I mean, that's one way of viewing it, yes, but considering how influential they are in spaces other businesses are struggling in (free software), having a $34B market cap isn't shabby performance. IBM getting an easy-in to free software via a respected (by business, anyway) partner is a big opportunity, but they'd have to play their cards right and I can't think of the last big thing IBM was behind. They might be able to sell Red Hat to everyday people if they pair it with hardware and have reasonable pricing for personal or self-hosting support licenses. I'm not savvy enough on IBM's history to know if their current staff are good picks to develop a more complete product on top of RHEL, but I can see it having value and success if priced well. As I understand it though, both IBM and RH seem more interested in cloud stuff.
You'd have to be blind to consider Red Hat not influential in its sphere.
Yes Red Hat is significant in its niche of enterprise server operating systems, but it's not in the same league as Microsoft as a company overall. Red Hat would typically be deployed on AWS or Azure where they rake in all the money.
While Microsoft makes $73B profit, IBM makes $2B profit.
You can make up whatever you want, that doesn't mean it's reality. I guess Zildjian, the cymbal making company is bigger than amazon, apple, microsoft, netflix, facebook and IBM, since it was founded in 1623.
This could be a product of your own PoV & history with IBM. Not many consider IBM's legacy noteworthy, they became complacent and got beat out the market.