Take the KT 9.8 one-year bridge - engineering will figure it out as long as the million dollars comes with headcount

September 7, 2026 at 4:55 PMstrategyhigh

Situation

Korea Telecom needs 9.8 rather than the 9.6 discussed the day before, ahead of a regulatory approval process. Bjorn proposed installing 9.8 now with CIQ supporting it for a year - including CVE remediation, which CIQ does not normally do outside LTS versions - against a commitment that KT migrates to 9.10 a year out, for a million dollars. Peter shook Bjorn hand on it and then told Nathan in their 1:1. Nathan pushed back that he does not like doing CVEs on a non-LTS 9.8. Peter did not argue the technical objection: he answered that it is not just a million dollars, it comes with people, that it will not cost more than one or two headcount, and that once those hires are indoctrinated into Nathan system he can redeploy them elsewhere.

Reasoning

Peter treats a revenue commitment that lands on engineering as acceptable only when it grows capacity rather than displacing it. The million dollars is not the reason to say yes - it is the reason the yes is affordable, because it converts into one or two heads that outlast the engagement. He also implicitly priced the distaste: Nathan objection is real and Peter acknowledged it without relitigating it, because the answer to a capacity objection is capacity, not a technical rebuttal.

Additional Context

This follows directly from the prior day decision to refuse the 9.10-as-of-today letter and give KT 9.6 LTS with its real support window. The commercial shape changed to 9.8 plus a migration commitment; Peter conditioned the engineering side of it rather than reopening the commercial call, which sits in Bjorn lane.

Observed Evidence

Nathan: We do not do anything LTS for 9.8. / Peter: Not LTS. ... CVEs for a million dollars. / Nathan: I mean, I do not like it, but... / Peter: I get it, but you get headcount. I mean, it is not just a million dollars. You will get people to do it. ... it is not going to cost you more than one or two headcount, right? So we get you two headcount, they do that for a little while, and then they are indoctrinated into your system, and you use them somewhere else.

Matching Patterns

70%
Protect Engineering Capacity(require partnerships to add headcount, not just fund activity, reject work that displaces existing priorities without growing capacity)
45%
Decide on the Precedent, Not the Case(makes the headcount commitment unconditional so the precedent is deliberate)

Confidence Breakdown

32/35
Evidence
26/30
Pattern
19/20
Source
13/15
Corroboration

Reasoning Depth Analysis

Org Signal:Revenue that lands on engineering must buy engineering capacity. A leader may dislike a deal and still get it, provided the heads arrive with it.
Who Affected:Nathan Linux Engineering org, which now owns CVE work on a non-LTS minor version; Art Tyde and the KT-facing group, who had been given the 9.6 answer the day before.
Precedent:CIQ will do LTS-shaped support on a non-LTS minor version when the money funds the people - which is a door other deals will now try to walk through.
Consequences:Real - a year of CVE remediation on 9.8 plus one or two net-new heads, against a migration commitment CIQ must hold KT to.
Timing:Now because KT regulatory approval window is driving it and the 9.6 answer had just been delivered.

Source

reflection

AI Confidence

90%

Related Context

🎥
Nathan <> Peter Weekly 1:1

fathom

Bjorn asked, could they install it for a year, and we support them for a year, with the commitment that they move to 9.10 a year from now, and they pay us a million dollars for that interim. ... my comment to Bjorn was, as long as it comes with a million dollars, we will figure it out.

Outcome

No outcome recorded yet.

Decision ID: 636d1ca5-5e32-4c76-aab7-cf6568a7c216