board met, the spinmeisters are at the ready and, most of all, Silicon Valley is stoked to make some more arrogant badillionaires.

Now, hopefully, we’ll get the real news about Facebook.

Namely, who’s getting the big dough in this much-anticipated Web 2.0 gambit? Co-founder and CEO and Hoodie Commander Mark Zuckerberg fer sure, but who else?

Plus all the juicy financials from Facebook, along with stats in usage, growth and just how much the company sticks it to its gaming serf — oops, partner — Zynga and others for the privilege of being on its all-powerful platform.

Me? I pay nada, like other Facebook users, for being able to show off pictures of my vacations and decline friendships from PR people I like, but still … well, you know.

Here is another Facebook financial chart that will not knock your socks off unless you are an accountant:

I am now so comatose waiting for the show to begin that I briefly began a liveblog of my activities this morning.

It went like this:

4:45 am PT: Done with AOL Q4 earnings, which were meh, but better meh than expected. AOL, if you recall, used to be Facebook and now is, um, not.

Note to Zuckerberg: Be nice to people on your way up, since you’ll meet them again on the way down.

4:46 am PT: I check the SEC site and get zip. Click, click, clickety-click over to find out the latest on Demi Moore and her fake-pot debacle.

Who knew there was synthetic cannabis and it is called K2 or Spice? Not me! According to Wikipedia: “It seems likely that synthetic cannabis can precipitate psychosis and in some cases it is prolonged.”

I decide to blame Ashton Kutcher and then wonder if he is an investor in Facebook via BFF-to-errant-celebrities-who-like-tech Ron Conway, also a Facebook investor.

Note to self: Call Ashton! That dude plays village idiots all the time, but I am not fooled by Mr. Pretty Face.

4:47 am PT: I consider email bombing Yahoo’s Jerry Yang, who is probably not so busy right now, and asking him what he thinks about the Demi Moore crisis and also Facebook’s IPO.

Remember when Yahoo was king of Silicon Valley and Yang posed in that purple VW on the cover of that magazine? Better still, remember when Yahoo was going to buy Facebook for just over $1 billion and then borked it?

Just sayin’, Mark — so, keep it reals!

4:48 am PT: I consider going out for doughnuts — and not because of any real weed need. I just would like me some glazed and sprinkled sugar treats right about now. Then, I could post the pictures of them on my Facebook page.

Sweet.

But you-know-who would file right when I left the house on the munchie run. Click, click, clickety-click over to the SEC site and I come up peanuts.

Time to check in on the Kardashians.

You get the idea — so, Facebook IPO, take me away!

RELATED POSTS

• In Its First Acquisition as a Public Company, Facebook Buys Social Gifting App Karma
• Zynga’s Stock Tanks After Facebook Fails to Pop
• The Price Is Right: Facebook Closes Near Opening Price
• And We’re Off! Facebook Shares Hit the Nasdaq at a Slight Increase Before Settling Back.
• Hear That?
• $$FB$$ Has Arrived: So Now What?
• Facebook Cheers On Mark Zuckerberg. Wall Street Gets Its Chance Soon.
• The Verdict Is In: Facebook Share Price Set at $38
• How Will Facebook’s Zuckerberg Adapt to Working in the Public Eye?
• Facebook IPO Halo Boosts Social Media Stocks
• How Will Facebook Ring in the IPO? With a Hackathon, Of Course.
• What to Expect When Facebook Is Expecting: Five Predictions for Facebook’s First Public Year
• Facebook Is Still Figuring It Out. Will Advertisers and Investors Wait Around?
• Investors Told Facebook IPO Will Be in $34 to $38 Price Range
• Facebook Roadshow Bloopers (Comic)
• Facebook’s Latest S-1 Amendment: Yep, We’re Still Weak on Mobile
• $FB Is a Buy, Analysts Say
• Facebook’s Road Show Kicks Off Electronically With Zuckerberg in a T-Shirt (Video)
• After Public Offering, Mark Zuckerberg Will Still Control More Than Half of Facebook
• Facebook IPO Docs Could Get Approval This Week, Followed by Road Show With Zuckerberg (No Guarantee on Tie)
• Updated S-1: Facebook’s Yearly Revenue Growth Up 45 Percent, But Down Six Percent From Last Quarter
• SecondMarket Lays Off 10 Percent in Light of Facebook IPO
• SEC Cracks Down on Firms Trading Facebook Pre-IPO Shares
• Tidbits From the Facebook IPO Filing: I’ll Have What SV VCs Marc Andreessen and Jim Breyer Are Having!
• During the IPO Quiet Period, Please Enjoy the D Stylings of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg (Video)
• Facebook’s Ad Business Is a $3 Billion Mystery
• Viral Video: Farewell to the No-IPO Mark Zuckerberg
• Zuckerberg Is the Billion-Share Man: Who Owns What, Who Makes What in the Facebook IPO
• Zuckerberg Tells Investors, “We Don’t Build Services to Make Money”
• Mobile Highlighted as Key Risk Factor (and Opportunity) in Facebook Filing
• Stop All That Poking: Facebook Filing Temporarily Crashes SEC Web Site
• Zynga Accounted for 12 Percent of Facebook’s Revenue in 2011
• Facebook Has 845 Million Users
• On Its Eighth Birthday, Facebook Files to Raise $5 Billion in Massive IPO (Get Your S-1 Here!)
• Go the F**k Back to Sleep, Silicon Valley: Facebook IPO Likely to File Later Today at Earliest
• Dude, Where’s My Facebook IPO Filing? (Ashton’s on Hold!)
• The Quiet Man: Meet the Less-Known Face of the Facebook IPO, CFO David Ebersman
• Facebook Board Meeting Today for Final IPO Okays
• Facebook (Eye)PO: Tracking the Truth of the Biggest Deal of Web 2.0
• Viral Graphic: Visualizing the Facebook IPO
• Is Facebook IPO on Track for Late May?
• IPO Watch: Facebook Hiring Brunswick to Help With Comms for Expected Public Offering
• Complete Facebook coverage

Despite everything, corporate spending on IT was going to hold steady, went the conventional wisdom. Big tech companies selling to big companies — except the financial ones — were supposed to have the situation well in hand. All those big companies looking to get things done in a faster, cheaper and more efficient manner would be writing big checks to the big lumbering tech companies, which would translate into operational savings: Faster servers, faster PCs, cloud services, better software.

