Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Revenue Up, Tries to Hook Third World

rocketjam writes "Microsoft reported record revenue for the last quarter Thursday due to increased sales of personal computers. Analysts were impressed with the company's overall performance, however they expressed concern about the continuing drop in unearned revenue, reflecting Microsoft's difficulty in signing up customers for long-term, sustainable business contracts. The $400 million drop in unearned revenue was less than the drop in the last quarter but still exceeded many analyst's expectations. The company's continuing problem in gaining long-term contracts is generally attributed to growing security concerns among customers and company's unwillingness to go along with Microsoft's 'Software Assurance' upgrade subscription plan." Also in the news: Microsoft is donating a pile of software to the United Nations -- retail value, $1 billion; wholesale value, maybe $1 million or so -- attempting to hook the Third World on Microsoft software.

39 of 489 comments (clear)

  1. Come on, Michael... by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Mikey adds " .. retail value, $1 billion; wholesale value, maybe $1 million or so "

    Do you have any real data to back this up, Michael, or is this yet another of your unnecessary and unwanted biased editorials? Not that I'm in the pro-Microsoft camp but a 1000-to-1 profit line sounds pretty high. This is shoddy "journalism".

    Feel free to bitch slap me and any subsequent thread.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Come on, Michael... by DrEldarion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, it all depends on what he means by "wholesale value". If it just includes the costs involved in stamping out the CDs, I wouldn't doubt that it would be that cheap.

    2. Re:Come on, Michael... by grub · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Storing these copies in warehouses costs money. Shipping the product costs money. Development costs money. Bug fixes (which MS does) costs money...

      Microsoft doesn't tell their people to go home after they release V1.0 of a product.

      man.. defending MS.. next thing you know I'll be going to church..

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    3. Re:Come on, Michael... by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Informative

      I agree that this thread is relatively venom-laded, but I think the 1000-1 markup is 'valid' from a manufacturing perspective.

      Several years ago (1995ish?), Microsoft Canada closed its retail distribution centre here in Mississauga, to concentrate operations in the US. So Canadian product is shipped north. No big deal. But what was interesting was when they closed the warehouse, it was more cost effective for them to destroy the software than to redistribute. The software packaing itself had very minimal value, compared to the intellectual property inside.

      I've always remembered this example... when it comes to intellectual property, its value is very subjective -- especially to the eyes of the owner.

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    4. Re:Come on, Michael... by GoofyBoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Software, once written, has absolutely no economic value.

      And how can you say this with all the retail software stores out there?

      What do you think the person who wrote the software would say?

      Why not just openly copy things for free and then in court try and pull that argument to justify what sort of penalties should be applied?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    5. Re:Come on, Michael... by GregWebb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nestle, anyone? For years they've been donating formula milk to hospitals in the third world. This isn't as good for the kids as their mothers' milk, costs them money if they carry on using it later (quite likely, if they stop feeding they'll also stop lactating - and guess what, breastfeeding is why women gain weight during pregnancy! Breastfeed your baby and you'll lose weight) and there isn't always a clean source of water, so causing problems there. By giving away the product for free, they cause major problems.

      Windows, Exchange, Office - they all cost money and once you've committed to a solution it's expensive and difficult to change. Giving free software can most definitely be damaging to the recipients.

      --

      Greg

      (Inside a nuclear plant)
      Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

    6. Re:Come on, Michael... by bonch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You somehow relate the fact that Nestle baby formula isn't as good as breast milk to Microsoft donating computer software. Congratulations on the wackiest stretch of an analogy I've ever witnessed.

    7. Re:Come on, Michael... by RoLi · · Score: 3, Informative
      Storing these copies in warehouses costs money.

      Not really. When MS donates 100 000 licenses it really donates a piece of paper and a few CDs, those can be easily stored in Bill Gate's desk.

      Shipping the product costs money.

      See above.

      Development costs money.

      Development has cost the same no matter if MS donates licenses or not.

