Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Profit and Loss by Business Area

An anonymous submitter writes "The Register is reporting in this article striking new evidence of what in my opinion can only be described as abuse of their monopoly position. A recent SEC filing shows that they lose money in every business area except Windows (86% profit) and Office (79% profit)." Another notes that the Financial Times has a story on the same subject - Dr. No writes "According to the Financial Times, Microsoft's Windows division has a profit margin of 85%. This is the first time this figure has been made public." The full version of Windows XP costs about $300.00. Microsoft could sell it for $45 and still make a profit. The difference between the $45 price and the $300 price is what economists call "monopoly rents".

3 of 894 comments (clear)

  1. And this is news... by sparkz · · Score: 1, Troll

    because? MS profit on Windows and Office, their cash-cows. They use this profit to do other stuff. The difference between this any any other company would be ... what, exactly? This is not news, this is not even vaguely interesting. If MS made more from their mobile phone business than from Windows, that would be "News for Nerds" *and* "Stuff that matters". This is neither. It isn't even news (and hasn't been for at least a decade)

    --
    Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
  2. Sheesh by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1, Troll

    The full verison of Windows XP costs about $300.00. Microsoft could sell it for $45 and still make a profit. The difference between the $45 price and the $300 price is what economists call "monopoly rents".

    And what do they call it when Red Hat could sell it for fifty cents instead of the $300 (or whatever it is) for the server version?

    Once again, Michael has absolutely no clue what he's talking about.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  3. Re:Bashing party! by targo · · Score: 1, Troll

    Actually, you said:

    So the costs of R&D are probably nicely offset by the tax benefits.

    This sounded pretty much like 100% to me.