Well, one way to look at it is that this would allow condensing of population simpler. Many families are fine with 1-2 children. If you can make a genetic offspring from 3 parents, 2 children, rather than sustaining the number, now actually decreases as the population ages. Do this for 4-5 generation, you would have a reduction by 1/3rd.
They are in Redmond because it has the infastructure to support them. The telecommunications, roadways and educational system to supply those tens of thousands of employees. Nevada, by contrast, cannot supply these (sorry nevada, you're a great state, but your infastructure is horrid). For microsoft to do such a move would be to cut off its nose to spite its face.
There is a reason why the top performing companies are found in areas with the highest tax brackets. Those territories, which tax for the needed infastructure, are the ones which can support businesses of Microsofts size.
Quite true, a bond issuance would work, save Microsoft has already offered it as shares. 0.97 a yahoo share per microsoft share.
If this was a bond issuance, wouldn't have much to be concerned about. But when you have $17 billion in stock of your own company as part of your cash and short term investment sheet... it can get ugly if the merger does not come off perfectly.
Yes, I see serious financial trouble. They are using cash reserves (which is mostly shares held in itself) to maintain a front of profitability and dividend price. This cannot be maintained forever, and Microsoft has shown no change of direction in order to correct this.
What is there to understand. They have, since 2000, had a net profit of roughly $100 billion. They have, since 2000, expended roughly $50 billion in dividends.
I have read their SEC filings every year, as a former stockholder should. Since 2000 I've been noticing bizzare habits, bad trends, and now a company in serious financial difficulties using every trick in the book to keep itself afloat.
Giants in industry have fallen on hard times and used similar tricks in an attempt to shore itself up. I just fear that this yahoo stock-swap might be a bridge too far for the company to handle, and I've stated that fear. I have had a dozen people directly address me, trying to "make me understand" but in the end, you cannot subtract $50 billion from $100 billion then minus the $roughly $40 billion that has evaporated from cash reserves and get $17 billion out of it.
You just sang and danced and your way to cover, and it doesn't work. $16 billion reinvested would not be called a net profit, it would be part of the cost between gross and net. You are still talking $16 billion just flat out gone, missing, evaporated! And this is the company offering to buy another one for $44.6 billion? You tell me, how does this add up?
Microsoft is suffering, they are failing, and if I were you, I'd flee before the whole company implodes spectacularly. I saw a similar situation a few years back with a company my grandfather had a lot of his retirement in, some small firm called Enron.
No, I am going by microsofts. Look at their cash-on-hand numbers for the past 8 years. Went from over $50 billion to now under $17 billion. They're performing fancy accounting to try and show a profit, but once you crunch the numbers, there's no true profits being generated.
Microsoft has only $17 billion in cash and easily liquidatable shares (almost all MSFT stock). A $44.6 billion bid requires them to "print money" ie Shares. This deal is absolutely horrid for any responsible stock analysist or stockholder for either company. WHat Microsoft is basically offering is to produce new shares, diluting ownership for all involved, which when paired with the rapid selloff upon deal conclusion, will drive the price of the stock downward even moreso than it has been since (It still hasn't recovered from the recession of '01). Add in that their operating cash is mostly stocks which would be driven down by this, you're looking at the potential for a bite more than they can chew.
According to their latest SEC filing, microsoft only has about $18 billion in cash and easily liquidated stocks (almost all their own) available. For them to do this, they would have to issue new stocks, which would then dilute all ownership value, then when the yahoo folk offload their stock in a hurry, cause the whole thing to plummet like a rock which would in turn turn Microsofts operating cash into monopoly money, likely giving them at beast indigestion, at worst crippling the company...
I, too, work in the movie industry. The issue is that movies, for good or ill, is not a service, it is a luxury item. Plumbing is a service, in the end you have something in your hand. A movie will leave you with memories. While yes you can have a physical component of the movie, it is not intrinsic to the artform itself.
Being an artform, it's value is dependent upon its audience itself. The best artists can demand the highest price. But the best artists also know that the art sells itself. If I demanded that someone buy my painting, but they cannot look at it, I would be given a very low value unless I had earned such high regards that people flocked for even a hair from my brush. file sharing is that viewing, like it or not. People like what they see, they will pay for it. If you cannot trust in the value of your art, then you are in the wrong business.