    8. Re:Come on, Michael... by RoLi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      $1 billion of cash and software

      I have the strong feeling that it's mostly the latter...

    9. Re:Come on, Michael... by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't be so condescending. It's not artificial value at all. I, as a consumer who can't write my own code, assign it a value. And you know what? To me XP *is* worth $200. And apparently, there are millions of people just like me. Granted, to you it may be worthless. So all in all, let's let the Third World decide what's it worth to them. They don't have to accept this donation you know. Give them a little more credit. I'm sure they know all about Linux and how it's free.

      --
      Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    10. Re:Come on, Michael... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      it is dictated by what someone else is willing to pay for it.

      This is exactly right. If this software was being donated for use in the United States, the retail value of the software donated might be somewhat relevant. But it's being donated for use in the third world. And we've seen countless articles about how the third world is embracing linux because they simply cannot afford even the reduced prices that Microsoft tries to charge in those countries.

      When donating something, it is not the donor or the recipient that gets to determine the value of the gift. I cannot donate an old junker of a car and claim that I donated a $35,000 automobile because I think I could sell it for that. Likewise, if Microsoft cannot reasonably charge that for the software they are donating, they should not be able to claim that figure either.

      When I visited the Amazon, I was able to buy a Coke for $0.08 in a small town that was easily 2-3 hours from anywhere. When I was in Paris, essentially the same product cost me almost $3. This difference in price has nothing to do with the cost of production/delivery but is entirely dependant on market forces.

      Put simply, MS software is worth next to nothing outside of first-world countries. Whether 1000-1 is correct, I cannot speculate without factual evidence to back it up. But it is x-1 where x is a pretty hefty number.

    11. Re:Come on, Michael... by Blue+Stone · · Score: 3, Interesting
      You somehow relate the fact that Nestle baby formula isn't as good as breast milk to Microsoft donating computer software. Congratulations on the wackiest stretch of an analogy I've ever witnessed.

      It's not whacky at all. The principle aim of Nestle's baby-formula scam was that they'd donate just enough formula for the mother's own milk to dry up, after which ... lock-in: unable to produce her own milk, she would be dependent on the formula if she didn't want her baby to starve (pretty likely scenario.)

      Fairly appropriate analogy, really.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    12. Re:Come on, Michael... by andrews · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Khomar, you're making the same mistake Marx did. A thing's value is not derived from the costs involved in making it.

      Value is totally subjective and unmeasurable. A rough approximation can be made based on market price, but that's somewhat faulty too because the trade medium (money) itself has different value to different people. $100 is is more valuable to someone who earns $20K/year than it is to someone who earns $100k/year.

      A ratio of $s/time to earn can be used to more closely approximate comparative value of a thing for models but even so that ignores differences in individual tastes/wants/needs. Basically value can only be measured on individual case by case basis by the individual making the buy/not buy decision.

  2. You're kidding, right? by inertia187 · · Score: 4, Funny

    retail value, $1 billion; wholesale value, maybe $1 million or so -- attempting to hook the Third World on Microsoft software.

    That's the difference between Microsoft's wholesale and the MSRP? Amazing...and that's without the Software Assurance, I'd imagine. Man, am I in the wrong business or what?

    I'm glad you're here to tell us these things.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
  3. Re:"the third world" by Squeebee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Aah, but is it profit they are after? Seems to me that when Microsoft gives software away these days it is not so much to hook people, but to keep them from going to Linux.

  4. "Hook" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    attempting to hook the Third World on Microsoft software

    While I'm an avid Linux fan, why do I get the feeling that if a large Linux distributor like Red Hat arranged for a glut of software to be sent to UN countries, the headline would have been slightly more flattering? Something like "generously supplied Third World coutries with Linux software" instead of the negative connotations implied with "hook" that is attached to Microsoft's gesture.

  5. Everyone nod your head by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "In the news today, something good happened to Microsoft. However, we at OSDN feel we must say something bad about them, so as not to focus less on the positive, more on the negative. Thank you for nodding your head."

