Reading the auguries¶

The Patrician has learned that official announcements in Ankh-Morpork require careful interpretation because what is said is carefully constructed to advance the speaker’s interests while what is meant must be inferred from what is not said, how it’s said, and who benefits from particular interpretations. When the Merchants’ Guild announces “unprecedented opportunities for collaborative commerce,” this translates approximately to “we’ve formed a cartel and prices are going up.” When the Alchemists’ Guild declares “minor adjustment to safety protocols following recent incident,” this means “the explosion was larger than we’d prefer to discuss and we’re implementing the precautions we should have had already.”

Technology companies communicate similarly. Press releases, product announcements, and earnings calls are carefully choreographed performances designed to present developments in the most favourable light while technically remaining truthful. The art of interpreting these announcements involves understanding the incentives behind them, recognising the patterns of how good and bad news are presented, and learning to translate corporate euphemisms into actual meanings. This skill is invaluable for anyone attempting to understand what’s actually happening rather than what companies would prefer you to believe is happening.

The Patrician’s approach to interpretation involves asking what the speaker gains from you believing their statement, what they’re not mentioning, whether specific numerical claims are accompanied by context that would make them less impressive, and whether the announcement’s timing seems strategic relative to other events. This cynical approach produces more accurate understanding than taking statements at face value, which is either refreshingly honest or depressingly necessary depending on your temperament.

The patterns are remarkably consistent across companies and time, which makes learning the translation guide useful beyond specific announcements. Once you recognise how companies discuss problems euphemistically or how they present modest achievements as revolutionary breakthroughs, you can decode most technology communication with reasonable accuracy.

The art of the product announcement¶

Product announcements are designed to generate excitement, secure media coverage, and convince potential customers that something important has arrived. The announcements rarely mention that the product is actually months from availability, that key features are missing, or that previous products with similar promises disappointed.

“Revolutionary breakthrough” translates to “incremental improvement we’re marketing aggressively.” Genuine revolutions are rare, but revolutionary announcements are common because companies have learned that people respond to revolutionary framing even for evolutionary changes. When everything is revolutionary, nothing is, but the marketing continues because it works.

“Industry-leading performance” means “we selected the benchmark that makes us look best.” Performance comparisons are cherry-picked to favour the company’s product. If the product actually led on all metrics, the announcement would provide comprehensive comparisons. When the announcement highlights specific benchmarks while ignoring others, the ignored benchmarks tell the real story.

“Coming soon” has no fixed meaning and might indicate anything from “available next month” to “we’ve begun thinking about potentially building this eventually.” The phrase creates anticipation without commitment. If the company had a firm date, they’d announce it. Vague timing indicates either uncertainty or strategic delay in admitting how far away release actually is.

“Powered by AI” means “we added a feature that uses machine learning, possibly just calling an API from a provider who actually built the AI.” Every product announcement now includes AI regardless of whether AI meaningfully improves the product. The phrase has become content-free through overuse but continues appearing because marketing departments believe it attracts attention.

“Seamless integration” translates to “we built an API and some connectors.” Genuine seamless integration is difficult and rare. When integration is announced without detailed documentation or customer testimonials about the integration experience, assume the integration is minimal and the seamlessness is aspirational.

“Available to select customers” means “we’re testing with friendly customers who will provide positive feedback and we’re not ready for general availability.” Early access programmes serve to generate positive publicity while limiting exposure to customers who might have problems or complaints. When products move from “select customers” to general availability, the missing features and rough edges become apparent.

The Patrician observes that product announcements are optimised for generating interest rather than conveying accurate information, and that the skill is extracting signal from the enthusiastic noise by recognising what’s carefully not being said.

Decoding the earnings call¶

Earnings calls are quarterly performances where executives discuss financial results with analysts while attempting to present everything in the best possible light. The calls follow predictable patterns that allow translation of corporate speak into actual meanings.

“We’re executing on our strategy” means “we don’t have better news to report so we’re emphasising that we’re doing what we said we’d do.” When results are strong, executives discuss the results. When results are weak, executives discuss the strategy that will supposedly produce future results.

“We’re seeing strong customer interest” translates to “people are expressing interest but not yet buying.” Interest is leading indicator that might predict future revenue but might just indicate that marketing is working while sales are not. When companies emphasise interest rather than actual revenue, the revenue growth is disappointing.