That this scam can even work is a product of supplier-side economics. Where people don't have to work to get what they want. That it is all about me me me.
Get rich quick schemes never are quick and they don't get you rich. never have, never will. Grow up and get a real job. Want to make $100k a year, go to college to earn that degree for a position that does make $100k a year.
It is really sad when Matrix Reloaded got hacking more accurate than a movie about hacking!
these writers should log into IRC sometime and chat with people that know how this stuff works. I could have rewritten portions of this movie to be more plausible as well as more compelling.
A surprising move
on
Sun Buys MySQL
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
When I talked to some Solaris guys about MySQL, I had nothing but grief from them about it. They kept hyping up postgresql. Now I wonder if I log into that forum now if they shall change their tunes any.
He tried several arguements. The most notable being:
All other offices use it! Microsoft makes the best products! I'd never heard of this! How can we be considered professionals without Microsoft? Office is the only format with any support It doesn't offer the same features. You have to retrain everyone, which would cost more.
You do realize that Intel gained a lot of its manufacturing capability through questionable avenues, such as suing smaller silicon vendors then out-spending their law teams and refusing any solution other than to hand over their silicon plants, right? (eg DEC)
Our office was doing a major expantion, double the staff. The accountant was driving herself nuts trying to source Office CD's for everyone.
Then I installed OpenOffice on my machine. She walked by, and went "you didn't install Office without a key did you, because that's against the rules." I then proceeded to show her OO, how it works, what it was. Then came the big sale, "..and best of all, it's free."
Our office is MS Office free now, altho one holdout refuses to go OO, so eventually I installed the beta of IBM Lotus Symphony and all is good.
Slashdot Mirror
Never had anybody compare me to Mitt Romney before...
And who says it has to be two women, with the new UK research able to have men produce eggs and women sperm?
Well, one way to look at it is that this would allow condensing of population simpler. Many families are fine with 1-2 children. If you can make a genetic offspring from 3 parents, 2 children, rather than sustaining the number, now actually decreases as the population ages. Do this for 4-5 generation, you would have a reduction by 1/3rd.
Paper tiger arguement.
They are in Redmond because it has the infastructure to support them. The telecommunications, roadways and educational system to supply those tens of thousands of employees. Nevada, by contrast, cannot supply these (sorry nevada, you're a great state, but your infastructure is horrid). For microsoft to do such a move would be to cut off its nose to spite its face.
There is a reason why the top performing companies are found in areas with the highest tax brackets. Those territories, which tax for the needed infastructure, are the ones which can support businesses of Microsofts size.
Quite true, a bond issuance would work, save Microsoft has already offered it as shares. 0.97 a yahoo share per microsoft share.
If this was a bond issuance, wouldn't have much to be concerned about. But when you have $17 billion in stock of your own company as part of your cash and short term investment sheet... it can get ugly if the merger does not come off perfectly.
Yes, I see serious financial trouble. They are using cash reserves (which is mostly shares held in itself) to maintain a front of profitability and dividend price. This cannot be maintained forever, and Microsoft has shown no change of direction in order to correct this.
What is there to understand. They have, since 2000, had a net profit of roughly $100 billion. They have, since 2000, expended roughly $50 billion in dividends.
I have read their SEC filings every year, as a former stockholder should. Since 2000 I've been noticing bizzare habits, bad trends, and now a company in serious financial difficulties using every trick in the book to keep itself afloat.
Giants in industry have fallen on hard times and used similar tricks in an attempt to shore itself up. I just fear that this yahoo stock-swap might be a bridge too far for the company to handle, and I've stated that fear. I have had a dozen people directly address me, trying to "make me understand" but in the end, you cannot subtract $50 billion from $100 billion then minus the $roughly $40 billion that has evaporated from cash reserves and get $17 billion out of it.
They've paid $40 billion in dividends off of net profits of almost $100 billion, yet had their cash reserves drop by over $40 billion...
As Atari once said, Do the math.
You just sang and danced and your way to cover, and it doesn't work. $16 billion reinvested would not be called a net profit, it would be part of the cost between gross and net. You are still talking $16 billion just flat out gone, missing, evaporated! And this is the company offering to buy another one for $44.6 billion? You tell me, how does this add up?
Microsoft is suffering, they are failing, and if I were you, I'd flee before the whole company implodes spectacularly. I saw a similar situation a few years back with a company my grandfather had a lot of his retirement in, some small firm called Enron.