At least that was the conventional wisdom until today. Now Oracle has gone and harshed whatever buzz there was left. Once investors got their heads around the wider implications of the software giant’s disappointing quarter, they concluded that the entire enterprise tech sector required a sharp spanking. Here’s a rundown of the damage:

• Oracle shares fell by $3.40 or nearly 12 percent, and briefly traded within 20 cents of their 52-week low.
• IBM, recently the engine of steady, dependable tech growth, fell $5.77, or more than 3 percent.
• Cisco Systems fell 49 cents, or more than 2 percent, and teamed up with Big Blue as the day’s worst Dow performers.
• Salesforce.com fell 5 percent.
• VMWare fell nearly 10 percent.
• SAP fell $3.49, or more than 6 percent.
• Hewlett-Packard held up (relatively) better than the rest, falling only 47 cents, or less than 2 percent.

Okay, you get the picture. Investors wanted out of any stock that touched enterprise tech today. Oracle is considered a bellwether. The result was predictable. But does the crux of the argument that fueled today’s fear have any merit? Maybe not.

There are reasons to hope it’s not quite so bad. For example, IT consulting house Accenture, which saw its own stock fall more than 4 percent today, recently reported a pretty good quarter, with record revenues and earnings. Its strength came from $7.8 billion in new bookings, which isn’t exactly a negative indicator.

Second, even if corporate spending does slow down, tech M&A deals could help larger companies grow despite themselves. Oracle, Cisco and IBM have a combined $87 billion in cash and short-term investments among them. And as we’ve seen, there’s still plenty of appetite among large tech companies for gobbling up smaller ones, especially in the red-hot software-as-service space.

Recent examples include SAP’s $3.4 billion acquisition of SuccessFactors, Oracle’s $1.5 billion deal for RightNow, and Salesforce’s grab of Rypple.

And the potential targets are numerous: There’s Taleo, NetSuite, Workday; even newly public Jive Software.

Finally, the currency weakness that has Oracle and so many other companies running uphill when dealing with non-U.S. customers isn’t going to last forever. Yes, it’s true that IT companies like it better when the dollar is weak against the euro. Considered from that angle, Oracle and other global tech companies suffer less from a demand problem than a temporary — though it is going on way too long — currency problem.

But even if the euro crisis does last well into next year, there are still the BRIC countries, which Intel, another significant tech bellwether, can’t stop praising. And — dare I say it? — the U.S. economy is showing signs of coming back to life. In several states, private payrolls are growing just enough to offset the declines in employment at state and local governments, and as new tax revenue flows, government payroll declines will slow, as well. As 2012 wears on, the U.S. might find itself rolling into an honest-to-goodness recovery, which would fuel improvements to IT budgets. Though the hard-drive shortage caused by the flooding in Thailand won’t make this any easier.

So don’t worry. Or don’t worry too much.

It’s not the only one: Several enterprise software and hardware players are falling right along with Oracle. Salesforce.com, whose primary customer relationship management software rivals Oracle’s, has fallen more than $8, or more than 8 percent. Oracle’s primary software rival, SAP, is down by more than $3, or more than 5 percent. IBM has fallen $6.73, or more than 3 percent. Hewlett-Packard is down 50 cents, or nearly 2 percent. Dell is down 40 cents, or more than 2 percent. Microsoft is falling, too, but not as much.

It looks a lot like what Cannaccord Genuity analyst Richard David predicted in a note to clients this morning. Oracle is something of a bellwether for software company and corporate IT stocks in general. A lot of the problems that sapped Oracle’s results this quarter, David wrote, are specific to Oracle. But in the minds of investors it doesn’t matter:

“Much of the miss was company specific, but it won’t matter this morning. Investors are likely to use this miss as a reason to pound software on Wednesday. We believe Oracle’s miss, combined with Red Hat’s heavily punished but modest scuffle on Tuesday, will first hit infrastructure stocks like VMWare, Citrix Sysems and then for good measure high fliers like Salesforce.com. Our view is more nuanced; Oracle missed because some buyers waited for a new hardware upgrade, and on the software front the firm is behind the curve in cloud applications. We expect Oracle to catch up, but it will be through some R&D and a lot of M&A. We would “back up the truck” on Salesforce if traders knock that stock down because cloud software companies are very likely to gain significant market share from non-cloud vendors.”

Davis cut his rating on Oracle to “Hold” from “Buy,” arguing that the shares will “trade sideways for the next two to three quarters.” Even after an expected “dead cat bounce” — a quick price recovery after a significant fall — Oracle will have some work to do. “Oracle will have to rebuild confidence that the firm is not is not headed to Microsoft’s valuation level over the next few years. Therefore, we can no longer rate Oracle a Buy.”

Not everyone was quite so negative. FBR analyst David Hilal, in a note to clients this morning, lowered his estimates on Oracle’s sales and profits for fiscal 2012. He now expects Oracle to report per-share profits of $2.36, down from $2.44, and cut his sales estimate to $37.7 billion from $39 billion. He also lowered his target to $34 from $38. Even so, he’s still bullish generally, albeit with lower expectations. “The macro debate will now focus on whether IT spending is finally coming under pressure due to broader economic concerns,” Hilal wrote. “While IT spending is not immune to such macro factors, we are not forecasting a material slowdown as we believe enterprises have already been cautious regarding their spending. However, some modest pullback should be expected, particularly post a seasonally strong end to the year.”

BMO Capital analyst Karl Keirstead didn’t agree with Hilal on that point. “Given some weak recent data points from Red Hat, Salesforce.com, Intel and Accenture, we conclude that the macro IT spending backdrop in fact weakened and that the miss was not related to Oracle execution or share losses,” he wrote in a note to clients this morning. “We assumed that Oracle could manage through this tightness and we were obviously wrong.” He lowered his price target to $32 from $38 but maintained a “buy” rating.

Other analysts downgraded Oracle, too. Societé Generale analyst Richard Nguyen cut it to “Hold” from “Buy.” CLSA slashed Oracle shares to “underperform” from “buy,” and lowered its price target to $30 from $36. Deutsche Bank analyst Thomas Ernst lowered his target price to $29 from $33. It’s just one of those days.

So what happened? A few things, as Oracle execs tried to explain on a conference call.

• The currency effect: As President and CFO Safra Catz explained, what had been a 1 percent tailwind for currency effects turned into a 2 percent headwind. With all the violent swings in the value of currencies around the world as compared to the U.S. dollar, Oracle suffered a negative effect that pinched revenue.

