Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates - Linux

This is a discussion on Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates - Linux ; Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!! http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...FREE&cm_ite=NA Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

  1. Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!


    http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...FREE&cm_ite=NA

    Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings
    report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.





    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  2. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    Keith Windsor wrote:
    > Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >
    >
    > http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >
    > Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings
    > report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.
    >

    So what?

  3. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates


    "Rick" wrote in message
    news:13i20raq2f62tda@news.supernews.com...
    > Keith Windsor wrote:
    >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>
    >>
    >> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >>
    >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >> earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.
    >>



    > So what?


    You and your ilk seem to be very interested in all [NEWS] about Microsoft.
    You know... things about the Zune, XBox and everything else. Surely this is
    about Microsoft so it's vital that it be posted here in COLA.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  4. Re: Open Source Bigger than Micoshaft in EU alone!!!!

    Micoshaft Asstroturer Keith Windsor wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    Corporation:

    > Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >
    >
    > http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis

    techsoftware/10386641.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >
    > Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    > earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.



    Dude you are so out of date.

    The open source movement in EU alone is now
    bigger than Micoshaft Corporation!!!




  5. Re: Open Source Bigger than Micoshaft in EU alone!!!!


    "7" wrote in message
    news:678Ui.37090$c_1.18611@text.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    > Micoshaft Asstroturer Keith Windsor wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    > Corporation:
    >
    >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>
    >>
    >> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis

    > techsoftware/10386641.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >>
    >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >> earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.

    >
    >
    > Dude you are so out of date.
    >
    > The open source movement in EU alone is now
    > bigger than Micoshaft Corporation!!!
    >


    Proof? (Of course not) Perhaps we should believe you just like when you said
    this hillarious classic - "You can't discriminate against your advertiser if
    you are selling ad space even if you vehemently disagree."




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  6. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >
    > http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...
    >
    > Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings
    > report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.


    Think about that for a minute though. Last year, Microsoft was late
    delivering Vista, the orders were probably for what would have been
    Vista Home Basic level pricing, and PC sales were very low in
    anticipation of Vista. This year, OEMs have decided to pay a premium
    price for Vista Business Edition, which also gives them the option of
    selling the same machine as an XP machine (for the license count,
    Microsoft seems to make no distinction, and the pricing options are
    the same for Vista Business vs XP.

    The preliminary announcements don't tell all the details either.
    Remember, the last two quarters Microsoft was sweetening it's bottom
    line by financing channel stuffing - which didn't show up in the
    "Bottom Line" until about 24 hours later.

    Microsoft has turned a lemon (Vista Home Edition) into Lemonade (Vista
    Business as XP Professional), giving themselves almost 30% more
    revenue PER MACHINE than the original XP pricing model. Ironically,
    Microsoft is actually getting a huge windfall as an impact of "playing
    nice" with Linux with Vista Business and allowing PC makers to offer
    XP Professional at the same price as Vista Business. There may be
    some issues with the Securities Exchange Commission if Microsoft
    doesn't accurately break out how many Licenses were XP, but Microsoft
    may have deliberately created the OEM license agreement so that they
    don't have to report that number.

    The big "gotcha" there is that if users must activate their licenses,
    whether XP or Vista, and Microsoft fraudulently reports the XP
    licenses as Vista licenses, this might be considered to be an illegal
    attempt to "Pump" the stock by overstating the success of the newer
    product (Vista) rather than accurately reporting the lack of
    acceptance of the new operating system. It could even be a Sarbanes-
    Oxley violation.

    I will be very interested in seeing the actual SEC filing and the more
    complete details.

    Ironically, it may not matter. If OEM and Business Customers are
    willing to pay a 30% premium for Vista or XP licenses that allow end-
    users to run it as a VM client, allow users to run Linux on the same
    machine, and allow end-users to call Windows XP libraries from Linux
    (WINE), they might be able to bump that up to 35 or 40% in exchange
    for the permission to INSTALL Linux, VMWare, and Windows XP or a
    "Vista Light".

    Keep in mind also that it wasn't just Vista that came out in January.
    Office 2007 also came out at the same time, and normally that would
    have boosted the price in the year following the release of the
    Operating system. There might even be a Windfall of users who are
    "Downgrading" to Office XP. In addition, if Businesses are converting
    their annual support plans to licenses, that could be a huge increase
    on the on-time hit of transferring the ownership of the licenses back
    to the corporation.

