My point is simply that it is extremely difficult to extrapolate overall value from demand alone. I see this mistake being made time and time again, and not just with Juniper/Cisco, but also with Windows vs. UNIX, or things like that.
Besides, I would also add 2 points to the equation: #1) The problem with looking just a job boards to gauge demand. The simple fact is, most jobs are not publicly advertised. Surely you've seen the studies from CNN that have shown that 90% of all available jobs are never publicly posted, and are obtained just by knowing the right people and employee referrals. Companies seem to prefer things this way because it is a better quality-check than soliciting a mass of resumes (i.e., an employee is unlikely to refer somebody that he knows to be bad because if that guy is hired and flames out, that employee would be professionally embarrassed). How this impacts something like Juniper (or UNIX or whatever) is that it seems that the high-end jobs are more likely to not be publicly posted because it seems that the more high-end and important the job (and on average, a Juniper job tends to be higher-end than the average Cisco job), the more quality-checks you need. I believe this is why you hardly ever see public postings for positions like CEO, even though I know that many companies are looking for one. #2) The warping of small numbers. This is somewhat related to point #1. What this is all about is that when the numbers of available candidates are small, it is often inefficient to publicly post a job for them, rather a company who wants one should just individually contact each available candidate, depending on how many there really are. For example, let's say your local NFL team loses its quarterback in mid-season to a season-ending injury and decides they need a replacement to make a playoff run. Are they going to advertise it on Monster? No, of course not. The head coach knows full well that there are only a handful of available guys in the world who could reasonably step in and lead their team, and the coach probably already knows them by name and how to contact them. There's no need to publicly advertise a job when you already know who the prospective candidates are. This might apply to the JNCIE. I don't know if it does, but it might. Consider this. There are only 65 of them. Within a day or two of investigating, I could probably find out all their names and contact info, because there really aren't that many of them. So would I really need to publicly advertise my job? Maybe, maybe not. I think only when the numbers get large do the benefits of publicly posting become apparent. ""Wes Stevens"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > nrf, you and Peter both make good points on what is advertized on the job > sites may not tell the whole Juniper job story. The supply may well be low > enough that there are jobs to be found. Still I would think that there would > be some jobs advertized. Even a search on Dice for just Juniper did not turn > up much. A few jobs for a C++ person with Juniper skills and a few low level > type jobs was all. It really does not matter for most of us as there is no > way to get that cert unless you work on Juniper equipment at work. Building > your own Juniper lab at home is not realistic. > > By the way Juniper is looking like they will come in with sales in the $540m > range down almost 40% from last year and most analysts are saying carrier > spending will not pick up until the second half of 2002. > > > >From: "nrf" > >Reply-To: "nrf" > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: How do I approach the company about my CCIE [7:40261] > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 01:26:55 -0400 > > > >Inline > > > > > > > >""Wes Stevens"" wrote in message > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Peter I have been following and trading Juniper stock for years. In the > > > beginning everyone loved it because it was so focused - just high end > > > routers. Two things came together in 2000 to help them grow sales 6x > >over > > > 1999 one was the massive build out of the telcos and the other was the > >fact > > > that they had a year lead on cisco for delivering 192 interfaces. In > >2001 > > > the telco's started cutting back and juniper sales growth went to up 32 > >%, > > > but all of it came in the first half. Since mid year last year sales > >have > > > been dropping qtr over qtr. The biggest reason is the same reason the > > > analysts used to love it - focused only on the high end telco market. > >Well > > > the telco's are in a world of trouble. They are so deep in dept that > >most > > > will never climb out. Global xing bit the dust and it looks like wcom > >may > > > follow. Quest is in deep trouble too. Believe it or not the only hope > >for > >a > > > recovery in the next year is that these big guys go chapter 11 and then > > > reorg. All the investors get screwed but their debt goes away and they > >may > > > have some money to invest again. All of the major telcos cut capex for > >the > > > rest of this year and next in their first quarter report. Juniper's also > >has > > > to deal with cisco now as they are going after that same market and have > > > taken share away in the last year. This will be especially a problem in > > > markets outside the us where cisco already has a presence and juniper > >does > > > not. The last two purchases by Juniper say the reconize the problem as > >they > > > are trying to broaden their product line. But they paid too much for > > > Unishere and it will be dilutive this year. > > > > > > The bottom line is that the big telcos