“We’re investing for long-term growth” means “our current profitability is poor but we’re framing this as strategic choice.” The phrasing suggests that profitability could be achieved if desired but that growth is more important. Sometimes this is accurate, sometimes it’s excuse for unprofitable business model. Distinguishing requires examining whether the unit economics suggest profitability is achievable through scale.

“We’re being disciplined about capital allocation” translates to “we’re not growing as fast as we’d like and we’re trying to make this sound intentional.” Fast-growing companies discuss their growth. Slower-growing companies discuss their discipline and prudence. The shift from emphasising growth to emphasising discipline indicates growth has slowed regardless of whether that’s presented as strategic.

“Normalising for one-time items” means “if you ignore the things that went wrong, our results look better.” One-time adjustments are often not actually one-time but are recurring charges presented as exceptional. When executives spend substantial time explaining why results should be evaluated differently from how they’re reported, the reported numbers tell the real story.

“We’re seeing some headwinds” is acknowledgement that things are going poorly, phrased to minimise the severity. Headwinds are temporary and external by implication, even when the problems are fundamental or self-inflicted. The severity can be gauged by whether executives elaborate on the headwinds or move quickly past them.

“We remain confident in our full-year guidance” followed immediately by lowering that guidance translates to “we hoped things would improve but they haven’t.” Companies maintain guidance until they cannot, then reduce it while expressing confidence in the reduced numbers. Sequential guidance reductions reveal deteriorating conditions regardless of confident framing.

The Patrician observes that earnings calls reward careful attention to what’s emphasised versus what’s mentioned briefly, to changes in language from previous calls, and to the questions executives avoid answering directly.

Reading between the marketing lines¶

Marketing materials present products and companies in maximally flattering ways while remaining technically truthful. The skill is recognising what’s being carefully not claimed and what modifiers limit seemingly impressive statements.

“Up to 10x faster” means “10x faster in specific optimal conditions we tested but typical performance is considerably less.” The “up to” qualifier negates the numerical claim for practical purposes. Real performance advantages would be stated as “10x faster” without qualifiers. The phrase “up to” indicates the impressive number is maximum rather than typical.

“Powered by advanced algorithms” translates to “we’d prefer not to explain specifically how this works.” Vague technical descriptions indicate either that the technology is not particularly advanced or that specifics would be less impressive than implications. When companies have genuinely advanced technology, they provide technical details that substantiate the claims.

“Enterprise-ready” means “we’ve added some features enterprises want but it’s still primarily designed for smaller deployments.” True enterprise readiness requires security, compliance, scalability, and support that most products lack. The phrase appears when companies are attempting to move upmarket but haven’t fully built enterprise capabilities.

“Best-in-class” indicates “we’re good at some things and we’re emphasising those rather than the things we’re not good at.” No product is best at everything, so “best-in-class” claims are inherently selective. The class boundaries are defined to make the product look favourable.

“Trusted by leading companies” followed by logos means “we have some customers at large companies but we’re not specifying whether they’re using our product extensively or merely trialling it.” Logo display does not indicate deployment scale or customer satisfaction. When actual usage statistics or testimonials are absent, the customer relationships are likely modest.

“Intuitive interface” translates to “we believe our interface is intuitive but haven’t validated this through user testing.” Truly intuitive interfaces are demonstrated through user testimonials and adoption metrics. When companies claim intuition without supporting evidence, the interface is probably conventional rather than innovative.

“Flexible and customisable” often means “we haven’t decided which features to build so we’ve made it possible for you to build what you need.” Flexibility is genuine capability but it’s also euphemism for product immaturity. Mature products are opinionated about how things should work. Immature products let customers figure it out.

The Patrician observes that marketing language is optimised for maximum implication with minimum specific commitment, and that the skill is recognising what’s being implied versus what’s actually being stated.

The strategic restructuring translation¶

Companies announce organisational changes and strategic shifts using language designed to present necessary adjustments as proactive improvements. The reality is usually less flattering than the presentation.

“Organisational realignment to better serve customers” means “layoffs.” The phrasing suggests strategic improvement rather than cost reduction, but realignment typically reduces headcount while positioning this as efficiency improvement. The customer benefit claims are rationalisations for decisions made for financial rather than strategic reasons.

“Streamlining operations for increased agility” translates to “we’re cutting costs because growth has slowed or profitability is under pressure.” Streamlining announcements indicate that previous organisation was inefficient, which raises questions about why inefficiency was tolerated until financial pressure forced change.