    It could be an interesting quarter. Will Gateway be reporting 20%
    profits (they've been losing big time for the last two quarters)?
    Will other OEMs be reporting huge profits for their PC divisions in
    this quarter? HP and Dell both shot up - presumably by investor hopes
    that if Microsoft is getting a 20% profit growth, that the PC makers
    will also be getting a corresponding jump in profits.

    If the PC division profits DON'T grow by 20%, it means that Microsoft
    got a short-term windfall from OEMs who were hoping they would be
    making bigger profits on the PCs sold with Vista, and those profits
    did not materialize. This could create some pricing pressure, or more
    agressive demands for the ability to sell hybrid Linux/Windows
    machines. With Motherboard makers now offering the hypervisor, Linux
    and Windows can both be booted and started as "equals". The
    hypervisor kernel is based on Linux, but very lean, fast, and
    efficient.

    Keep in mind that OEMs have placed a year-long bet on Vista, based on
    assurances from Microsoft that Vista would be so extraordinary that it
    would drive sales and provide such high demand that the OEMs would be
    able to get some real profit margins on their PC sales at high unit
    volumes. If prices have eroded over 50% in less than 9 months, and
    OEMs are now scraping to sell machines at cost, or selling PCs at
    below cost, it could be a real problem. For many OEMs, the ONLY
    profit is in selling the Extended Warranty.



  7. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates


    "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    news:1193349362.195773.26530@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
    > On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>
    >> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...
    >>
    >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >> earnings
    >> report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.

    >
    > Think about that for a minute though. Last year, Microsoft was late
    > delivering Vista, the orders were probably for what would have been
    > Vista Home Basic level pricing, and PC sales were very low in
    > anticipation of Vista. This year, OEMs have decided to pay a premium
    > price for Vista Business Edition, which also gives them the option of
    > selling the same machine as an XP machine (for the license count,
    > Microsoft seems to make no distinction, and the pricing options are
    > the same for Vista Business vs XP.


    Vista was released about 10-11 months ago. According to the "linux
    advocates" at the time when good earnings were released it was because of
    the "built up demand" for Vista and we were sure to see a huge drop off by
    the end of the year. Well, it's the end of the year and things have PICKED
    UP and not dropped off.


    > The preliminary announcements don't tell all the details either.
    > Remember, the last two quarters Microsoft was sweetening it's bottom
    > line by financing channel stuffing - which didn't show up in the
    > "Bottom Line" until about 24 hours later.


    Oh yes. Somebody in COLA posted "channel stuffing" so it must be true.



    > Microsoft has turned a lemon (Vista Home Edition) into Lemonade (Vista
    > Business as XP Professional), giving themselves almost 30% more
    > revenue PER MACHINE than the original XP pricing model. Ironically,
    > Microsoft is actually getting a huge windfall as an impact of "playing
    > nice" with Linux with Vista Business and allowing PC makers to offer
    > XP Professional at the same price as Vista Business. There may be
    > some issues with the Securities Exchange Commission if Microsoft
    > doesn't accurately break out how many Licenses were XP, but Microsoft
    > may have deliberately created the OEM license agreement so that they
    > don't have to report that number.


    The number of licenses or activations has absolutely ZERO to do with what
    was reported. The quarterly report is in ***DOLLARS*** and not licenses,
    activations, eye-balls or click-throughs. It's DOLLARS and PROFIT and other
    things that are measured in MONETARY terms. Not your silly little licenses
    or activations.


    > The big "gotcha" there is that if users must activate their licenses,
    > whether XP or Vista, and Microsoft fraudulently reports the XP
    > licenses as Vista licenses, this might be considered to be an illegal
    > attempt to "Pump" the stock by overstating the success of the newer
    > product (Vista) rather than accurately reporting the lack of
    > acceptance of the new operating system. It could even be a Sarbanes-
    > Oxley violation.


    Blah, blah, blah. Learn to read a SEC filing. Nobody cares about licenses or
    activations. It's all about MONETARY results. Sales. Period. End of story.



    > I will be very interested in seeing the actual SEC filing and the more
    > complete details.


    The SEC filing is already out there. Go knock yourself out.


