Slashdot Mirror
Elop Favored By Gamblers As Microsoft's Next Chief Executive
PolygamousRanchKid writes "A gambling website's favorite as Microsoft Corp.'s next chief executive officer is Stephen Elop, the Nokia CEO who has presided over a 62 percent decline in market value. Elop, a former Microsoft executive, has 5-to-1 odds to be hired as Steve Ballmer's replacement, according to Ladbrokes, the U.K.-based gambling operator. He leads a pool including internal candidates Kevin Turner and Julie Larson-Green and outsiders like Apple CEO Tim Cook — a 100-to-1 dark horse."
An expert in tanking companies at the helm of Microsoft? I can't wait.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Elon Musk
Every time I see his name, I think what a cool name for mens cologne.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
I can picture it now...
Elop gets in. He sits down, and writes a memo about how the company is sitting on a burning platform and needs to change or die. He'll then adopt a bold strategy of switching the entire company over to... what? QNX maybe?
Considering his track record, I find it hard to believe anybody thinks this is a good idea.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
Maybe Nokia was always supposed to be Elop's training company? You know, a company he can try stuff at and drive it into the ground before he gets his hands on the real thing? Maybe he was even supposed to run it into the ground the ground, kind of like Brewster's Millions but with a company?
Fanatically anti-fanatical
How are CEOs judged. Honestly.. I don't know. It seems to an outsider like me that names come up again and again even after they slam corporations to the ground.
Carly Fiorina came up as a candidate. Why? Everything she touches turns to shit and H.P. barely survived her.
There is a cult of personality around these people that need to be broken up.
Ballmer left the company in shambles in terms of their standing and momentum in the industry. Whoever takes over is going to have to be very aggressive and will probably run head long into antitrust issues if they are too serious about rebuilding Microsoft's standing and momentum. What Microsoft needs at this point:
1. Release Windows 8.2 with the start menu fully restored, Metro apps able to run on the desktop mode and Metro only a primary UI option on touch screen PCs unless the user configures otherwise (either way should still be an option).
2. Release Windows RT 2 tablet in $200 and $300 32gb and 64gb options with full Microsoft Office. Microsoft needs to just flood the market with low cost, Kindle-like Windows tablets that'll run any traditional Windows app recompiled for ARM (another restriction that needs to go from Windows 8).
3. Attack the living room not just with the XBox One, but alternatives to protocols like AirPlay that are open, documented and patent-free for other vendors to implement. Microsoft can isolate Apple even more by returning to its roots of being of one of the most open big vendors in the industry.
What the employees want does not matter even a little.
The current management put Ballmer in charge, they are going to select another Ballmer not someone who will change their culture.
Stock price doesn't mean diddley squat. GE is immense and their stock price isn't great but they do very well in their markets.
And this visionary thing is overrated, Apple isn't going to produce a groundbreaking device in a new market for them every three years. No company can does that.
1. Release Windows 8.2 with the start menu fully restored, Metro apps able to run on the desktop mode and Metro only a primary UI option on touch screen PCs unless the user configures otherwise (either way should still be an option).
2. Release Windows RT 2 tablet in $200 and $300 32gb and 64gb options with full Microsoft Office. Microsoft needs to just flood the market with low cost, Kindle-like Windows tablets that'll run any traditional Windows app recompiled for ARM (another restriction that needs to go from Windows 8).
3. Attack the living room not just with the XBox One, but alternatives to protocols like AirPlay that are open, documented and patent-free for other vendors to implement. Microsoft can isolate Apple even more by returning to its roots of being of one of the most open big vendors in the industry.
I love quick fixes. The problem with Microsoft is the the company. We are asking why an army of clever; highly qualified and paid individuals could release so many failures...obvious failures before release.
Lets look at your fixes(Lipstick on a Pig) you address the unpopular Metro Interface failure, by having it there as a kludge; It was never about a start menu it was about creating an ecosystem with a consistent interface so they could force themselves into the mobile market(They use the word "ecosystem"), and cash in on the lockdown (store and hardware) to Microsoft product and services. The answer wasn't to use the advantages over mobile (10x power and screen real estate, good input, massive storage) they simply dumbed down a computer to a poor tablet. How about Microsoft accept its in competition and compete by producing the Best Desktop ever.
Then you bring up cost. Microsoft walk around with 70% gross margins while its partners do with 10%-20%, and not only is office unwanted they also charge for that too. Traditional Windows Apps do not work on a tablet. No wonder the devices are considered overprices and its partners are turning away. How about Microsoft change their business stratergy?
Bill Gates might have got into the living room with the console, but seriously its a $500, £430 in the UK and 500 Euros console (ignoring its anti-gamer launch) it is going against a $35 Device Chromecast. that already has an alternative to Airplay and works for iOS and Android. How about Microsoft stop selling hardware but sell software...hold on did Andriod just get another 6 Consoles.
The bottom line is a few quick fixes...and these aren't are not going to fix the problem.
Shareholders judge CEOs according to how stock prices have moved and how dividends have been released. These are usually the guys you have to please, over the term of a couple of years, to keep your job.
An objective observer would more likely judge a CEO by the stability and growth of the company over the course of half a decade or more. It's not always about the money. Some great private company owners don't care much about bringing in a corporate profit, but rather they just like what they're doing and want to pay their employees and the bills. (But of course, once you hold a majority share in a company that is worth billions of dollars, it becomes VERY hard to resist an IPO.)
There's also a big difference between a startup that is still on its way up vs. an established company. A company with its roots firmly planted, in my opinion, should value a CEO with the ability to continue pushing the company forward when market conditions provide overbearing competition and when economic times do not play well to the good or service being provided. Sometimes this means reducing cash in the bank and moving fiercely into related markets that are on the upswing.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
A company that is stagnating basically needs to start a square 1 and re inject that creativity. It was always said that Paul Allen would have taken M$ in other directions to Bill Gates and Paul Allen was the real creative person behind M$, just got squeezed out by the hostility of Ballmer and Gates combined. So get Paul back in to set new directions for the two parts of the company M$ Office/Windows and MSN/gaming. They can leave Ballmer at M$ Office/Windows to squeeze the life out of it.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
>To paraphrase "1984," some shareholders are more equal than others.
Right author, wrong book: Animal Farm.
Right. That would be Orson Wells. The original poster was probably confusing the shareholders with Morlocks, from one of his other books - The Time Machine (as in the movie, starring Jean-Claude Van Damme).