Microsoft CEO Ballmer not worried about Apple's market cap

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 105
    And all you naysayer will see - just wait until the Courier comes out on the market!!
  • Reply 62 of 105
    bc kellybc kelly Posts: 148member
  • Reply 63 of 105
    souliisoulsouliisoul Posts: 827member
    Ballmer was in India, it never made the main stream news in India! I only found out after reading this article. I can tell you if SJ came to India, it would be major news, since Apple has good following in India!
  • Reply 64 of 105
    icyfogicyfog Posts: 338member
    Ballmer wasn't worried about the iPhone either.
  • Reply 65 of 105
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post


    "We are executing very well," the chief executive said. "That's going to lead to great products and great success."



    And that means more Windows licenses sold to hardware OEMs. Microsoft is in the Windows business, not the software business. This is why they have failed in consumer electronics. IT departments and HP and Dell are locked into the Windows business. Consumers aren't.



    MS may have to worry about that, too. We have Apple owning the higher-end consumer market with their PCs, which means MS is not making many OS sales in that area, the area where OS sales are more profitable per unit.



    Then we have Windows failing for a decade on tablets, the iPad paving the way for usable tablets with Android and, likely, WebOS and Chrome OS pulling up the rear. We should also start seeing Android and Chrome OS, and possibly WebOS, on netbooks. This may carry over into cheap notebooks, especially in the developing areas.



    This pretty much gives Windows the middle of the road computing for consumers and the Enterprise, but we're seeing a trend of Apple having to expend their market into some cheaper machines as they saturate a market's price point, as well as trend for people not buying the cheapest machine possible.



    On top of that,it's possible that the smartphone market may be a precursor to changes to PCs in the workplace. The ubiquity of the internet, Macs being x86, OS-independent web apps and the popularity of notebooks over desktops may give rise to users getting a choice or having the cost of their personal notebook being subsidized by their employer. This could lead to more Macs in the workplace, even though they'd be purchased via the consumer end. This wouldn't affect servers or desktops and would be a very small ding in Windows marketshare, but the financial impact could be quite severe for PC OEMs.
  • Reply 66 of 105
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by icyfog View Post


    Ballmer wasn't worried about the iPhone either.



    He sure didn't admit he was scared and pooh-poohed it, said the price was too high even though WinMo-based phones had been selling for more money, and alluded to MS having a lot more market share than they did, though he didn't actually state it.
  • Reply 67 of 105
    tofinotofino Posts: 697member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by raymondinperth View Post


    Fire Steve ballmer !



    Steve Ballmer is the best thing to ever happen to apple.
  • Reply 68 of 105
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,404member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cincytee View Post


    it's -- a contraction of "it is"

    its -- a possessive pronoun indicating association to an inanimate object



    Wow. Like I didn't know. Get a life.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post


    could it be that we all know this already and it's just a typo?



    That's what it was (notice the contraction). Thanks for the benefit of doubt, 126.



    (I was sending it from my iPad, and sometimes, it sneaks in apostrophes..... )
  • Reply 69 of 105
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,404member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post


    It certainly is damning when he took over 10 years ago MS' Market Cap was $500+Billion and now it's less than half that! Wow!



    Best



    To be fair to MSFT, its stock was swept up as part of the dotcom bubble. For instance, Cisco was valued at $557B in March 2000, but is worth $135B now. Similar things happened to Amazon, eBay, etc., and even worse, Yahoo (which, if I recall, was worth $125B at peak, now worth $22B).
  • Reply 70 of 105
    riderrider Posts: 31member
    [QUOTE=

    The market value of Microsoft has decreased from $556 billion in January of 2000, when Ballmer took over for Bill Gates as CEO, to $219 billion on Wednesday. In the same timeframe, Apple's market value has grown from $15.6 billion to $221 billion after the closing bell Wednesday.

    [/QUOTE]



    that says it all ...
  • Reply 71 of 105
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    To be fair to MSFT, its stock was swept up as part of the dotcom bubble. For instance, Cisco was valued at $557B in March 2000, but is worth $135B now. Similar things happened to Amazon, eBay, etc., and even worse, Yahoo (which, if I recall, was worth $125B at peak, now worth $22B).



    True, but Apple is up by a factor of 15 in the same time period.
  • Reply 72 of 105
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,427member
    balmer is apple's best asset

    i read an article that stated as of 2003 MS 400b apple 5b

    now MS 200b apple 221b

    wow what a meltdown.