    > Ironically, it may not matter. If OEM and Business Customers are
    > willing to pay a 30% premium for Vista or XP licenses that allow end-
    > users to run it as a VM client, allow users to run Linux on the same
    > machine, and allow end-users to call Windows XP libraries from Linux
    > (WINE), they might be able to bump that up to 35 or 40% in exchange
    > for the permission to INSTALL Linux, VMWare, and Windows XP or a
    > "Vista Light".


    May, might, could, perhaps.



    > Keep in mind also that it wasn't just Vista that came out in January.
    > Office 2007 also came out at the same time, and normally that would
    > have boosted the price in the year following the release of the
    > Operating system. There might even be a Windfall of users who are
    > "Downgrading" to Office XP. In addition, if Businesses are converting
    > their annual support plans to licenses, that could be a huge increase
    > on the on-time hit of transferring the ownership of the licenses back
    > to the corporation.


    Microsoft grew and made a HUGE PROFIT during THIS quarter. And the previous
    quarter. And the quarter before that. As a matter of fact, every quarterly
    report since Vista was released has been a stellar knock-out.

    Isn't it time for a new set of excuses from the "linux advocates."



    > It could be an interesting quarter. Will Gateway be reporting 20%
    > profits (they've been losing big time for the last two quarters)?
    > Will other OEMs be reporting huge profits for their PC divisions in
    > this quarter? HP and Dell both shot up - presumably by investor hopes
    > that if Microsoft is getting a 20% profit growth, that the PC makers
    > will also be getting a corresponding jump in profits.
    >
    > If the PC division profits DON'T grow by 20%, it means that Microsoft
    > got a short-term windfall from OEMs who were hoping they would be
    > making bigger profits on the PCs sold with Vista, and those profits
    > did not materialize. This could create some pricing pressure, or more
    > agressive demands for the ability to sell hybrid Linux/Windows
    > machines. With Motherboard makers now offering the hypervisor, Linux
    > and Windows can both be booted and started as "equals". The
    > hypervisor kernel is based on Linux, but very lean, fast, and
    > efficient.
    >
    > Keep in mind that OEMs have placed a year-long bet on Vista, based on
    > assurances from Microsoft that Vista would be so extraordinary that it
    > would drive sales and provide such high demand that the OEMs would be
    > able to get some real profit margins on their PC sales at high unit
    > volumes. If prices have eroded over 50% in less than 9 months, and
    > OEMs are now scraping to sell machines at cost, or selling PCs at
    > below cost, it could be a real problem. For many OEMs, the ONLY
    > profit is in selling the Extended Warranty.



    --- "> Keep in mind that OEMs have placed a year-long bet on Vista, based on
    assurances from Microsoft that Vista would be so extraordinary that it would
    drive sales and provide such high demand that the OEMs would be..."

    Really. And you know this how exactly? Or did you simply make this up
    (again) as you went along.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  8. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:27:48 -0400, Keith Windsor wrote:

    > "Rick" wrote in message
    > news:13i20raq2f62tda@news.supernews.com...
    >> Keith Windsor wrote:
    >>> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis/

    techsoftware/10386641.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >>> earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >> So what?

    >
    > You and your ilk


    Me.. and my .... ilk?

    Kiss my ass.


    > seem to be very interested in all [NEWS] about
    > Microsoft. You know... things about the Zune, XBox and everything else.
    > Surely this is about Microsoft so it's vital that it be posted here in
    > COLA.


    I could care less about the Zune, or the XBox.



    --
    Rick

  9. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    >On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    >>
    >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>
    >> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...
    >>
    >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings
    >> report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.


    Crime pays, apparently.


  10. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Oct 25, 6:05 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > "RexBallard" wrote in message
    > news:1193349362.195773.26530@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
    > > On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    > >>http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...

    >
    > > Microsoft has turned a lemon (Vista Home Edition) into Lemonade (Vista
    > > Business as XP Professional), giving themselves almost 30% more
    > > revenue PER MACHINE than the original XP pricing model. Ironically,
    > > Microsoft is actually getting a huge windfall as an impact of "playing
    > > nice" with Linux with Vista Business and allowing PC makers to offer
    > > XP Professional at the same price as Vista Business. There may be
    > > some issues with the Securities Exchange Commission if Microsoft
    > > doesn't accurately break out how many Licenses were XP, but Microsoft
    > > may have deliberately created the OEM license agreement so that they
    > > don't have to report that number.