• Deals didn’t close during the quarter: Catz said that in the final days and weeks of the quarter, some customers added an extra layer of executive approval to close deals to buy Oracle stuff. That meant that some deals Oracle had expected to close before the quarter’s end moved into the next quarter. Catz said that Oracle has taken steps to better manage deal flow to take this into account. It is consistent, however, with recent statements from other enterprise IT vendors, like IBM and NetApp.
• Transitions: Oracle’s SPARC server business just switched to a new chip called the T4, which was unveiled late in the quarter. The machines require a total upgrade, and that means a lot of testing with existing applications, which can slow down deals for the new machines, while at the same time sapping demand for the prior generation of products. That had a lot to do with hardware sales dropping by 14 percent year over year to $953 million. As Catz put it: “We saw good early demand for the new SPARC SuperCluster, but only released the product for general availability at the very end of the quarter, allowing us to ship only a couple.”

Catz also predicted that hardware sales will decline as much as 14 percent this quarter, although CEO Larry Ellison was bullish on its growth prospects later this year. New software license revenue, a key metric gauging software sales, is expected to grow in a range of 2 percent to 12 percent. Total sales are expected to grow in the range of 3 percent to 7 percent, and per-share earnings are expected to come in between 56 and 59 cents, which is in line with the consensus of analysts.

There were a few things that went right. Ellison did what he usually does on a conference call, and crowed about examples where Oracle is beating a competitor. This time, the targets were IBM, Cisco Systems and SAP, but not his usual punching bag, Hewlett-Packard. Oracle won several competitive deals from Big Blue and Cisco, as well, with customers as varied as Australia’s University of Melbourne, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Hyundai Kia Motor Company.

Ellison also hinted that Apple is a big Oracle customer. He mentioned a “a very large American smartphone manufacturer” that had bought more than 30 Oracle Exadata systems as it built out its cloud. Unless I’m missing something, there’s really only one company that fits that description, and that’s Apple. Its use of Oracle gear within the mix at its North Carolina data centers has been speculated about before, but never confirmed by Apple directly. (Big surprise, that.)

IBM, he says, should meet expectations for the quarter by delivering per-share earnings of $3.31, slightly better than the consensus estimate of $3.21. On top of that, he expects IBM to raise its guidance for earnings on the year to $13.35 per share or higher. Sacconaghi says IBM may earn as much as $13.60 a share this year, depending on how much it ultimately saves from workforce reductions and a lower tax rate. He says that IBM has beat its consensus in each of its last 15 quarters and raised annual earnings guidance in nine of its last 11 quarters.

All good, right? Sure, but how long can IBM keep this sort of thing going? Certainly not forever, especially in a tough global economy. Revenue growth this year will be difficult to compare to last year, Sacconaghi writes, especially in light of a stronger U.S. dollar, a slowing business cycle in hardware upgrades and a slowdown in services growth over the last 18 months. As such, his estimates for revenue growth are below those of the Street consensus: Where the Street expects IBM to report sales of nearly $112 billion in fiscal 2012, Sacconaghi expects $109.3 billion.

“IBM has benefited from a favorable currency environment, which has boosted the company’s headline revenue growth number, which is likely to reverse and pressure IBM’s reported revenues in the first half of 2012 at current spot rates,” he writes. “While we don’t expect this to lead to earnings misses versus the consensus given that IBM hedges, we believe that revenue estimates need to be revised downwards from current levels.”

Given the recent feuds between the management teams at the two companies, Oracle’s acquisitive history and HP’s sudden weakness, it doesn’t take much for a popular narrative of Oracle buying HP to emerge. It would be a dramatic denouement to the events of the last year that have found HP and Oracle at increasingly caustic loggerheads. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison would take some kind of victory lap and mount HP on the wall like a of trophy.

The idea gained some currency with an Aug. 21 story in the New York Post (which, like this Web site, is owned by News Corp.) arguing that HP’s $11.7 billion bid for the British software firm Autonomy, having caused shareholders to knock $12 billion and change off HP’s market cap, would therefore make HP more attractive to Oracle.

The meme gained further currency with a Bloomberg News story saying that HP’s board was “concerned” that its weakened condition had left it vulnerable to Oracle.

Let me put it like this: No. Just, no.

The first problem with the notion is this: What parts of HP would Oracle want to own? Answer: Practically none.

First, let’s look at the condition of Oracle: Its mainline software businesses are showing healthy returns, while its hardware business, built on the foundation of Sun Microsystems, the IT hardware concern it acquired last year for $7 billion, is ramping up to full speed. But here’s a fundamental truth: Software carries a higher profit margin than hardware, so when software companies buy hardware companies, they can’t avoid seeing their overall profitability erode.

Consider Oracle’s operating margin during its fiscal fourth quarter — its seasonally strongest quarter — during the last three years. In 2009, before the Sun deal was closed, it was 43.4 percent. In 2010, after the Sun deal was closed, it was 38.3 percent. In 2011 it was 41.6 percent. And during Oracle’s most recent conference call, CFO Safra Catz said Oracle hopes to get back to “pre-Sun” operating margins soon.

Now let’s look at HP and its operating margins: In its most recent quarter ended July, HP’s enterprise, storage and networking business turned in operating margins of 13 percent, which were down from 14 percent in the prior year’s period. The story was the same in practically every other HP business unit: Operating margins in services fell from 15.7 percent to 13 percent; in software they fell from 28 percent to 19.7 percent; imaging and printing margins fell to 14.6 percent from 16.9 percent. The only place they increased was the personal systems group — the PC unit that’s being considered for a spinoff — where they grew year on year from 4.7 percent to 5.9 percent.

Conclusion: Owning HP would do nothing good for Oracle’s profitability, especially at a moment when the stated goal is to nudge them up.

There’s more. As Mark L. Moerdler, an analyst at Bernstein Research, argued in a research note to clients on Sept. 26, software accounts for about 2 percent of revenue at HP. And what software it has is not the type that Oracle typically likes. When Oracle does acquisitions, it grabs companies that make applications that plug holes in its own product portfolio. The majority of HP’s software offerings — Autonomy nothwithstanding — deal with infrastructure management, not exactly a priority for Oracle. It is, however, a business where IBM and Computer Associates participate.

And there are two historically important business units at HP that would be outliers at Oracle: PCs and printers. Oracle has no interest in either one, and it’s hard to see that changing. Combined they make up more than half of HP’s annual revenue. In the hands of Oracle, they would probably end up being spun out, either together or separately, but why buy a whole company only to chop off more than half of it — a half that’s shrinking at that — at what would have to be unfavorable terms.

Let’s not forget the valuation estimate of HP’s $40 billion PC business: Analysts have expected that a hypothetical buyer might pay as little as $8 billion for it, or about one-fifth trailing revenue. Why go to all that trouble?