  6. Hooking by jimhill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't see that it really matters if Microsoft tries to "hook" the Third World on their products. The Third World can't _afford_ Microsoft prices (sort of what makes them Third World) and so if they are using Microsoft products it will be at no gain to the company's bottom line.

    --
    Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
  7. Weapons of Mass .... by jvmatthe · · Score: 3, Funny

    Isn't giving away tons of Microsoft software like trafficking in weapons of mass infection? Shouldn't that be against some international law or something? I mean, what could be worse than a million extra Outlook and IE clients all unpatched and ready to act as virus broadcast stations?

    Yeah, yeah, I know. Not fair. So mod me down. :^D

  8. Re:unearned revenue ?? by 1SmartOne · · Score: 3, Informative

    What they're talking about it unearned, they mean contracted or obligated but unpaid. Like if you buy something on a lease and don't have to pay for 90 days or better yet sign a contract but you don't take deliverables until 5 months into the contract. Simple GAAP rules. -Scott PS. Sorry 'bout being off topic.

  9. Definition of Unearned Revenue by RazzleFrog · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of you who are not accountants:

    Unearned revenue is actually not a P&L item. It is a liability on a companies Balance Sheet. If I prepay for a service the company has to recognize that revenue over the life of the service. So if I pay for a years worth of service from Microsoft for $12,000 they can recognize $1000 each month as revenue and reduce the liability by $1000 until the 12 months are up and the $12,000 has entirely hit the P&L.

    The decrease in unearned revenue means that people aren't locking themselves into Microsoft but it doesn't reflect at all on what Microsofts future revenue will be. If anything companies that do end up sticking with Microsoft may pay more in the long run by not taking advantage of prepayment discounts.

    And yes - I am CPA.

  10. Re:"the third world" by sTalking_Goat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not neccisarily. During the 90's MS knew that software priacy in China (real copy/sell piracy not ??AA piracy...)was big in China, but they let it happen because they the Chinese would get 'hooked' and MS products and then MS could really turn the screws and milk them. Drug dealer tactics. The first one is always free.

    --

    My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...

  11. Re:Donating software by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative
    The article points out their expectations that, since they "own" 90% of the software market, that most of the boxes will stay ms-boxes:

    from the article:

    "Our role is to bring software that is quite popular, and happens to be ours."

    Microsoft software is used to run more than 90 percent of the world's PCs.

    Look here for previous "charitable donations" that were actually marketing trojan horses that ended up being too expensive for the recipient..

  12. Re:Double standards by TheSpoom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you on crack?

    Microsoft can't "remotely deactivate" any version of Windows XP any more than I can reach into your hard drive with my mind and delete your OS. And even if they could, any government with an ounce of programming experience would DISABLE Windows Product Activation through a crack, or even use the Corporate version, which doesn't ask you for it.

    Are you trying to imply that all software created in the United States should only be distributed to countries that the US explicitly approves of or something? That's not the way the world works, and that's certainly not the way that I would want MY software handled if I lived in the US.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  13. Re:"the third world" by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, but there are a few benefits to this:

    1) They have a chance to get in on the ground floor in those countries. If all the people there are used to using MS software, guess what they'll keep using if/when the economy starts to get going?

    2) It pushes the numbers of people using Windows up, which is what a lot of PHBs look at. "Why would we switch over to Linux when 99% of the world uses Windows?!"

    3) Tax write-off.

    4) Looks good to consumers - "Wow, they're so generous!"

    5) Maybe MS just felt like being nice. There's no exclusivity agreement, so even if the people there take the free software, there's nothing stopping them from using alternative software if they feel like it. Pretty cool of MS.

  14. Reminds me of Nestle by Chairboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember reading about Nestle bringing baby formula to 3rd world countries. "Use this instead of your own breast milk. The succesful and healthy parents in the United States do, so it must be better."