    > The number of licenses or activations has absolutely ZERO to do with what
    > was reported. The quarterly report is in ***DOLLARS*** and not licenses,
    > activations, eye-balls or click-throughs. It's DOLLARS and PROFIT and other
    > things that are measured in MONETARY terms. Not your silly little licenses
    > or activations.


    Actually, it has quite a bit to do with the profits earned in this
    quarter. From the full SEC Filing:

    Client offerings consist of premium edition and standard Windows
    operating systems. Premium offerings are those that include additional
    functionality and are sold at a price above our standard versions.
    Premium offerings include Windows XP Professional, XP Media Center
    Edition, XP Tablet PC Edition
    , Vista Business, Vista Home Premium,
    and Vista Ultimate. Standard Windows operating systems include Windows
    XP Home and Windows Vista Home Basic. Client revenue growth correlates
    with the growth of purchases of PCs from OEMs that pre-install
    versions of Windows operating systems because the OEM channel accounts
    for approximately 80% of total Client revenue. The differences between
    unit growth rates and revenue growth rates from year to year are
    affected by changes in the mix of OEM Windows operating systems
    licensed with premium edition operating systems as a percentage of
    total OEM Windows operating systems licensed ("OEM premium mix"),
    changes in the geographical mix, and changes in the channel mix of
    products sold by large, multi-national OEMs versus those sold by local
    and regional system builders.


    Put another way, the OEMs want to install and ship XP Professional,
    and Microsoft is more than willing to let them do so, for a PREMIUM
    PRICE. Unit Volumes don't seem to have grown that much, but PRICE
    INCREASES have met little resistance in exchange for more flexability
    in how users are able to use the "Premium" editions, particularly
    Vista Business and Office Professional. Remember that even Windows
    2000 is priced like a "Premium" product.

    Ironically, Microsoft may be able to charge even HIGHER prices in
    exchange for MORE flexibility in terms of allowing OEMs to offer
    better support for Linux, including preinstalled hypervisors,
    preinstalled Linux, and the ability to openly advertize which machines
    are "Linux Ready" on machines offered with "Premium" versions of
    Windows.


    Client revenue increased primarily reflecting licensing of Windows
    Vista. OEM revenue increased $706 million or 25% driven by 20% growth
    in OEM license units. Revenue from commercial and retail licensing of
    Windows operating systems increased $116 million or 23% primarily due
    to strong sales from Enterprise Agreements and legalization efforts in
    Russia, China, and other emerging markets. The OEM Premium Mix
    increased 16 percentage points to 75% driven by increased consumer
    premium mix. Based on our estimates, total worldwide PC shipments from
    all sources grew 14% to 16% driven by demand in both emerging and
    mature markets.


    This could be a big "one time" hit. There is a 20% growth in OEM
    license units, but this may be in part due to an increase in licenses
    in China and Russia. The 25% revenue growth seems to be driven by the
    price increases due to the adoption of "Premium" editions. No
    indication of how much is Vista premium and how much is XP
    Professional. It's ironic that Microsoft is able to get MORE for XP
    Professional BECAUSE of the release of Vista Home Basic and
    restrictions on Home Premium.

    It seems that the "Wind-fall" of the EU ruling is that Microsoft was
    able to set the "Base" price of Home Basic to the same levels it used
    to charge for Windows XP home Edition.

    The next trend to look at will be profit numbers for companies like
    Gateway and Lenovo, who are closer to "Pure PC" plays. If Gateway is
    reporting huge losses again this quarter, it could indicate that there
    will be much more pricing pressure on Microsoft when license rates are
    negotiated next year.

    Ironically, this may still be a legitimate merit for an increase to
    $34/share being shown.

    > > The big "gotcha" there is that if users must activate their licenses,
    > > whether XP or Vista, and Microsoft fraudulently reports the XP
    > > licenses as Vista licenses, this might be considered to be an illegal
    > > attempt to "Pump" the stock by overstating the success of the newer
    > > product (Vista) rather than accurately reporting the lack of
    > > acceptance of the new operating system. It could even be a Sarbanes-
    > > Oxley violation.

    >
    > Blah, blah, blah. Learn to read a SEC filing. Nobody cares about licenses or
    > activations. It's all about MONETARY results. Sales. Period. End of story.