Further: Why would Oracle buy a company that’s roughly one-quarter exposed to the consumer market. Sure, HP has a retail distribution network that’s the envy of the PC industry. But Oracle would rather sell those retailers systems to help them manage their businesses, not the PCs they in turn resell at razor-thin margins.

If that’s not enough, then there’s one key bit about HP that Oracle would actively dislike. HP, by virtue of being the biggest distributor of Windows-based PCs and servers, is the world’s largest reseller of Microsoft Windows. If there’s anything more utterly antithetical to Oracle’s core values than helping put money in Microsoft’s pocket, I haven’t heard of it.

Finally, there’s the issue of cash. Even in its weakened state, HP is trading at a market cap of $45 billion and change. Assuming a premium for the whole thing, that pushes a hypothetical price tag to $60 billion. That’s too rich, even for Oracle, whose balance sheet as of Aug. 31 contained a combined $31.6 billion in cash and marketable securities. It would have to take on a tremendous amount of debt — amounting to 82 percent of fiscal 2011 sales — to get such a deal started, let alone closed.

HP’s directors and shareholders can rest easy. They have many worries about the Silicon Valley icon and the troubles in which it finds itself. But being acquired by Oracle isn’t one of them.

Gone is the webOS hardware business acquired with Palm last year, though the WebOS software business remains alive and well for now. The business of selling phones and tablets was unceremoniously killed in a move reminiscent of Cisco Systems’s decision to kill its Flip video camera business. At least we know why: As AllThingsD reported exclusively Tuesday night, sales of HP’s TouchPad have been embarrassingly bad, particularly at Best Buy.

Soon to be going — either spun off or sold — is HP’s consumer PC business. Exactly what will happen there is anyone’s guess. Will HP create an independent company or sell it? If it’s to be a sale, the smart money says that Samsung would be a possible buyer, and sources have told AllThingsD that HP was shopping the PC business around Asia earlier this year. But there are several reasons that HP would choose to follow the model of Motorola and spin the unit off into an independent company. As CEO Léo Apotheker said on the conference call, all options are on the table, including a spinoff sale to another company, sale to private equity, or even no transaction at all. The reason for making today’s “strategic options” announcement is that it frees up management and the board of directors to take a deep dive and look at what’s best. My guess: Bet on a spinoff.

My notes from the conference call are below.

2:01 pm: And so we’re waiting for the conference call to start. Lots of soothing music to keep our minds off all the questions reeling in our heads.

Among those questions: What kind of transaction can we expect for Hewlett-Packard’s PC unit? A spinoff or a sale? Will it include the enterprise PC business as well as the consumer PC business?

Was there ever any attempt to sell the webOS assets? What about the webOS and Palm-related portfolio of patents? I bet those are pretty valuable right now. Will HP sell them or keep them?

The call is underway.

Léo will be speaking shortly.

2:05 pm: And here’s Léo.

Today is all about driving shareholder value and addressing the challenges in our business. I’ve been CEO for nine months and made some tough decisions. There are four elements to the path forward.

Consumers are changing the use of the PC, and sales of the TouchPad are not meeting expectations. (Where have I heard that before?)

The plan to separate PSG is to sharpen HP’s focus on cloud and other services. There are tactical issues to consider. We are still facing headwinds, stemming from the Japan earthquake, in the printing business.

There is a clear secular movement in the consumer PC space. The tablet effect is real, and the TouchPad is not gaining momentum in the marketplace.

For our PC business to function properly, it needs to be able to make decisions that are best for itself. We anticipate we will take 12 to 18 months to complete this process.

Additionally, we have been tracking the progress of webOS. We were successful at launching software that was praised. We are exploring options of how best to optimize the webOS assets in the future. The devices aren’t getting traction. Continuing to execute in this market space is no longer in HP’s interest. The webOS hardware business will be shut down by Q4.

Now on to services. The transformation will be a multiquarter journey. We are focused on addressing sales delivery and other challenges.

He’s now announcing John Visentin as the head of Enterprise Services. He’s an IBM veteran and has previously run Enterprise Services. He’s Ann Livermore’s replacement, and thus has big shoes to fill.

Now on to tactical challenges. In business critical services, we think the Itanium platform is the best in the industry. We are fully committed. We are doing everythying we can, including pursuing legal action against Oracle’s “anticompetitive behavior.” (Long story, but you can read several posts I’ve written about this.)

Fourth: Adding more value-added intellectual property. More software. More big data. More cloud.

2:14 pm: A good example is the acquisition of Vertica.

And now he’s talking about the acquisition of Autonomy. Here are the financials: This is a milestone, because there is a very real need to address the explosion of structured and unstructured data.

HP will pay $42.11 per share, though Léo is giving the amounts in British pounds.

2:17 pm: In 2010, Autonomy had gross margins in the high 80 percent range, and operating margins in the 40-plus percent range. Autonomy will continue to operate separately.

As an executive who has spent most of my career in software, it is a world I know well. We believe this transaction will unlock synergies across multiple industry verticals. We are building a strong HP software business.

We are focusing on what needs to be fixed, shut down and considered for separation.

A comment on guidance. I am lowering the Q4 guidance in order to be realistic about where we are. I don’t take this action lightly. I know our investors don’t like being in that position, and neither do I.

I am taking ownership for these actions and investments as we shape the new HP.

Cathie Lesjak, CFO, is now speaking and doing the numbers. “This is the toughest guidance in my career as CFO.”

Company gross margin of 23.3 percent was down 70 basis points year on year. Printing and webOS posted lower gross margins, which were offset by favorable commodity environments.

Generated $3 billion in earnings from operations, down 14 percent sequentially and down from $3.4 billion a year ago.

HP repurchased $4.6 billion of shares.

Segment info: Personal systems, revenue of $9.6 billion, down three percent from prior year.

Commercial client revenue grew nine percent, led by workstations. Consumer down 17 percent. Ouch. Desktops and notebooks equally affected by drop in consumer demand.

Lesjak says webOS ran a loss. Clearly, the sell-through wasn’t what was expected. It quickly became clear that pricing parity wouldn’t generate demand. The price cuts had added incremental cost to our model. We took a five-cent charge to EPS. We would expect a bigger loss in Q4.

To make this a financial success would create more risk without certain returns. We will explore options for strategic value of the software. (Hint hint, webOS software is for sale. Again.)

Now on to the printing business. Three million Web-connected printers sold. Sell-through is slowing in supplies. Supplies business tends to follow the economy. Expect a revenue and margin impact for the next few quarters.