    The problems started to show up immediately. First, there was a limited supply, so the parents would try to stretch the formula. Second, there isn't usually a source of purified water in the middle of poverty stricken 3rd world, so they would use water that often had bacteria. 3rd, after using the introductory supply up, they were basically forced to keep using it going forward because the mothers had lost the ability to generate milk.

    Nestle made a great profit because there was a high demand, funded through help funds, and also because they generated a captive audience.

    I wonder if there will be equivalents here where Microsoft essentially 'addicts' them to using their software while leaving any content expiration intact so they'll be obligated to stick to acquiring new MS things going forward.

  15. Re:unearned revenue ?? by nodwick · · Score: 4, Informative
    call me old fashioned but shouldn't any revenue be EARNED ??? :))
    For those not familiar with the accounting-speak, unearned revenue is basically money which has been paid to Microsoft for products which they have not yet delivered. Consider it kind of like pre-ordering your favorite new DVD or video game. Companies are required to account for it separately from regular revenue because if for some reason they're unable to deliver the product later, that revenue might have to be returned; therefore it's considered slightly risky.

    In this particular context, it would include people who have signed up for Microsoft "software subscription" program. Declining unearned revenues mean that there aren't as many people signing up for their subscriptions as they'd hoped.

  16. It's like this.. by loconet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A friend of my put it best ..

    "In other news, crack dealers give first hit of crack for free to kids"

    --
    [alk]
  17. Profit was not up by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Read the statements again. 3 month income is down, year over year.

    Microsoft is trying to spin this as improved results, but they are just playing a shell game. Note that the increase revenue is more than balanced by increased expenses. Translation: Microsoft is buying sales and hiding the costs. Translation of the translation: Microsoft is being forced to offer heavy incentives to move their tired old products. Translation of the translation of the translation: a million Penguin bites really do hurt.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Profit was not up by RazzleFrog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Revenue is not the same thing as profit. Revenue is your gross income. Profit is your net after expenses. If you look at their financial statements and the MD&A you will notice that the decrease in profit is due to "$1.31 billion in stock based compensation expense associated with the employee stock option transfer."

      There is no spin here except for your post. If you eliminate the effect of the stock options their expenses as a % of revenue actually decreases.

  18. You'd think the 3rd world would... by FerretFrottage · · Score: 3, Funny

    get it right after all the first two worlds has been throught with MS products. Then again, maybe McBride is in the 3rd world as we speak preaching the evils of the GPL. Here's to the the 4th world!

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
  19. Are taxpayers donating to Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe an accountant can answer this question:

    How much does Microsoft get to declare as a tax deduction when it donates software?

    For example, say Microsoft donates a CD, and that CD cost $1 to manufacture, but it contains software that normally retails for $100.

    What does Microsoft get to deduct for their charitable donation? Is it $1? $50? $100?

    If it is anything more that $1, then Microsoft is making a profit. In effect, money would be being transferred from other taxpayers to Microsoft.

    1. Re:Are taxpayers donating to Microsoft? by magarity · · Score: 3, Informative

      How much does Microsoft get to declare as a tax deduction when it donates software?

      Please see the first section, "What is fair market value?" at this IRS online publication: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p561.pdf
      The relevant sentence: "Fair market value (FMV)is the price that property would sell for on the open market." In other words, regular retail price.

  20. Sure they'll take it, but wouldn't anyone? by holy_smoke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a "freebie", that is.

    Like other posters have pointed out, these third world countries will not be able to affort the hight prices of upgrades. Sure they would take the freebies - it would be smart, but I doubt Microsoft is going to gain the long position.

    The dynamic in Microsoft's finances right now is really illustrating a couple of things: (1) market pressures by solutions offered by other (open source) alternatives, and (2) the beginnings of the effects of their predatory reputation and business practices in light of #1.