    MS stock losing 1/2 its value, FAILURE, where is the outrage at stockholders meetings??
  • Reply 73 of 105
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    To be fair to MSFT, its stock was swept up as part of the dotcom bubble. For instance, Cisco was valued at $557B in March 2000, but is worth $135B now. Similar things happened to Amazon, eBay, etc., and even worse, Yahoo (which, if I recall, was worth $125B at peak, now worth $22B).



    You could compare MSFT to other non-performers but that doesn't lead to a different conclusion IMO. Better I think to factor out the dot-com bubble and look at performance over the last five years. On that basis, MSFT is a flatliner, and CSCO and AMZN are well on the plus side.
  • Reply 74 of 105
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,404member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    You could compare MSFT to other non-performers but that doesn't lead to a different conclusion IMO. Better I think to factor out the dot-com bubble and look at performance over the last five years. On that basis, MSFT is a flatliner, and CSCO and AMZN are well on the plus side.



    Nothing to disagree there. The S&P and broader indexes have all flatlined. I.e., the average stock has produced a zero percent return (except for dividend yield) in the past five years.



    My point is that Apple was the exception. Microsoft was the norm. There are hundreds of CEOs in Ballmer's club, in other words. Indeed, many who are extolled as being very good (e.g., Immelt, Chambers, Whitman, Ellison, Bezos.......)



    OK, I just checked 5-year returns. Ellison (+80%) and Bezos (+256%) should not be on that list. Ballmer (+9%, incl. dividend yield) compares well with Whitman (-40%), Chambers (+20%), Immelt (-50%, incl. dividend yield). Btw, I referred to the 10-year number only because that's what's been trotted around in all the news reports, as well as in the threads here.
  • Reply 75 of 105
    lowededwookielowededwookie Posts: 1,143member
    MS should just fold up their Windows, XBox, Zune, and Surface departments and go back to basics and just make Office for Mac.
  • Reply 76 of 105
    stldougstldoug Posts: 10member
  • Reply 77 of 105
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    If they don't do anything they why do they exist?



    I know people that would like to invest in Apple if the cost per share was lower. Just because it's psychological doesn't mean it doesn't help. Just look at the psychological aspect of ending prices in 99¢.



    Just like urban legends, stock splits exist and happen because people think it works. The problem is that in the long term, it hasn't been found to be useful. There are people that followed up on stock splits for large swaths of companies and found that it doesn't really do anything meaningful. there is a lot of psychology at work in stock trading, but splits haven't been found to be where it happens, you might as well draw a unicorn on the prospectus.



    Quote:

    Scenario: If you have a $1200 to invest, getting 48 shares of a $25 stock feels like you are more committed than getting 4 shares of a $250 stock. Now what if each share was $10,000 or $100,000? The buy-in price can clearly affect the way the stock acts. However, that does not mean that Apple wants the stock to be cheaper as there are many reasons to keep the stock price high.



    High share price hasn't hurt Warren Buffet's little enterprise.
  • Reply 78 of 105
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Nothing to disagree there. The S&P and broader indexes have all flatlined. I.e., the average stock has produced a zero percent return (except for dividend yield) in the past five years.



    My point is that Apple was the exception. Microsoft was the norm. There are hundreds of CEOs in Ballmer's club, in other words. Indeed, many who are extolled as being very good (e.g., Immelt, Chambers, Whitman, Ellison, Bezos.......)



    OK, I just checked 5-year returns. Ellison (+80%) and Bezos (+256%) should not be on that list. Ballmer (+9%, incl. dividend yield) compares well with Whitman (-40%), Chambers (+20%), Immelt (-50%, incl. dividend yield). Btw, I referred to the 10-year number only because that's what's been trotted around in all the news reports, as well as in the threads here.



    Point taken, but I'm not sure what GE is doing on this list. They're hardly a tech company, and their 50% takedown is mainly on account of their financial businesses.
  • Reply 79 of 105
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    [...]stock splits exist and happen because people think it works [...] there is a lot of psychology at work in stock trading [...]



    And working this aspect of the market isn't a viable marketing strategy? That is what I've been watching for years. I wait for some silly fear to creep into the market as a whole and then buy when things are unrealistically low. I do better in recessions because I played off the psychology that is inherent to the majority of investors.



    I care not if the stock splits as there are pros and cons to that occurrence, and for my needs there are more cons regarding the fluctuation of Apple's stock price, but I guarantee you that if they did a 2/1 split that there would be more investors jumping in and you'd see at least a short-term surge in the valuation of AAPL.
  • Reply 80 of 105
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Alfred E. Newman's famous last words... And AEN was a rocket scientist compared to mentally challenged Bozo Ballmer.
Sign In or Register to comment.