Still more troubles from Japanese currency and the rise in the yen. Expect that to continue, too.

Our services transformation is a four- to six-quarter journey.

Industry standard servers: We expect to show share gains, though we expect growth to slow. HP remains number one in blade services.

Revenue decline in business critical servers is down nine percent because of the legal mess with Oracle.

3PAR sales continue to accelerate. Seems it was worth taking on that bidding war with Dell last year.

Balance sheet: Total gross cash of $13 billion. Looks like the Autonomy deal is going to consume $11 billion of that, if I read the presentation of that deal correctly.

Long-term EPS commitment is now gone. I think Lesjak said it was $7.14 in EPS by 2014. I may have mangled that. Whatever, they’re not going to make it now, anyway.

Q4 EPS expected at 44 to 55 cents a share.

Léo is back. This is about a transformation of HP for a new future. HP is at a critical point in its existence. These changes are fundamental. The changes will transform HP. The transformation starts today.

And here’s the Q&A. Should be interesting.

2:39 pm: Morgan Stanley. Can you talk about which customer segments and geos weakened in July, and which ones will weaken in October?

Léo: A summary of this — we saw our business in Asia grow, and if you look at the other two regions, they declined in constant currency. On a rough basis, consumer PCs declined while commercial increased. We had good performance in ESSN. But public sector, which is 10 percent of business, is being impacted by budget constraints on both sides of the Atlantic.

Lesjak: We had a back end loaded quarter, but it was softer that we expected in July.

Barclays asks about services: Did you cut enough when you bought EDS? Is 12.5 percent margins low enough?

Léo: We are making progress on services. One thing we are focused on is growing the top line. We didn’t do it. We now have a leader for this business. What we are trying to achieve is a much better mix, from the execution standpoint. We can increase our coverage and bench in application and services. We are engaged in a systematic account review, so we are optimizing value.

Lesjak: I said 12.5 percent. We are affected by the weakness in public sector, and also by business critical systems. (There’s the Itanium fight with Oracle rearing its head again. -Ed.)

Citigroup ask about the synergies between printers and enterprise business. How do you feel about keeping printers and enterprise together?

Léo: IPG, the printing unit, is important to HP. It has been leading the disruption of the analog printing market.

IPG has the opportunity to reinforce its strengths. We are driving our document- and content-management solutions. With the acquisition we announced today, we will be able to provide IPG with additional intellectual property.

Sanford Bernstein asks about Autonomy. You are paying a fantastic price. He’s worrying that HP is overpaying for Autonomy at a time when HP’s stock is at a historic low. It’s going to cost you 15 percent of your market cap. Also it’s going to eat into the cash position.

Léo: Let me start by making sure everyone understands what Autonomy represents. It will allow us to lead a large and growing space, enterprise information management. It will help customers manager the explosion of information. It will position HP in a large and growing space. It will provide differentiated IP for services. It will give IPG a base for content management.

Léo: Autonomy has grown its revenue at compound annual growth rate of 55 percent over three years. We think we can extract a lot more out of it by combining it with HP.

Lesjak is speaking about cash. We have repurchased $15.6 billion worth of shares. We would spend to rebuild our balance sheet, and will moderate share buybacks.

2:49 pm: Cross Research on Personal Systems Group: Why not spin it off now? And also on webOS. What about the plan (announced at D) for putting webOS in PCs?

Léo: What the board and management team have been working on is to look at our options, and what the board has decided to do is look at all the options. This will allow us to look at it much more closely. Over time, a decision will crystallize. All I can say now. We will refrain from commenting further. On webOS software business, we are looking at all our strategic options regarding the software. The software has been received very well. We will be looking at all of the options to third parties, to others who need this kind of option. Licensing or other possibilities, to extract value from webOS.

Wow.

Goldman Sachs question: How should we think about strategic actions versus the need for further cost reductions, in light of the view that there’s been an underinvestment in prior years?

Léo: He’s not taking the bait to repeat the “Blame Hurd” message from last quarter.

BMO’s Keith Bachman, whose downgrade caused so much share-value loss yesterday, asks about the growth prospects at Autonomy.

Léo: When you analyze the numbers of Autonomy, they have been executing a shift to software as a service, or cloud services. They are one of the few traditional license-based companies who have executed such a successful transaction. Roughly one-third of revenues are cloud-based. Not going to talk about forward growth rates.

Raymond James: On PC, you’ve talked about strong return on capital in that business. Can you talk about what changed?

Léo: One of the reasons we announced today was so that we can study. We are going to look at all of our options, and also want to make sure everyone understands that all options are possible, including a nontransaction. Which means they may not ultimately sell the PC unit.

2:56 pm: Stifel Nicolaus asks: Operating profitability for two segments: Enterprise seems to be at 13 percent, which is below previous guidance. And the same question to imaging and printer, now 14.7 percent, though having supply-chain problems.

Lesjak: The macro picture has deteriorated since last quarter. We saw softness in Europe and Americas. Also there’s the lower mix of systems in Business Critical Systems. (Another reference to the Oracle fight.)

Another question, though I didn’t catch the firm that asked: Is there scope to cut more costs at HP at the group level?

Léo: How are we performing compared to peers? In fact, we are actually competing rather well. Our market share across the vast majority are stable, or in a few cases we have eked out gains. Are there any specific issues affecting our business in particular? We are facing macro trends. What HP is facing are essentially the following things: We are being challenged on business critical systems. We have an issue in printing, which was impacted by Japan. Overall, we have one issue that we want to tackle, and that’s our productivity in the salesforce. We are going to create a unified platform for the salesforce to go to market. We are now going to have a regular cadence and discipline around managing major accounts in this company.

3:01 pm: UBS question. How much of the $332 million in operating losses is related to webOS? How long is the leash to lower the losses or get to break-even?

Lesjak: We remain at the operating expenses of one to two cents a quarter.

A question from Jeffries about free cash flow. Can you give us an understanding of the cash balance? Also, do we have any bullet payments? Also around Autonomy: If it’s going to be independent, but if you see synergies, how will you integrate it?

Léo: Yes, we will run Autonomy as a separate entity. Of course we will be looking for synergies as quickly as possible. First off, we will give Autonomy access to our channels. We will be working across our softare teams and theirs. IPG is one case. There are other things we can do with ESSN, as you can imagine.

Lesjak: We ended with $13 billion in gross cash. With our lower top-line expectation, and the cash charges related to webOS shutdown, that is putting downward pressure on cash flow. We expect free cash flow for the year of $8 billion.

