back to article Air Force Won: Nutanix lands $45m deal to ply US flyboys with hyperconverged kit

Nutanix has scored a $45m contract, via an unnamed channel middleman, to supply hyperconverged kit to US Air Forces Central Command (AFCENT)*. So says respected financial analyst Jason Ader, at William Blair, who claimed a Nutanix reseller won the deal late last month. He estimated the $45m "will not all flow to Nutanix" - …

  1. Hans 1

    The contract was actually won by a US-based channel player, who will presumably gladly hoover up the remainder of the money on the table.

    Great, air force lost $10m for not going to Nutanix directly .... Oh, yeah, Not their money!®

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Of course

    - No news on delay of key strategic product Xi. Two years and still not shipping, no date in sight.

    - No news on missed earnings (but every little prior press release gets printed).

    - No news on Dell turning off the money spigot.

    - But right on queue TADAH! They win a government contract and we get a big fat headline.

    Hey Reg editors, we read your site because we want unbiased industry insights. Chris Mellor has been shilling for Nutanix for quite some time now and is no longer acceptable. When are you going to do something about it before you lose all credibility? This has turned into a propaganda operation: suppress all bad news, highlight the good news. This is not going to end well.

    1. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge

      Re: Of course

      How are things over at Simplivity these days? Hurting a bit since the HPE acquisition, I'm guessing?

  3. Chairman of the Bored

    Two questions...

    (1) WTF is a "federal vertical"?

    (2) What Air Force civilian employee is about to get a nice position @ Nutanix or the channel partner? $45M is probably too small to bag a cushy sinecure for a flag officer; seems like a good place for a GS-15 to land though...

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    I guess that's a significant deal? Is $15m a lot nowadays?

    Why are they still considered an "upstart"? Aren't they already 10 years old or so? IPO was quite a while ago too, wasn't it? What's the difference between start up and upstart? Or do they count as upstart because they are still not profitable? This is all so confusing.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like