When in doubt, do nowt
|
|
|
Microsoft shareholders go at Ballmer and Gates
WHAT IS NORMALLY a festival of love between Microsoft and its shareholders turned into a bit of a gripe session as to why CEO Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates have been flogging off their shares.
According to the Seattle Times, at the row's heart is the fact that Microsoft's share price remains low even while the outfit makes record sales and profits far exceeding analyst expectations.
Some at yesterday's annual shareholders meeting in Bellevue thought Microsoft's dividends, which increased 23 percent this year, weren't high enough to boost the share price.
Others thought Bill Gates should not have sold some of his shares to put the proceeds into his foundation, but should have removed them from the company balance sheet so that the smaller number of shares would be worth more.
Ballmer said that he understood the frustration, but then he blustered a bit. "So let's talk about what we can do and what we can't do. I mean, ultimately, the stock market gets it right as long as we get it right. So we optimise every day on getting it right."
No answers there, but at least we know that Steve is optimised every day. They must do it when they defrag his computer or repair the furniture in his office.
Gates hit back at the claims that he should not sell shares to help the Gates Foundation prosper.
"I think the thrust of the question is, 'Are the current grantees of the foundation more deserving than turning the money over to Microsoft shareholders?' I guess I've made the decision that wealth is going to go to the foundation rather than being some reduction in shares outstanding for Microsoft."
One shareholder asked whether Microsoft should break up the company but Ballmer was quick to rubbish the idea.
"I don't think it would be useful. I think it creates economic dis-synergies in fact," he said.
Gates agreed that it was a bad idea, saying that he didn't think there is a line where you'd create net simplicity by trying to create a new company.
We were left wondering why you would use a line to create a net simplicity anyway, as if anyone suggested that geometry would solve anything. µ
Share this:
Share
The plain fact is that Microsoft is increasingly irrelevant to daily life as the focus now shifts to the Internet and cloud computing etc.
Let's analyze the various businesses of MSFT:
Web services - No contest. Google wins. Credit to Microsoft to try and spice up competition with Bing, but Google still wins.
Office - Sales of Office 2010 are not going very well. There are alternatives out there, ranging from Google Docs to Open Office. Or you can stick with Office 2003 or 2007.
Windows - people (especially the corporate folks) are still sticking with WinXP. Windows Vista was a disaster, and Windows 7 is an afterthought to rid the foul lingering aftertaste. Microsoft still wins here via OEM, but for how long?
Browser - IE9 has moved in a right direction, but it's hard to shake off the reputation of being a bug-ridden, non-standards compliant browser. And there's plenty of good alternatives out there.
Mobile - Windows Phone 7 is too little, too late. Even Meego the latest pet project from Intel/AMD/Nokia, will trump it.
Games - Good try, but you still can't beat the Japanese. Don't forget Xbox 360's RROD.
Administrator/dev software, input devices - alternatives available.
Silverlight - trying to cut into Adobe Flash's highly entrenched mindshare. Won't work.
The point is - MSFT has its fingers in many pies, but fails to come up with a unique, winning recipe.
Great idea, to piss off your shareholders, rubbish their ideas and generally scorn their wallets.
I believe that will have absolutely no relevance to their decision-making process the next time they have to choose whether or not to continue trusting you.
Keep it up, chair-chucker, you're once again making the right decision.
Yep...I am positive that I have given a greater proportion of both my time and money to altruistic causes than Gates. In fact....no comparison.
In any case, that's a completely non sequitur argument...as one might expect from one with the intellect/mentality of Vincent, as demonstrated by his witty and thoughtful post.
It is an interesting irony that Vincent uses the same irrational argument tactic as Gates....Billy....it doesn't matter whether you judge your foundation a better recipient than the shareholders. The obligation you and MS owe to them is a much more complex issue than such a ridiculous grade school emotional plea.
I'll bet my salary against Bill's that I gave a larger percentage of my income to charity the last 10 years compared to Bill and I didn't continuously violate law to receive my salary.
BULLmer is a talking HEAD... as in toilet. You can tell when he's lying, his lips are moving.
So, richard, what did YOU give to those in need?
F*cktard.
More importantly to Gates...it's his disguise to paint himself as a modern-day enlightened philanthropist and genius...not the slimy business criminal he is!
How dare shareholders of a CORPORATION demand he not give away money to improve his reputation....don't they know what a corporation is about? Isn't that what they gave him their money for?
Inside Fat Ballmer, where else. Ballmer who, incidentally, needs a good De-fragging.
One shareholder asked whether Microsoft should break up the company but Ballmer was quick to rubbish the idea. "I don't think it would be useful. I think it creates economic dis-synergies in fact," he said.
What utter Ballocks! How did this incompetent, fat, sweaty dwarf become CEO?
I think Microsoft should be broken up, then dear Steve will have a suitable suppository.
I'm not much of a fan, but Bill Gates's Microsoft shares presumably belong to him. They are HIS PROPERTY. He can and did sell them for cash, with, presumably, certain provisions against insider trading. Other shareholders apparently believe that he should have set them on fire in a public place, repudiating his own stake in Microsoft and essentially making that share of the value of the cnmpany to the other shareholders.
So, "Nice try", or did I misunderstand?
I'm thinking of Odysseus and the suitors of Penelope for some reason, if I have the names right...
Just to pre-empt any Billites lauding him for donating to charity: he *still* controls the money.
"We were left wondering why you would use a line to create a net simplicity anyway, as if anyone suggested that geometry would solve anything. µ"
Of course that would never work because the net isn't a bunch of lines... its made of tubes.