Larry Qualig wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > __/ [ Larry Qualig ] on Sunday 21 May 2006 16:01 \__
> >
> > >
> > > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > >> Let is face a certain reality. Microsoft are dwindling more quickly than
> > >> anybody anticipated. The stocks show it, the investors say so, and there
> > >> is other evidence all around us.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.schestowitz.com/Weblog_Frames/msft_slumps.jpg (15%+ drop in
> > >> less than one month!)
> > >>
> > >> All that this company can do is reach out for its deep pockets (filled
> > >> with tainted gold) and *pay* Web hosts to pick up Windows over superior
> > >> software, which is *free*. This is a proven fact. Also, they sell the XBox
> > >> 360 for a considerable loss. That's a _well-known_ fact.
> > >>
> > >> All that this company does is giving an _illusion_ that Microsoft lives
> > >> on. In reality, its pockets are being emptied; And the cash cows (notably
> > >> Office and Windows) are being made obsolete by their various mature
> > >> alternatives.
> >
> >
> > Oops. I forgot to add bloggers, whom Microsoft pay to publish stuff in
> > support of Microsoft. Media sources such as CNET likewise.
>
> This is marketing and PR... How is this related to the company dying
> very quickly?
>
> > Also, I forgot to mention forum trolls:
> >
> > http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/gizmos/2005/11/2_grassroots_an.html
>
> Okay - Forms? Why are you trying to change the subject?
>
>
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> > | Some years back, Microsoft practiced a lot of dirty tricks using online
> > | mavens to go into forums and create Web sites extolling the virtues of
> > | Windows over OS/2. They were dubbed the Microsoft Munchkins, and it
> > | was obvious who they were and what they were up to. But their numbers
> > | and energy (and they way they joined forces with nonaligned dummies who
> > | liked to pile on) proved too much for IBM marketers, and Windows won
> > | the operating-system war through fifth-column tactics.
> > |
> > | Mr Dvorak wonders if Microsoft is today using reverse-dirty-tricks to
> > | promote the Xbox 360: pay people to create Web sites that slam the
> > | gaming computer in order to provoke a barrage of defenders.
> > `----
> >
> >
> > Want to see a _live_ example? Then read on!
> >
> >
> > > This absolutely the dumbest post I've read in a long time. Dying?
> > > Unfortunately the facts don't support your hyperbole.
> >
> >
> > And this, of course, comes from Larry Qualig, a formet Microsoft employee.
>
> I worked there from 1996 to 1998 when they acquired a company that I
> was working for at the time. Considering that I haven't received a
> check from them in almost a decade I'm reasonably sure I'm no longer on
> their payroll.
You worked for vermeer didn't ya? Not on the payroll anymore but hard
to stay neutral when your still spending there money.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/longterm/microsoft/stories/1998/microsofta101898.htm
"The deal closed in January 1996. Microsoft paid handsomely for Vermeer
- with stock worth an estimated $130 million at the time of the deal.
Most of the start-up's three dozen employees would be millionaires if
they stayed with Microsoft for at least two years."
>
>
> > > Let's look at the last quarter - what you consider evidence/proof of
> > > your position. Microsoft grew revenue in *every single market segment*
> > > they are in. Total revenue grew by 10% and total profits grew by 9%. A
> > > year ago they made $3.3 Billion in profit for the quarter and this year
> > > they 'only' made $3.9 Billion in profit.
> >
> >
> > Ahem! The world is becoming more modernised. More people buy computers,
> > servers, and their dependence on the technology rises, not linearly.
> > Moreover, don't forget /inflation/.
>
> Inflation is nowhere near 10%. Given that they grew *profits*
> (increased profits) at a rate of $2.4 Billion dollars per year it's a
> little early to proclaim that "It's official: Microsoft is dying very
> quickly." They first need to have declining profits and start losing
> money - just like Sun and Novell.
>
>
>
> > > I guess that "all this company can do is reach out for its deep
> > > pockets" - huh? (Hint: Just the $600 million dollar 'increase' in
> > > quarterly profits from last year is more profit than most companies
> > > make in an entire year.)
> > >
> > > Dying very quickly? From this post of yours it seems that you are
> > > either grasping at straws or losing your mind very quickly.
> >
> >
> > Larry, you are so blinded by the numbers that Ballmer feeds y'all through a
> > plastic tube. Have you read the financial papers recently? Well, I do. From
> > all perspectives, it's grim for Microsoft. The XBox 360, for example, is an
> > illusion. It's intended to massage figures and manipulate public opinion.
>
> Where in the world did you come up with this Ballmer issue? (Try and
> stay on topic) It is *YOU* who is blinded by your unhealthy obsession
> with Microsoft. The numbers I'm quoting come directly from official SEC
> financial filings.
>
> I'm quite positive that I read financial publications more than you do.
> No, I don't have any money invested in Microsoft nor do I plan on
> investing in them. But this doesn't mean that "it's grim for Microsoft"
> - the company Microsoft. It's grim for the stock price because the
> growth rates are no longer what they once were. But financially the
> company is in excellent health. You seem to confuse and equate "stock
> price" with the financial condition of a company. They are *not* the
> same thing.
>
>
>
>
> > Ballmer confident Xbox 360 losses will turn around
> >
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> > | Ballmer humbly admitted that the cost of producing Xbox 360 consoles
> > | was a wee bit higher than expected.
> > `----
> >
> > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31463
|
|
