Slashdot Mirror
Paul Allen's Microsoft Experience
theodp writes "Just in case Microsoft bashers don't have enough ammo, Robert X. Cringely has a couple of interesting tales in this week's column. The first explains how Bill Gates used Paul Allen's moonlighting at MITS to justify awarding himself 64% of Microsoft's stock vs. Allen's 36% (and Gates' failure to adjust the shares after he accepted a $10/hour part-time MITS job). The second heart-warming tale concerns a conversation Allen reportedly overheard late one night (as he was finishing up DOS 2.0) between Gates and Steve Ballmer discussing how to get Allen's Microsoft stock back if the Hodgkins disease Allen was battling killed him. Yikes."
I am about as pro-Microsoft as you get on Slashdot. However, I do not find this to be flamebait. Granted, I am sure it will degenerate into troll-fest, with the biggest trolls getting +5 Insightful.
It is a very interesting discuission. How would Microsoft be different if Paul Allen was 50% (or more) owner. The personality of the company be much different, that much is for sure. Would Microsoft have had the moxy to take over the PC world like it did? Would the architecture be even remotely like it is today?
It is fascinating to me how much history depends on a few descisions. While this one may not be the largest in the world, it certainly has had a big impact on the PC world.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
If you have dealt with MS for any length of time. Truth is, this stuff is putting BG in a better light than what he truely deserves. One interesting note, is that most people who are invited to BG's birthday only go, because it would be an insult to not go. Few really wish to go. Basically, BG is a SOB. Few who have worked with him, have a kind word to say about him.
OTH, many love going to Paul's because he really is a nice guy.
Either that or they could have created some other rules basically dilution rules, stating that their 64% were not subject to dilution (or diluted at a rate of 1% or something) and then issued a couple hundred million shares, basically diluting allens 36% down to nothing, and keeping their 64% stake. At the time back in '82 I'm sure MS only had a couple million shares on the books.. Basically it would work like this:
Say MS had 1 million shares, bill has 64% or 640,000, allen has 360,000... They pass a rule stating that their 640000 aren't subject to dilution (IE any new stock issues they get 64% of) and then proceed to issue 100 million shares... they now have 64,000,000 shares, they stick 35,640,000 shares in a trust to be given to future employees (or sold on the market, or whatever) and allen is left with his 360,000 shares which are now 1/3 of 1% of the company. Thus, he (or his heirs) are effectively removed from any meaningful involvment in the company, and they don't have to give anything (cash or otherwise to them).
This would be totally legal, and 100% possible given majority voting rights.
My take is that Paul made the smart move here. Gates was the drive behind Microsoft and he wouldn't have gone full out, if he didn't have a big enough share. The bit about MITS was merely a pretext IMHO. As I mention elsewhere in this thread, the lion got the lion's share.
Its flamebait. Look how the article is set up. "more ammo", "Heart-warming".
t ml?tw=wn_index_4
>How would Microsoft be different if Paul Allen was 50% (or more) owner.
Thats a great point, but do you really think this is the place that can insightfully discuss this?
You want a better story? How about this;
Apple's Finest Flip-Flops
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/mac/0,70546-0.h
Non-flamebait (unless you want to hang/defend Steve Jobs over everything he did in the past 15 years), interesting and tech-related.
The Cringely article is just fuel for hate on slashdot.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
A good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children, but the wealth of the sinner is stored up for the righteous. Proverbs 13:22
If you accept a Forbes article from 1999 or so, the culture of modern Microsoft is mostly Balmer's creation. Bill may have had the vision, but it's Balmer's Napoleon complex (if you believe Forbes, literal Napoleon complex) that enable Microsoft to become the behemoth it is.
Once Balmer was on board, Allen might not have been able to do much to influence Microsoft's culture.
the more accurate the calculations became, the more the concepts tended to vanish into thin air. R. S. Mulliken
After Ballmer stepped in, support for fringe platforms (i.e. not strictly PC-compatible) was pretty much dropped, up through 2.0, MS-DOS ran on quite a variety of 8086/8 boxes.
Now to think of it, MS dropping Xenix happened about this same time frame.
Is it?
I dont think so.
While I was just a newbie in the tech world, I made a promise to myself that I will give 20 % of my salary to charity.
Well, I did too, for around 2 years.
After that my salary increased, and I started finding it extremely diffiicult to give the 20 % of THAT salary away.. The amount increased, you see..
And at that time I wasnt having any other obligations also.
After 1 more year, with an even more increase in salary, I stopped, completely.
Because, when you get good money, you tend to be more selfish.
I *am* weak.
rajmohan_h@yahoo.com
You're right, but there are always workarounds. Here's how I might do it.
Presumably Gates, Balmer and Allen had a certain class of shares, probably along with some other early investors, which were not held by the general shareholders.
So, for the fiscal year 1983 (after Allen left), they could create a new class of shares and match 1:1 with shares from the new class to shares in the old class, for people actively involved in the betterment of the company (not Allen) as an employee stock incentive. Then they could dillute the class of shares that Allen held, including Gates and Balmer's shares (but they don't care, they have the new class).
Of course, IANAPSM (I am not a professional stock manipulator), but it seems if there's a will there's a way.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Thing is, at the time that Jobs said they weren't going to make a video capable iPod, the reason he gave was that there wasn't enough legal content available. Apple then proceeded to (or was already in the process of) line up video content for the iTunes store while developing the video iPod.
I wouldn't call this a flip flop. At worst, it's putting out disinformation to confuse competitors. Disavowing video was part of the strategy.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
You have no idea how true that is. Heres what an expert in criminal psychology states about mafia hitmen, rapists and CEOs.
From here:
According to the Canadian Press and Toronto Sun reporters who rescued the moment from obscurity, Hare began by talking about Mafia hit men and sex offenders, whose photos were projected on a large screen behind him. But then those images were replaced by pictures of top executives from WorldCom, which had just declared bankruptcy, and Enron, which imploded only months earlier. The securities frauds would eventually lead to long prison sentences for WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers and Enron CFO Andrew Fastow.
"These are callous, cold-blooded individuals," Hare said.
"They don't care that you have thoughts and feelings. They have no sense of guilt or remorse." He talked about the pain and suffering the corporate rogues had inflicted on thousands of people who had lost their jobs, or their life's savings. Some of those victims would succumb to heart attacks or commit suicide, he said.
Then Hare came out with a startling proposal. He said that the recent corporate scandals could have been prevented if CEOs were screened for psychopathic behavior. "Why wouldn't we want to screen them?" he asked. "We screen police officers, teachers. Why not people who are going to handle billions of dollars?"
"I always said that if I wasn't studying psychopaths in prison, I'd do it at the stock exchange," Hare told Fast Company.