3:04 pm: Question from Gleacher about storage. What will drive that business to higher growth rates?

Léo: Our storage business is going through a mix shift. 3PAR is growing triple digits year over year. We are in the early days of the P6000(?) launch.

Lesjak: 3PAR revenue is up triple digits on a normalized basis.

ISI question: If PSG transition could take a year, do you expect disruptions in PSG revenue?

Léo: I just want to be sure that people understand that PSG will be managed in a normal manner. The team and employees and everyone will continue as if we are a normal day-to-day business. That is the expectation that we have. I’m sure we can manage whatever transition happens.

One more question, from RBC Capital: Can’t hear it well. Sorry, RBC.

And that’s a wrap.

Related posts

• Hewlett-Packard Says Goodbye to PCs, webOS
• HP Pulls Plug on webOS Hardware, Leaves OS Future in Doubt
• HP And webOS: But They Seemed So Happy Together!
• Liveblogging HP’s “Everything Including the Kitchen Sink” Conference Call
• HP’s Apotheker: We Struck Out with WebOS, but Maybe Someone Else Wants a Swing?
• Viral Video: Like Palm’s Creepy Naked Lady, TouchPad’s Floating Celeb Heads Get the HP Boot
• Licensing webOS May Not Be Much of an Option for HP
• Hewlett-Packard’s PC Business: What Happens Next?
• Worth More Dead Than Alive: Could HP Turn a Profit on Palm’s Patents?
• With HP’s Raising of the World’s Biggest White Flag, Will Jon Rubinstein and Todd Bradley Surrender Too?

While Dell’s per-share earnings were 54 cents, about five cents ahead of the consensus, sales were $15.66 billion, a full $100 million shy of what analysts expected. Worse, Dell said it expects revenue in the third quarter to be “roughly flat” relative to the second quarter, which it said would be consistent with typical seasonal patterns seen over the last two years.

There’s more: Dell slashed its sales growth outlook for the year. It said it now expects revenue to grow in a range of one to five percent, down from its previous range of five to nine percent.

CEO Michael Dell tried to reassure investors of an eventual turnaround in a statement: “We continue to see great momentum in the high-growth areas of our business, which is a direct reflection of the discipline and strong execution our global Dell team is applying to help solve real-world challenges for our customers. We’re creating efficiency across every step of the IT value chain and ultimately enabling all customers — from home users to large businesses and government organizations — to achieve the outcomes that matter most to them.”

It wasn’t enough to calm skittish investors: Dell shares initially fell as much as six percent on the news, and are as of 1:25 pm Pacific Time trading down 4.2 percent, or 64 cents.

The new authorization comes on top of another $10 billion authorized last year, of which about $4 billion has been used.

As of April 30, HP had $12.7 billion in cash. The company says it will use the authorization “from time to time” to buy shares back “opportunistically,” or when the share price is low, and to offset dilution created by employee stock plans.

HP shares rose 95 cents, or more than 2.5 percent, closing at $36.23 during the regular session, and rose further in after-hours trading after the filing became public. The shares have fallen by 14 percent since the start of the year.

Of those leaving the company, 2,100 are taking a voluntary retirement buyout package that’s been made available to people whose age and years of service add up to a sum of 50 60. For example, an employee 40 50 years old with 10 years at Cisco would be eligible. An additional 4,400 will lose their jobs outright, but will no doubt receive severance packages. The remaining 5,000 or so are employees of a Cisco plant in Mexico that is being sold to Foxconn, the Taiwanese contract manufacturer. They will become Foxconn employees.

These reductions are the third significant step in what’s expected to be a four-step process, spearheaded by CEO John Chambers, to get Cisco on a leaner, more competitive and more profitable path. Analysts are, so far, fairly positive on the cuts.

Brian Marshall of Gleacher & Co. in San Francisco, who last week predicted that Cisco would cut 5,000, gave a tentative thumbs-up to the move. Cisco’s goal throughout the process has been to take out $1 billion in annual operating costs. Marshall says that it looks like Cisco could do better than that: He thinks the cuts could yield $1.7 billion in savings and add 25 cents in per-share earnings to the bottom line in 2012.

Breaking it down, he says the 6,500 jobs cut could result in $1.3 billion in savings from retirements and firings, assuming a cost of about $200,000 per head. The sale of the facility in Mexico will yield about $400 million in reduced cost of goods sold (COGS).

The next step, which Marshall expects in September, will be for Cisco to recalibrate its long-term financial expectations. Long accustomed to telling Wall Street to expect in the 12 to 17 percent range, the more realistic range for Cisco, Marshall says, is now closer to 10 percent, plus or minus a few points. Gross margin expectations will have to come down, too, to about 25 percent, down from a range of 28 to 31 percent.

Shaw Wu of Sterne Agee in San Francisco called the reductions “painful but necessary.” He notes that Silicon Valley hiring has been pretty strong of late and that those Cisco folks losing their jobs should have little trouble finding work at companies like Facebook, Apple or Google, though I’d suggest that Hewlett-Packard’s up-and-coming networking unit or Juniper will be eager to pick up some Cisco talent.

On the sale of the factory to Foxconn, Wu sees Cisco as winding up for a spin-off of the set-top box business. “We view the Foxconn transaction as effectively a restructuring of its lower margin set-top box business and think ironically, could make a potential future spin-off easier with the manufacturing detached.”

Update: A few of you have written to say my initial characterization of the retirement package terms was incorrect. The required sum of age plus years of service is 60, not 50. Sorry about that.

Having closed on Friday at $14.97, the price of Cisco shares is nearing its lowest point in about five years (Cisco hit $14.18 in March of 2009). CEO John Chambers has blamed toughening competition in its main networking business, lower profit margins resulting from a product transition and a drop in government spending for many of its troubles. A significant restructuring is coming some time before the end of the summer that will combine offering retirement packages to eligible employees and laying off others. It’s also possible that other parts of Cisco’s business may be sold, spun off or shut down.

Chambers’ plan is to trim Cisco’s operating costs by $1 billion a year. Meanwhile, the video business that Chambers constantly talks about is starting to get interesting and competitive, and other products, like its blade servers, are starting to show some traction. And by the way, the Internet isn’t exactly getting smaller, you know.

Whatever it is, it better happen soon, Wu says, because investors are getting impatient. “In sum, we believe Cisco is fixable and not structurally flawed, but admit we need to see more dramatic steps be taken,” he writes.