    Actually, Micrososft DID point out that XP Professional premiums, as
    well as premiums for Vista Business and Vista Home Premium and Vista
    Ultimate was a key factor in their profit growth in the client arena.
    They carefully AVOIDED any direct statements indicating what
    percentage of these premiums were Vista upgrades and what percentage
    were XP Professional.

    > > I will be very interested in seeing the actual SEC filing and the more
    > > complete details.

    >
    > The SEC filing is already out there. Go knock yourself out.


    It wasn't on the Yahoo site yet. Found it this morning. Thanks.

    I particularly enjoyed the "Risks Section"


    Item 1A. Risk Factors

    Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and
    uncertainties, including those described below, that could adversely
    affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash
    flows, and trading price of our common stock.

    Challenges to our business model may reduce our revenues and operating
    margins. Our business model has been based upon customers paying a fee
    to license software that we developed and distributed. Under this
    license-based software model, software developers bear the costs of
    converting original ideas into software products through investments
    in research and development, offsetting these costs with the revenue
    received from the distribution of their products. In recent years,
    certain "open source" software business models have evolved into a
    growing challenge to our license-based software model. Open source
    commonly refers to software whose source code is subject to a license
    allowing it to be modified, combined with other software and
    redistributed, subject to restrictions set forth in the license. A
    number of commercial firms compete with us using an open source
    business model by modifying and then distributing open source software
    to end users at nominal cost and earning revenue on complementary
    services and products. These firms do not have to bear the full costs
    of research and development for the software. A prominent example of
    open source software is the Linux operating system. Although we
    believe our products provide customers with significant advantages in
    security, productivity, and total cost of ownership, the
    popularization of the open source software model continues to pose a
    significant challenge to our business model, including continuing
    efforts by proponents of open source software to convince governments
    worldwide to mandate the use of open source software in their purchase
    and deployment of software products. To the extent open source
    software gains increasing market acceptance, sales of our products may
    decline, we may have to reduce the prices we charge for our products,
    and revenue and operating margins may consequently decline.


    Clearly, Microsoft is seeing more growth in Linux and OSS than it
    would like to announce to the press. They are worried about a number
    of OSS products cutting deeply into their revenue model, and it's a
    very real and current threat.

    Notice that Microsoft also reports increases in Business division
    primarily as a result of price increases related to Office 2007 - not
    due to volume increases or an increase in Market share.

    There will be a period of peaceful coexistence, where users will pay
    for Windows and MS-Office as part of their OEM and Support purchases,
    but as OSS products such as FireFox, Linux, and Open Office begin to
    reach critical mass, there may be a sudden drop in demand for MS-
    Office products such as Office 2007.

    There is also a chance that more companies will begin to "Opt Out" of
    support contracts, or downgrade their support levels.


    Another development is the software-as-a-service business model, by
    which companies provide applications, data, and related services over
    the Internet. Providers use primarily advertising or subscription-
    based revenue models. Recent advances in computing and communications
    technologies have made this model viable and enabled the rapid growth
    of some of our competitors. We are devoting significant resources
    toward developing our own competing software plus services strategies.
    It is uncertain whether these strategies will prove successful.


    The bigger news was the profitability and growth of the Entertainment
    division. They almost doubled their sales of X-Boxes to 1.8 million
    units. That's a very small portion of the over all game machine
    market, but Microsoft has been able to size their efforts
    appropriately and generate triple-digit growth in that niche. The
    HALO game seems to have also generated some huge revenues. Microsoft
    could expand the game machine to cover the loss of revenue in the
    Business Division - when OSS begins to buckle that market.

    > > Ironically, it may not matter. If OEM and Business Customers are
    > > willing to pay a 30% premium for Vista or XP licenses that allow end-
    > > users to run it as a VM client, allow users to run Linux on the same
    > > machine, and allow end-users to call Windows XP libraries from Linux
    > > (WINE), they might be able to bump that up to 35 or 40% in exchange
    > > for the permission to INSTALL Linux, VMWare, and Windows XP or a
    > > "Vista Light".

    >
    > May, might, could, perhaps.


    I should probabably change that to WHEN. Even Microsoft accepts that
    it's no longer a question of IF OSS will gain widespread acceptance,
    but instead WHEN OSS displaces many of Microsoft's premium products,
    and how Microsoft will adopt to a Market in which it must either
    attempt to compete head-to-head or coexist with Linux, Firefox, and
    Open Office.