“Focusing on core competencies” means “we’re abandoning initiatives that failed or that we can no longer afford to continue.” The competency framing suggests strategic focus rather than admission that efforts outside core business didn’t work. The abandoned initiatives are rarely acknowledged as failures, just described as outside strategic focus.

“Transitioning to new leadership” indicates “the previous leadership is departing under circumstances we’d prefer not to detail.” Leadership changes presented positively might be genuine successions, but sudden transitions with minimal explanation suggest problems precipitated the change.

“Pursuing strategic alternatives” translates to “we’re considering selling the company or specific businesses because current strategy isn’t working.” The strategic alternatives phrase maintains negotiating leverage while acknowledging that independence is questioned. The process often results in sale, shutdown, or abandonment of the alternatives with renewed commitment to current course.

“Restructuring to align with current market conditions” means “we over-invested during better conditions and must adjust to worse conditions.” The market conditions framing externalises responsibility for decisions that were probably optimistic even when made. The restructuring involves cost reduction and reduced investment regardless of market conditions phrasing.

The Patrician observes that strategic announcements describing changes as improvements should be evaluated skeptically because genuine improvements are usually obvious without requiring careful framing, while necessary adjustments require careful framing to avoid acknowledging problems.

The Patrician’s assessment¶

Looking at technology communication with appropriate skepticism about motivated reasoning and careful phrasing, The Patrician concludes that most announcements require translation to extract actual meaning, that the patterns are consistent enough that translation becomes straightforward with practice, and that developing this skill provides substantial advantage in understanding what’s actually happening versus what companies would prefer you to believe.

The fundamental principle is that companies communicate to advance their interests, which means presenting information in maximally favourable ways while remaining technically truthful. This creates predictable gaps between what’s said and what’s meant. The gaps are not deception but rather strategic framing that anyone attempting accurate understanding must account for.

The product announcements emphasise potential while minimising limitations. The earnings calls present challenges as temporary while presenting modest achievements as significant progress. The marketing materials imply capabilities beyond what’s specifically claimed. The strategic announcements frame necessary adjustments as proactive improvements. All of this is rational behaviour from communicators’ perspectives and all of it requires careful interpretation from audiences’.

The translation skill develops through attention to patterns rather than memorising specific phrases. Once you recognise how companies discuss problems euphemistically, you can identify problems in unfamiliar announcements. Once you understand how achievements are inflated through selective metrics, you can discount the inflation in new contexts. The patterns transfer across companies and situations.

The cynical interpretation is usually more accurate than the charitable one, which is unfortunate but empirically supported. When companies provide vague timelines, they’re further behind than they’d prefer to admit. When they emphasise specific metrics while ignoring others, the ignored metrics are unfavourable. When they discuss strategy rather than results, the results are disappointing. These patterns hold sufficiently consistently that assuming them is reasonable default.

The exceptions where announcements are straightforward and honest are notable precisely because they’re exceptions. Companies occasionally communicate clearly about problems, limitations, and challenges. These communications deserve attention because honesty is sufficiently rare that its presence indicates either unusual corporate culture or situations so dire that euphemism is inadequate. Both deserve investigation.

The practical application involves reading announcements with attention to what’s emphasised versus mentioned briefly, what’s carefully not claimed despite implications, what qualifiers limit seemingly impressive statements, and what the timing reveals about motivations. The announcements that coincide with competitor announcements, regulatory actions, or financial pressures are particularly worth skeptical evaluation.

The Patrician suggests that the wise approach is assuming all corporate communication is strategic framing until proven otherwise, that learning the translation patterns saves substantial time compared to taking statements at face value, and that the skill is valuable beyond technology because the patterns of euphemistic communication transfer to other domains where people have incentives to present information favourably.

The auguries are readable once you learn the language, and the language is consistent enough that literacy is achievable through attention and practice. The technology industry’s communication is no more or less honest than communication from organisations with interests to advance, which is to say it’s optimised for advancing those interests rather than conveying neutral information. Understanding this and translating accordingly provides substantial advantage in understanding actual situations versus presented narratives.

The Patrician has spent decades reading between lines of official announcements and has concluded that the skill improves with practice, that cynical interpretation is more often correct than charitable interpretation, and that the people who take announcements at face value are reliably surprised by developments that were predictable to anyone who translated the earlier announcements accurately. This is unfortunate for the naive but convenient for those who developed translation skills, which creates incentive for maintaining the current system where communication is optimised for favourable impression rather than accuracy and where understanding requires interpretation rather than being directly accessible from the words used.