are in real trouble and there is > > > still a lot of competition and excess capacity out there. Their capex > > > spending is going to be the last thing to recover and along with it > >Juniper. > > > > > > Another good indication is in the job market. Go to dice.com or hotjobs > >and > > > do a search on jncie and ccie and see what you get for both. > > > >Oh God, my fingers just got so itchy when you said that. I wrote an entire > >book about this on this newsgroup just a few months ago (and elicited a > >firestorm of protest for which I and many other people here still bear the > >scars). So if you want the entire spiel, go look for some of my old posts > >in the archives. > > > > > >And I think just heard a big whoosh from the guys who I sparred with in the > >past are now all collectively slapping shaking their heads because they > >realize I'm just about to get into it again. Fear not guys, I'll try to > >make it short as I possibly can, for both your and my sanity. > > > >Basically job value has to do with basic economics and how it pertains to > >the supply and demand of labor. True, there are many less Juniper jobs. > >So > >there is less demand On the other hand, there are many many less > >Juniper-trained people. You can't just look at demand. There's no such > >thing as a "law of demand". There is only "the law of supply and demand". > >You must factor in both supply and demand before you can say whether > >something is more or less valuable than something else. > > > >And from the evidence I've seen, it looks like while the demand for Juniper > >skills is obviously lower than the demand for Cisco skills, the supply of > >Juniper skills is proportionately even lower, such that the overall value > >of > >Juniper skills is higher. > > > >Or I'll put it to you another way. Doctors make more money than cashiers. > >But why? Clearly there is a greater demand for cashiers than doctors. You > >mentioned going to public places like the Internet or the newspapers and > >looking for mentions of JNCIE or CCIE. OK, I can do that for doctors and > >cashiers and I think we'll both agree that I'm going to find many many more > >mentions for cashiers than for doctors. Makes sense too. How many times > >do > >you seriously injure yourself vs. how many times do you buy something in > >the > >store? Right. So since there is clearly more demand for cashiers than > >for > >doctors, can we simply conclude that doctors are screwed and they should > >all > >be cashiers? Exactly. So what's going on here? Simple - supply and > >demand. > >Surely there is less demand for doctors. But on the other hand, there is > >corresponding even lower supply. The same thing holds for UNIX vs. > >Windows admins (UNIX admins make better money on average than Windows > >boxes, > >yet there are many fewer UNIX jobs). Lower demand is swamped by even lower > >supply. This is why diamonds (which nobody really needs except for maybe > >my > >ex, but diamonds are rare) are more expensive than, say, drinking water > >(which everybody needs, but is plentiful). > > > >So how can I prove the this is also true for Juniper/JNCIE. Short answer, > >I > >can't, at least not rigorously (on the other hand, the opposite - that > >Cisco/CCIE skills are more valuable - cannot be rigorously proved either). > >I have to rely on public datapoints and extrapolate. So bear with me. > > > >There are 65 JNCIE's in the world today compared to about 7500 CCIE's. > >That's a ratio of 120:1. Therefore for the value of CCIE skills to be > >greater, the demand for CCIE skills has to greater than 120:1. Is it? > >Maybe, but I doubt it. Look at new installations. Cisco is in line to > >sell > >about $20 billion of gear this year, whereas Juniper will probably sell > >about $750 million. That's a ratio of only 27:1. Ok, true, Cisco also > >has > >a large installed base (but don't forget, Juniper also has an installed > >base > >now), so maybe I can give Cisco some credit of maybe 2X or 3X for this > >effect? OK, so now we're still talking 27 x 3= 81? Still haven't reached > >120. > > > >And on the other hand, I think Cisco should be penalized with a negative > >multiplier because much of the gear it sells is low-end and used in simple > >networks, where quite frankly you don't need a CCIE. For example, you > >don't > >need a CCIE to configure 2 routers over a T-1. Juniper's routers are, in > >contrast, generally used in more complex networks (the provider) where > >technical skill is more critical. > > > >Furthermore, much of what Cisco sells, the average CCIE has no idea how to > >use. How many CCIE's are really expert in using, say, the ONS-series of > >ADM's and DWDM stuff? Or MGX/BPX Stratacom stuff (those old-school > >WAN-CCIE's excepted)? Compare that to Juniper, where they sell just one > >line of stuff, and the JNCIE is (or really should be) proficient in all of > >them. So it's really not fair to include all of Cisco's revenue and > >installed base for a CCIE value-analysis when much of that gear consists of > >boxes that the average CCIE has no idea how to use. > > > > > >The point is simply this. You can choose to be in a market that has lots > >of > >jobs, but also lots of competition for those jobs. Or you could be in a > >market with less jobs, but less competition. Which is the right choice? > >Difficult to say, really depends on how much less jobs and how much less > >competition and so forth. But surely you can see where I'm going with > >this. > >A simplistic look at demand where you just look at the number of available > >jobs is meaningless unless you also look at the number of people who can do > >those jobs. Public