    Vista Home Basic license restrictions were a "trial balloon" to see if
    Microsoft could win in an "Either/Or" scenario, and this 10Q filing
    shows that it clearly cannot win at that strategy. On the other hand,
    coexistence provides much higher revenues over a longer period of
    time.

    The big question now is "Can they do it again?". They have been able
    to orchestrate a series of "one shot" wins, but this may have been a
    play to jack up the price before Bill and Steve "Cash out". It could
    be the biggest "Pump and Dump" scheme ever, possibly worth as much as
    $40 billion.



  11. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    In other news, Eben Moglen, speaking on behalf of The Free Software
    Community, told The Wall Street Journal that the numbers clearly show
    that "Microsoft is rapidly dying", and reiterated his usual conjunctions
    that "we win" and "Free Software prevails."

    regards,
    alexander.

    --
    "The revolution might take significantly longer than anticipated."

    -- The GNU Monk Harald Welte

  12. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Oct 26, 8:55 am, chrisv wrote:
    > >On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:


    > >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!


    > >>http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...
    > >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter earnings
    > >> report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.


    I'm not sure that this proves Microsoft is a "growth" stock. It just
    shows that they can squeeze more revenue from key decision makers who
    seem to be willing to do ANYTHING to have Microsoft's products. Note
    however, that Microsoft very carefully AVOIDED providing numbers
    indicating what percentage of the market was actually Vista vs XP
    Professional.

    XP Home edition isn't doing anything - no surprise here. But for $20
    more web customers can upgrade from Vista Home Basic to XP
    professional, Vista Business, or Vista Home Premium. The Microsoft 10-
    Q filing very deliberately groups all 3 upgrades, along with Vista
    Ultimate - into a common pool - with a total of everything being
    around 88 million copies. Volumes are only slightly higher than last
    year. The increase in revenues is mostly increased prices.

    > Crime pays, apparently.


    Quite well, actually. Think about it. Microsoft pays roughly $2
    billion/year in legal fees and settlements, and makes nearly $60
    billion in revenue directly related to crimes addressed by those
    settlements.

    If you could sell crack cocaine for $60 a gram, knowing that your only
    penalty would be a fine of $2 per gram, but on a huge scale, say a
    metric ton (2 million grams) - and pay $2 million in fines for $60
    million in revenue, and all you had to do to maintain your monopoly in
    this deal is pay your lawyers $1 million/year, to negotiate legal
    contracts with your franchise. Make that a kiloton - 1 billion grams,
    with $60 billion in revenue and $2-3 billion in settlements, bribes,
    and legal fees - you have a very profitable low-risk business.



  13. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates


    "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    news:1193425401.061187.285080@v3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
    > On Oct 26, 8:55 am, chrisv wrote:
    >> >On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:

    >
    >> >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!

    >
    >> >>http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...
    >> >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >> >> earnings
    >> >> report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.

    >
    > I'm not sure that this proves Microsoft is a "growth" stock. It just
    > shows that they can squeeze more revenue from key decision makers who
    > seem to be willing to do ANYTHING to have Microsoft's products.


    It just shows that companies and people want Microsoft products more than
    ever.


    > Note
    > however, that Microsoft very carefully AVOIDED providing numbers
    > indicating what percentage of the market was actually Vista vs XP
    > Professional.

    Which they have been doing for years and years. Note that Mercedes Benz
    carefully AVOIDED proving numbers indication what percentage of the market
    wants the 3.2 liter engine vs the 4.3 liter engine.


    > XP Home edition isn't doing anything - no surprise here.

    And you know this how exactly? Seems that you're simply pulling facts out of
    your ass.


    > But for $20
    > more web customers can upgrade from Vista Home Basic to XP
    > professional, Vista Business, or Vista Home Premium. The Microsoft 10-
    > Q filing very deliberately groups all 3 upgrades, along with Vista
    > Ultimate - into a common pool - with a total of everything being
    > around 88 million copies. Volumes are only slightly higher than last
    > year. The increase in revenues is mostly increased prices.


    - "Volumes are only slightly higher than last year" Yeah... volumes are only
    about 27% higher than last year. Oh wait... revenue is also 27% higher than
    last year. What a coincidence.


    >> Crime pays, apparently.