While some investors have been calling for Chambers to step down, Wu isn’t with them. “From an investor standpoint, most believe that Cisco will be very difficult to turn around and that a management change is needed. While we do not believe that John Chambers needs to go, as we believe he has proven to be one of the greatest managers and visionaries of the modern era, we do believe he needs to make bigger moves than what has been done so far.” One suggestion? Boost the dividend to 3 percent from its current 1.6 percent.

Also? Cisco may have to take some “bitter medicine” on the price of its switches and other networking gear. Many Cisco customers and its channel resellers told Wu that Cisco’s prices are too high when compared to competitors, and that it may be pricing itself out of the market. “Many believe that Cisco still deserves a premium, but 50 to 100 percent seems a bit excessive,” he writes. “Because of this, we believe Cisco will likely need to take the bitter medicine of lower gross margin for longer-term good.” He cut his assumptions on Cisco’s gross margin accordingly from about 62 percent to a little higher than 55 percent.

That said, most of the the bad news at Cisco is priced in, making its depressed price a fair buying opportunity, he says. “We believe the Cisco story is getting better, and we’d rather be a buyer at these depressed levels than wait for obvious evidence of improvement. By then it may be too late.”

Wu still rates Cisco shares a buy, with a price target of $25, which is a drop from his previous target of $29. He also lowered his fiscal year 2012 estimates on Cisco’s revenue and per-share earnings to $45.9 billion and $1.50 per share, from $46.5 billion and $1.80 a share. The new target price represents a multiple of 12.5 times Cisco’s projected calendar year earnings of $1.62.

Wu also thinks Cisco will start setting more realistic expectations going forward, and back away from its projecting a long-term annual growth rate of 12 to 17 percent, which, he says, “no one believed anyway.”

Given all that, Cisco’s close to turning the corner, he says, though it won’t happen right away. “We realize that Cisco may take a few quarters in fixing itself, but we believe management will make the right moves in restoring investor creditability.”

(Image borrowed from the 1938 Warner Bros. classic animated short, Porky In Wackyland.)

Analysts had been calling for Sirius to break even in its fourth quarter on revenue of $740 million. Instead it reported a loss of $81.4 million, or two cents a share, on revenue of $735.9 million. The reason for the miss: An increase in operating expenses and $85.4 million in debt-extinguishment losses.

Unfortunate. Still, the company’s latest financials weren’t without some good news. Sirius added 328,789 new subscribers in the fourth quarter, up from 257,028 in the fourth quarter of 2009. And it ended 2010 with 20.2 million subscribers, 8 percent more than the 18.8 million it claimed at the end of 2009, and well above its target of 20.1 million.

Today’s the day we find out whether Cisco has successfully navigated the turbulence, and how bad the air pockets truly were. So far, the indications suggest that Cisco is starting to fly clear of the trouble. The consensus of analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial calls for Cisco to report per-share earnings of 35 cents on sales of $10.24 billion.

Barclays Capital analyst Jeff Kvaal wrote in a research note issued Monday that Cisco’s end markets look healthy. Telecom carriers and Internet service providers are spending, and you see that reflected in reports from Juniper, which show sales to service providers up 24 percent, and in AT&T’s optimistic capital spending outlook. Meanwhile, growth in enterprise spending is holding steady as companies improve their networks. And in the end, Cisco’s guidance for sales to grow 3 to 5 percent may prove a tad conservative, meaning those air pockets may not have been as entirely bad as originally thought.

The good news for Armstrong is that he has now conditioned Wall Street to expect these drops, as he works on a turnaround effort that began in the spring of 2009.

And because some of the ad drop is “self-inflicted”–the result of AOL’s decision to focus on quantity instead of quality as it revamps its ad team and strategy–it’s possible to add a more positive spin to the data. For instance: AOL’s domestic display ads, where the company has the most control of results, are only down 8 percent.

Armstrong’s vision is that eventually his company will once again be one of the industry’s top players: “AOL’s goal is to be competitive with Google and Facebook,” he said during his earnings call this morning. “We’re not trying to be competitive with people farther down the chain.”

Okay. But when? Today Armstrong announced that he expects AOL’s ad sales to mirror the broader industry’s by the second half of 2011. That will be more than two years after he took over.

Then again, you can argue that AOL languished within Time Warner’s grasp for the past 10 years. By comparison, that’s a reasonably speedy turnaround–and bear in mind that any Internet turnaround is a very rare thing.

So here’s the question: Will Wall Street wait to find out if he can do it?

—————
EARLIER:

A quick first look at AOL’s Q3: Revenue of $563 million and adjusted earnings of $0.93 a share. The Street was looking for $557 million and adjusted earnings of $0.50 per share.

AOL’s ad slump continues, though Wall Street expected that: Ad revenue was down 27 percent this quarter, and display ads were down 14 percent. Domestic display was down 8 percent.

Things to look for in the company’s financials and during its conference call this morning: Most important, an update on its attempt to turn around its ad sales unit, which has been a mess–analysts are still expecting AOL to post a substantial ad sales decline this quarter; additional news about the company’s renewed search pact with Google; and perhaps insight into Tim Armstrong’s M&A plans following a shopping spree that included TechCrunch and 5Min.

AOL says it spent $97 million on TechCrunch, 5Min and Thing Labs, and that it could spend up to $23 million more on earnouts/retention bonuses over the next three years. $65 million of that total went to 5Min.

Here’s what AOL’s ad story looks like, quarter by quarter:

And here’s what AOL wants you to think about as you evaluate its ad decline–moves it has made on its own that will cut down sales in the short term, like its decision to more or less shutter its European operations.

I’ll update with notes following the company’s 8 am earnings call.

Yesterday, BoomTown began grading the performance of Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz, after she gave herself a B- for overall performance for the year since she took over the troubled Internet giant.

But I decided to be more specific, splitting the grades into five categories: Management, financials, product innovation, deal-making and moxie.

For management, I gave Bartz an A-, because she has been a definite improvement on previous leadership in terms of decision-making, speed and essentially grabbing the mantle of control firmly from the start.

Some thought I was too generous and others thought the grade should have been an A+. Which means it was just about right!

Today, let’s look at financials–by which I mean Yahoo’s fiscal performance and its stock price.

In this regard, Bartz only gets a C++ (it’s a techie joke, get it?).

I could have given her a B- here, I guess, but–to me–C+ simply means financials have remained in a holding zone under Bartz, so she does not deserve to be completely decried, or applauded either.

Why? Well, let’s start with the stock.

While Yahoo (YHOO) shares are up about 38 percent for the year, which is a good thing, they still lag those of other Internet companies, as well as the market.