sites like Monster and Hotjobs tell you about demand > >but tell you nothing about supply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Peter van Oene" > > > >Reply-To: "Peter van Oene" > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Subject: Re: How do I approach the company about my CCIE [7:40261] > > > >Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:43:09 -0400 > > > > > > > >What leads you to believe that they "will be at the tail end of the > > > >recovery?" > > > > > > > >At 09:04 PM 5/27/2002 -0400, Wes Stevens wrote: > > > > >Jenny I assume you are talking about Juniper. I really don't know > > > >anything > > > > >about their cert. The company I know pretty well. I would not want to > >be > > > > >looking for a job in this market place with only Juniper experience. > > > >Juniper > > > > >will not go away for sure, but they will be at the tail end of the > > > >recovery > > > > >at best. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > > > >Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >Subject: Re: How do I approach the company about my CCIE [7:40261] > > > > > >Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:15:12 -0400 > > > > > > > > > > > >"A CCIE is still the highest networking cert and the only one that > >is > > > >not > > > >a > > > > > > > > > > > >paper cert. " > > > > > > > > > > > >I'll save nrf the trouble of saying this. > > > > > >Highest networking cert? Arguable. Depends how you define > >"highest". > > > >But > > > > > >it's certainly not a totally unreasonable claim. Only one that is > >not > > > >a > > > > > >paper cert? Hardly. Try doing a little more research. > > > > > >However, if you substitute "Cisco" for "networking" in your > >original > > > > > >sentence, it looks far more accurate. > > > > > > > > > > > >Cisco is not the only player, or even the only significant player, > >in > > > >the > > > > > >networking game. > > > > > > > > > > > >JMcL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 28/05/2002 08:39 am > >----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Wes Stevens" > > > > > >Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >27/05/2002 11:40 pm > > > > > >Please respond to "Wes Stevens" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > cc: > > > > > > Subject: Re: How do I approach the company about my > > > >CCIE > > > > > >[7:40261] > > > > > >Is this part of a business decision process?: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >If you look at Cisco over the last 18 months compared to it's > > > >competitors > > > > > >it > > > > > >has done well. It's sales have dropped much less then most other > > > > > >networking > > > > > >companies and they have actually gained market share in all major > > > >areas. > > > > > >The > > > > > >major telco's built out way too fast and the growth did not come > >like > > > >they > > > > > > > > > > > >expected. But on the enterprise side companies took it a lot > >slower. > > > >This > > > > > >economy is starting a slow recovery. Next year things will pick up. > >It > > > > > >will > > > > > >never be like 1999 as you say, but we will get back to the point > >where > > > > > >there > > > > > >will be plenty of jobs. > > > > > > > > > > > >A CCIE is still the highest networking cert and the only one that > >is > > > >not a > > > > > > > > > > > >paper cert. We have seen a lot more numbers comming out these days, > >but > > > > > >Cisco doubled the number of lab seats in San Jose and RTP back in > > > >March. > > > > > >Add > > > > > >to that the one day lab and Sat and Sun testing and there are a lot > > > >more > > > > > >people taking the test. Cisco keeps track of the passing percent > >and > > > >will > > > > > >adjust the challenge of the lab if necessary. The other thing is we > > > > > >probably > > > > > >will see major changes in the lab before the end of the year. When > >they > > > > > >get > > > > > >rid of token ring who knows what goodies they will replace it with. > >It > > > > > >will > > > > > >take a while for the boot camps to adjust their programs to the new > > > >topics > > > > > > > > > > > >and the candidates that take the self study route will be searching > >for > > > > > >ways > > > > > >to cover the new material. There will be a big slow down for a > >while > >at > > > > > >that > > > > > >point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I guess my point is I do not see the value of the CCIE going the > >way > >of > > > > > >the > > > > > >microsoft certs. Thing will get better next year and the demand for > > > >CCIE's > > > > > > > > > > > >will raise. > > > > > > > > > > > >[snipped] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee > >and > > > >may > > > > > >contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or > > > >subject > > > > > >to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended > > > >recipient > > > > > >you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use > >or > > > > > >dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by > >several > > > > > >Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this > > > >communication > > > > > >in > > > > > >error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of > > > >this > > > > > >transmission together with any attachments. > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > > >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > > > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > _________________________________________________________________ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45450&t=40261 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