    >
    > Quite well, actually. Think about it. Microsoft pays roughly $2
    > billion/year in legal fees and settlements, and makes nearly $60
    > billion in revenue directly related to crimes addressed by those
    > settlements.


    So it's your claim that any company that pays legal fees and settlements is
    a crimina empire. So apparantely your boss IBM is also a criminal
    organization because they've had to pay fees and fines.


    > If you could sell crack cocaine for $60 a gram, knowing that your only
    > penalty would be a fine of $2 per gram, but on a huge scale, say a
    > metric ton (2 million grams) - and pay $2 million in fines for $60
    > million in revenue, and all you had to do to maintain your monopoly in
    > this deal is pay your lawyers $1 million/year, to negotiate legal
    > contracts with your franchise. Make that a kiloton - 1 billion grams,
    > with $60 billion in revenue and $2-3 billion in settlements, bribes,
    > and legal fees - you have a very profitable low-risk business.
    >


    Is this what criminal empire named IBM does??? Are you saying that your
    employer sells crack cocaine to little children?




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  14. Re: Open Source Bigger than Micoshaft in EU alone!!!!

    Micoshaft Asstroturfer Keith Windsor wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    Corporation:

    >
    > "7" wrote in message
    > news:678Ui.37090$c_1.18611@text.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >> Micoshaft Asstroturer Keith Windsor wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
    >> Corporation:
    >>
    >>> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis

    >> techsoftware/10386641.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    >>> earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.

    >>
    >>
    >> Dude you are so out of date.
    >>
    >> The open source movement in EU alone is now
    >> bigger than Micoshaft Corporation!!!
    >>

    >
    > Proof? (Of course not) Perhaps we should believe you just like when you
    > said this hillarious classic - "You can't discriminate against your
    > advertiser if you are selling ad space even if you vehemently disagree."


    Well you can try to and find yourself in court you big pansy!

    In any case, open source is bigger in EU alone than micoshaft corporation
    and you just haven't a clue how or why.



  15. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Oct 26, 3:16 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    > news:1193425401.061187.285080@v3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
    > > On Oct 26, 8:55 am, chrisv wrote:
    > >> >On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > >> >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!


    http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...re/10386641.ht...

    > >> >> Microsoft (MSFT) proved it is a growth stock with its first-quarter
    > >> >> earnings report, which blew away Wall Street estimates.


    > > I'm not sure that this proves Microsoft is a "growth" stock. It just
    > > shows that they can squeeze more revenue from key
    > > decision makers who seem to be willing to do ANYTHING
    > > to have Microsoft's products.



    > It just shows that companies and people want Microsoft
    > products more than ever.


    The real question is "Who is making the decision?". There is
    typically a very small group of people, very close to the top, of the
    OEM organization. For corporate customers, the decision is usually
    made by the CTO or CIO.

    The retail sales of PCs configured with Vista Home Basic and Vista
    Home Premium have been less than wonderful.

    Microsoft very carefully avoided itemization of the "Premium" products
    in their 10-Q filing, choosing to blend Vista Business, XP
    Professional, and Vista Ultimate into a lump sum group. Microsoft
    then pointed out that they got a premium from these upgrades, but
    deliberately avoided disclosing the mix - which makes me assume that
    the percentage of PC buyers willing to pay a "premium" for XP instead
    of Vista may have been an embarrasment. Microsoft did everything they
    could within the letter of the law to meet SarbOx requirments without
    disclosing the failure of Vista in the marketplace.



    > > Note
    > > however, that Microsoft very carefully AVOIDED providing numbers
    > > indicating what percentage of the market was actually Vista vs XP
    > > Professional.

    >
    > Which they have been doing for years and years.


    Microsoft is normally quite eager to disclose the specific numbers
    related to a new product. For example, when Windows 95, Windows NT
    4.0, and Windows 98 were released, they were more than happy to
    provide counts and percentages.

    On the other hand, when Windows NT 3.x and Windows ME were released,
    Microsoft used "blended" numbers to claim greater success for the new
    product. Eventually, the market and the record showed that these
    products were rejected in the marketplace.

    > > XP Home edition isn't doing anything - no surprise here.


    > And you know this how exactly?
    > Seems that you're simply pulling facts out of your ass.