    Software is in may regards (and this is a controversial statement) becoming a commodity. When that happens pricing pressures take hold. Microsoft is entering this phase of its company's life. It can no longer hold onto and expand the market by monopolistic tactics. The open source movement, general awarness and a growing sense of displeasure in the business community with Microsoft's tactics and pricing, and of course the anti-trust trial and verdict (however inadequate we feel the "punishment".

    The bottom line is that Microsoft's business success was base partly on its ability to meet customer needs (minus security), but was propped up by its predatory behavior.

    I see this trend continuing until Micrsoft's pricing comes in line with upcoming competition (GO LINUX DESKTOP!!!). We are in the middle of a paradigm shift, ladies and gentlemen.

    --
    Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
  21. Re:Donating is a good thing by endoftheroadmatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but: The desktop OS/Office Software market is not your typical 2-3 major-player market. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist with over 90% market share. This is not an offer of help, this is a predatory offer to stop 3rd world countries from adopting Open Source Software.

  22. Helloooooooooo? by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't see that it really matters if Microsoft tries to "hook" the Third World on their products. The Third World can't _afford_ Microsoft prices (sort of what makes them Third World) and so if they are using Microsoft products it will be at no gain to the company's bottom line.

    You seem to have completely missed the finer points of monopoly versus normal competition. The very last thing you want as a monopoly is a competitive alternative. Read up on some basic economics about profits in monopoly versus duopoly and how much money it's rational to sink into barriers to entry.

    Microsoft would want nothing but for the third world to use their products, both officially (like this giveaway) and unofficially through piracy, because it means they're not using anything else. While they may cry their hearts out over the massive piracy, the truth is that if they actually forced them to pay, they'd lose their biggest barrier to entry.

    You're right, the third world doesn't gain their bottom line. But if they let an alternative develop and grow popular because their prices are too high, it could seriously hurt their bottom line where it matters - in the rich countries. That's what this is all about, what they are trying to prevent.

    That's also why threats of moving to Linux is so effective - the more people are on Linux, the more the rest can threaten to move to Linux. So it's probably cheaper to buy them off than to increase the Linux userbase and make the switchover threat worse. They sacrifice a little profit to keep their monopoly, because that is what matters in the greater picture.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  23. Yeah, sure, why not by andih8u · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft is obviously doing this just to hook the third world. Its not like they, nor Bill Gates have ever made any charitable donations before, right?

    Maybe one day slashdot will get rid of Michael and will slowly become a respectable news source again.

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
  24. Re:sloppy reporting by One+Louder · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It really depends upon what you consider the "value" of donated software - is it simply the costs of the media, or the artificially constructed retail price? What Michael was alluding to was not that Microsoft's software is worth only 0.1% of the retail price, but rather that the actual hard cost to Microsoft for the donation is orders of magnitude less than the fake "value". Where this is important is at tax write-off (or press release) time - they donate a CD with Office that costs them $0.05, and can try to write off $300. In some cases it's even less - they donate a single CD and grant a site license.

    If you like, I'll give you $1000 worth of software - it's easy because I can arbitrarily set the "value" of a trivial chunk of code at $1000 and be no different that what Microsoft is doing here. This is why Microsoft likes to donate software or vouchers for software (most which usually come back to them) instead of cash.

  25. Re:sloppy reporting by The+Bungi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The people who run this web site are not journalists by any stretch of the imagination. They never were, and they never will be. The only one to come remotely close to that description was Katz, but he was so far gone to the left that it didn't matter.

    I agree with what you're saying, but I cringe whenever someone accuses them of "shoddy journalism" - that's an insult to real journalists everywhere. Instead, they should be criticized for running a web site that unfortunately commands the attention of millions of people all over the world and knowingly appending their snippy comments to stories submitted by other people in order to sway the opinion of said millions (ok, maybe thousands).

    Being a "perl hacker" (whatever the hell that means) and hitting the jackpot by accident does not make you a journalist anymore thatn learning to hack a weird scripting language makes you a professional software developer.