Skip to main content

Global Sourcing: TCS to snatch Citigroup BPO under IBM's nose!

CGSL is mostly into transaction processing and call centre processing which suits TCS. The Tata group company pulled out of Intelenet, a third party BPO backed by Blackstone, as it wanted to exit from the voice-based BPO sector. Its MD S. Ramadorai had earlier said that Intelenet’s focus did not fit into TCS’ BPO strategy which was focussed on transaction processing, e-mail processing and call centre processing.

Both Citigroup and TCS declined to comment on the development. “At Citi, we follow the policy of not commenting on market rumours and speculation. Accordingly, we are unable to respond to your request.” said a Citi spokesperson in an e-mailed response. A TCS spokesperson said “As a policy, TCS does not comment on market speculation.”

IBM was the other contender for the captive BPO unit, said another source. IBM was also believed to be keen on acquiring Citos, the technology and infrastructure outsourcing arm of Citigroup. “ But Citi intends to sell CGSL first. And IBM found the pricing for CGSL too high”, the source said.


Source
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more