    I'm assuming that if Microsoft had a bunch of people ordering PCs with
    XP Home Edition, instead of Vista Home Edition, they would have
    included that blend of products together. Instead, Microsoft seems
    quite eager to report two separate groups. The first group was Vista
    Home Basic and Vista Home Premium, the other was Vista Business, Vista
    Ultimate, and XP Professional. The stock report makes no mention of
    XP home edition at all, which leads me to assume that PC buyers are
    not ordering their PCs with XP home edition.

    Dell, HP, Acer, Lenovo, and the other PC makers may be reporting more
    details about the mix they are seeing. We have seen CompUSA close
    thousands of retail outlets. Retailers have not been restocking their
    shelve.

    The one thing this does indicate is that more and more end users ARE
    making their own decisions. Perhaps this is why all of the major OEMs
    still offer XP as one of the Operating Systems options.

    It would be interesting to see the proportion of "Linux Ready"
    machines, such as those supporting OpenGL compared to those that are
    "Vista Only", offering DirectX-10 video cards.


    > >> Crime pays, apparently.

    >
    > > Quite well, actually. Think about it. Microsoft pays roughly $2
    > > billion/year in legal fees and settlements, and makes nearly $60
    > > billion in revenue directly related to crimes addressed by those
    > > settlements.

    >
    > So it's your claim that any company that pays
    > legal fees and settlements is a criminal empire.


    When they testify under oath that they have committed illegal acts and
    their primary defense is a technicality, I could consider them to be
    in the same class as the drug dealers who get acquitted because of a
    problem with the search warrant, or because the drugs were found in
    the back seat instead of the front seat.

    > So apparantely your boss IBM is also a criminal
    > organization because they've had to pay fees and fines.


    Do you have examples of cases where IBM admitted to obstructing
    justice, sabotage, or collusion?

    Remember, IBM DID have to deal with federal courts and federal laws
    back in the 1970s and early 1980s. IBM set up the company to promote
    an "internal divestature" about the same time that AT&T was being
    court ordered into divestature. When IBM started selling the PC,
    letting Microsoft sell the operating system, licensing the hardware
    and BIOS to third party OEMs, and the adoption of standards such as
    RS-232, as well as publication of floppy disk standards and other
    standards, was already established.

    In fact, it's quite possible that if the courts hadn't been watching
    so closely, that IBM would have tried to keep everything proprietary,
    and there wouldn't have been a Microsoft, or even a PC as we know it
    today.

    When John Akers tried to play a similar "market lock" game, tightly
    linking OS/2 2.0 to Micro-channel, it was the marketplace that
    slapped him around. The next 6 months were so bad for IBM that he was
    replaced by outsider Lou Gerstner. Lou created IBM Global Services,
    and tapped Sam Palmisano, who had been leading the PC division, to
    lead the new venture.

    Lou and Sam worked very well to encourage the IGS consultants to be
    "Brand Agnostic". IGS consultants are given free training in IBM
    products, but are also encouraged work with and be familiar with
    competitor products.

    In some benchmarks, Oracle outperformed DB2 on Power 5 servers.

    Microsoft would try to block a disclosure which showed that a
    competitor's product outperformed theirs. IBM encourages the
    publication of benchmarks involving different mixes of IBM and
    competitor products.



  16. Re: Microsoft (growth stock) Crushes Estimates

    On Oct 29, 2:54 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    > news:1193611135.715927.177670@d55g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
    > > On Oct 26, 3:16 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > >> "Rex Ballard" wrote in message
    > >>news:1193425401.061187.285080@v3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
    > >> > On Oct 26, 8:55 am, chrisv wrote:
    > >> >> >On Oct 25, 4:37 pm, "Keith Windsor" wrote:
    > >> >> >> Billions and billions in PROFITS!!!!

    >
    > > Do you have examples of cases where IBM admitted to obstructing
    > > justice, sabotage, or collusion?

    >
    > Plenty. Just last year in 2006 IBM and SAP were fined millions for collusion
    > in order to illegally coordinate bids. Here'a a link:
    >
    > http://ethisphereblog.com/sap-and-ib...r-coordinating...


    Interesting cite. I do remember hearing something about something
    like this, along with a bunch of mandatory training on business
    ethics. We have to take these every year.

    I wonder how many people got canned over that one?

    I know that there have been a few individuals who have attempted to do
    things that were unethical or illegal. They don't work for IBM
    anymore.



+ Reply to Thread