In the same period, the Nasdaq was up about 44 percent, Google’s stock has doubled and Microsoft (MSFT) shares are also up a lot more.

In an interview with Bloomberg recently, Bartz claimed that Yahoo was in the “penalty box” with investors–a hangover from former management, presumably–and this is the reason for its weaker stock gain.

Whatever. But Bartz has been the CEO for a year and Wall Street is still holding out. Thus, she has to fully take the blame instead of pointing at the previous administration.

In other words, former CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang and the Yangtanic are ancient history. So, all is forgiven, Jerry (call me!).

Bartz also blamed the recession for Yahoo’s continued revenue decline in 2009, about 12 percent overall in the most recent quarter.

She told Bloomberg, “We came out of one of the worst climates ever. And if you look at growth of Fortune 500 companies, only being down 12 or 15 percent is damn good. I’m not going to apologize for our growth.”

Again, whatever. But she runs a company in a high-growth industry and is not selling hams or socks, so perhaps bragging that being down 12 to 15 percent is “damn good” is a bit of a stretch.

(Microsoft certainly did not crow over its 14 percent decline in revenue in the most recent quarter even though it beat expectations, and its fiscal results rely a lot on something that does get profoundly affected–namely, sales of PCs–in a recession.)

Specifically, in the third quarter, Yahoo’s search advertising revenue was off 19 percent, and display was off eight percent at “Owned and Operated” sites on Yahoo.

Google, in contrast, reported a seven percent rise in its third-quarter results, and its execs projected a mood of smooth sailing ahead and no more econalypse. Financial performance at Amazon (AMZN) was also way up, as it was at Netflix (NFLX) and Apple (AAPL).

Still, Yahoo’s fiscal performance relies a lot on premium branded advertising, so it has remained weaker and will do so until the economy really comes back.

Many analysts are predicting exactly that, with double-digit sales growth in this area ahead.

And Yahoo’s bottom line is likely to get a boost when its costs are off-loaded to Microsoft, as part of the search and advertising partnership Bartz struck with the software giant earlier this year. The deal awaits regulatory approval, which is likely, and will then start to kick in later in the year.

Still, a dark cloud hangs ominously over the persistent search share declines Yahoo has suffered, which Bartz and others attribute to loss of toolbar and other distribution deals that Google (GOOG) and Microsoft picked up.

But query growth rates are also down and that’s a red flag, especially since Microsoft and Google are up a lot.

Nonetheless, depending on how these various parts of Yahoo revenue sort themselves out, along with Bartz’s cost-cutting, Yahoo’s bottom line is most likely to look better in the quarters ahead, so the stock could certainly go up quickly.

And so could her financial grade. Bartz is well known for being great at managing the bottom line and Wall Street expectations, so I suspect it is top of mind for her.

That said, once that registers, everyone will then be looking for not just a return to normal, but for actual growth.

And that can only come from product innovation–the name of the game in Silicon Valley–which is what will be on the grading block Monday.

Three months after Intel CEO Paul Otellini announced that the PC market had reached bottom, the company’s latest financials, which handily beat expectations, seem to have proven him right. “The worst is now behind us,” he said. And the tech economy is showing signs of muted recovery.

The question is: Is that recovery sustainable?

The answer, according to Otellini, is yes. “The second quarter was clearly better than we expected,” he told analysts on a conference call. “Customers signaled increased confidence in their ordering patterns.” After months of global recession, Otellini noted that the company’s second-quarter results “reflect improving conditions” in the PC market.

“Intel is seeing a firming up in demand,” he added. “It’s encouraging news for the industry.”

Indeed. Intel is a bellwether for the tech sector; as goes Intel, so goes the industry. So, if Intel says demand is beginning to return to normal seasonal patterns, then the industry may truly be stabilizing. That said, there’s still quite a bit of economic volatility–enough to suggest that it might be wise not to read too much into Intel’s performance.

Said analysts at JP Morgan: “Although the Intel quarter was clearly spectacular on all fronts, we continue to believe the upside was driven by inventory replenishment as we have not seen any evidence of increasing PC demand.”

Shares of Intel (INTC) are trading up 6.77 percent at $17.97 this morning.

Three months after Intel CEO Paul Otellini announced that the PC market had reached bottom, the company’s latest financials, which handily beat expectations, seem to have proven him right. “The worst is now behind us,” he said. And the tech economy is showing signs of muted recovery.

The question is: Is that recovery sustainable?

The answer, according to Otellini, is yes. “The second quarter was clearly better than we expected,” he told analysts on a conference call. “Customers signaled increased confidence in their ordering patterns.” After months of global recession, Otellini noted that the company’s second-quarter results “reflect improving conditions” in the PC market.

“Intel is seeing a firming up in demand,” he added. “It’s encouraging news for the industry.”

Indeed. Intel is a bellwether for the tech sector; as goes Intel, so goes the industry. So, if Intel says demand is beginning to return to normal seasonal patterns, then the industry may truly be stabilizing. That said, there’s still quite a bit of economic volatility–enough to suggest that it might be wise not to read too much into Intel’s performance.

Said analysts at JP Morgan: “Although the Intel quarter was clearly spectacular on all fronts, we continue to believe the upside was driven by inventory replenishment as we have not seen any evidence of increasing PC demand.”

Shares of Intel (INTC) are trading up 6.77 percent at $17.97 this morning.

However…

Looking ahead, Salesforce (CRM) said its current quarter would miss analysts’ estimates, and it reduced its full-year revenue outlook, saying sales will fall between $1.25 billion and $1.27 billion. The Street, which had been looking for $1.3 billion, was not at all happy with that and promptly sent the company’s shares down 7.6 percent.

And at this point, the company clearly has to do something. Its last financials were grotesque and the ones to come promise to be little different. The “transformation” Sony began four years ago is still a work in progress, arguably one that’s been stalled for some time now. Once an electronics powerhouse, Sony (SNE) is now a laggard in many of the markets it once dominated: videogame consoles, digital music players and TVs. “The prices of digital home appliances have been declining by 15% to 20% every year lately,” said Sony spokesperson Mami Imada. “Unless we cut costs we cannot hope to survive the price competition.”

All in all, a very impressive showing. Certainly, investors were agog over RIM’s financials. Shares in the company spiked on the news, rising more that 20 percent to $59.37 in after-hours trading. “This is wildly better than people were looking for,” said Duncan Stewart, analyst at DSAM Consulting in Toronto. “Getting improvement in both margin and growth at the same is a rare thing.”