Yes you do, as that would be paying out a dividend more than the net profits of the company. That cannot be sustained now, can it?
No, I am going by microsofts. Look at their cash-on-hand numbers for the past 8 years. Went from over $50 billion to now under $17 billion. They're performing fancy accounting to try and show a profit, but once you crunch the numbers, there's no true profits being generated.
$1 billion gross - $1.1 billion cost == net loss of $100mil a month, which is what you are finding if you check on their growth charts since 2000.
Only way for your math to work would be for them to cancel all R&D, tech support, and shut down every server, laying off everyone.
No.. the shares that they've bought back is listed on their SEC report under cash on hand and short term investments. All of them are accounted for.
Microsoft has only $17 billion in cash and easily liquidatable shares (almost all MSFT stock). A $44.6 billion bid requires them to "print money" ie Shares. This deal is absolutely horrid for any responsible stock analysist or stockholder for either company. WHat Microsoft is basically offering is to produce new shares, diluting ownership for all involved, which when paired with the rapid selloff upon deal conclusion, will drive the price of the stock downward even moreso than it has been since (It still hasn't recovered from the recession of '01). Add in that their operating cash is mostly stocks which would be driven down by this, you're looking at the potential for a bite more than they can chew.
Looks like I know where I'll be taking my photos...
According to their latest SEC filing, microsoft only has about $18 billion in cash and easily liquidated stocks (almost all their own) available. For them to do this, they would have to issue new stocks, which would then dilute all ownership value, then when the yahoo folk offload their stock in a hurry, cause the whole thing to plummet like a rock which would in turn turn Microsofts operating cash into monopoly money, likely giving them at beast indigestion, at worst crippling the company...
Great idea, I give it a double thumbs up!
I, too, work in the movie industry. The issue is that movies, for good or ill, is not a service, it is a luxury item. Plumbing is a service, in the end you have something in your hand. A movie will leave you with memories. While yes you can have a physical component of the movie, it is not intrinsic to the artform itself.
Being an artform, it's value is dependent upon its audience itself. The best artists can demand the highest price. But the best artists also know that the art sells itself. If I demanded that someone buy my painting, but they cannot look at it, I would be given a very low value unless I had earned such high regards that people flocked for even a hair from my brush. file sharing is that viewing, like it or not. People like what they see, they will pay for it. If you cannot trust in the value of your art, then you are in the wrong business.
32GB of RAM and two quad-core Xeon
Still sucks.
never thought I'd be quoting Drew Carey...
"we have a club, it's called EVERYBODY! We meet at the bar."
That this scam can even work is a product of supplier-side economics. Where people don't have to work to get what they want. That it is all about me me me.
Get rich quick schemes never are quick and they don't get you rich. never have, never will. Grow up and get a real job. Want to make $100k a year, go to college to earn that degree for a position that does make $100k a year.
A ha, so that is how Microsoft managed to brainwash everyone into running Windows!
It is really sad when Matrix Reloaded got hacking more accurate than a movie about hacking!
these writers should log into IRC sometime and chat with people that know how this stuff works. I could have rewritten portions of this movie to be more plausible as well as more compelling.
When I talked to some Solaris guys about MySQL, I had nothing but grief from them about it. They kept hyping up postgresql. Now I wonder if I log into that forum now if they shall change their tunes any.
He tried several arguements. The most notable being:
All other offices use it!
Microsoft makes the best products!
I'd never heard of this!
How can we be considered professionals without Microsoft?
Office is the only format with any support
It doesn't offer the same features.
You have to retrain everyone, which would cost more.
You do realize that Intel gained a lot of its manufacturing capability through questionable avenues, such as suing smaller silicon vendors then out-spending their law teams and refusing any solution other than to hand over their silicon plants, right? (eg DEC)
Our office was doing a major expantion, double the staff. The accountant was driving herself nuts trying to source Office CD's for everyone.
Then I installed OpenOffice on my machine. She walked by, and went "you didn't install Office without a key did you, because that's against the rules." I then proceeded to show her OO, how it works, what it was. Then came the big sale, "..and best of all, it's free."
Our office is MS Office free now, altho one holdout refuses to go OO, so eventually I installed the beta of IBM Lotus Symphony and all is good.