Would any other CEO survive that sort of performance, over such a long period of time? It can't hurt Ballmer's position that he's an old FOB and a major MSFT stockholder himself.
Seems like he'd look at his portfolio and start coming up with reasons to shape things up. Commentary on what goes on inside the company suggests that internal turf battles are often what hold them back. Steve Ballmer probably tolerated it, Steve Jobs would have had some heads roll.
Quote:
Think of what a pointless waste of effort that would be.
Yeah, stock splits don't really do anything, the psychological effect just doesn't hold up in this case. The idea that stock splits are beneficial has been largely abandoned, thankfully. Why there are still people that hold into it, I don't know, outside of just not getting the memo?
Could it be possible that there are no competent replacements for Ballmer over at Microsoft? Could it be no one has what it takes to drive that ship, or they're just lacking in overall talent and just reside to riding the windows operating system cash cow till the very end.
What a putz. He could have said something congratulatory and magnanimous and come out looking like a very smart guy playing a very canny hand close to his vest. But no, he has to lash out and claim the empire will fight back. Hey, Darth Ballmer, I wouldn't put all my faith in a new Death Star.
When boxers get hit with a hard shot, not enough to knock them down but really rocked them, they often smile and shake their head to indicate "you didn't hurt me" to their opponent. The ringside TV announcers always comment that whenever a fighter is smiling and saying "that didn't hurt," then that was a blow that hurt the most.
Ballmer is smiling and shaking his head. He isn't down, but he's been rocked to the core. Everyone knows that one hurt real bad.
"I will make more profits and certainly there is no technology company in the planet which is as profitable as we are," Ballmer said. "Stock markets will take care of the rest."
While that might be true, if Apple brings out a good competitor to Exchange and a solid OS X Server that can become a reliable corporate server, then MS will be no more a giant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"We are executing very well," the chief executive said. "That's going to lead to great products and great success."
...
...
"It's a long game," Ballmer was quoted as saying. "We have good competitors... We, too, are very good competitors."
Yea right, they "executed" their mp3 player, their tablet, and their new phones really well. Not to mention all the nightmares that came with IE or the sypware and virus vulnerabilities since Windows 95.
Seems like he'd look at his portfolio and start coming up with reasons to shape things up. Commentary on what goes on inside the company suggests that internal turf battles are often what hold them back. Steve Ballmer probably tolerated it, Steve Jobs would have had some heads roll.
He might have the motivation, but not the ability. I have often wondered what sort of position he'd be in today if he hadn't been Bill's old poker buddy at Harvard. Probably middle management, running a department maybe, but not an entire company.
I wonder what he'll say when Apple's profits surpass Microsoft's....
While the market cap is a milestone achievement (despite what some of the bonehead posters with no economic knowledge want you to think), Apple is still a long way off from besting MS' profit. But that is expected as MS is software and Apple is HW and one making unbelievably high percentage of profits whilst the other doesn't.
At the current rate of growth it's growth it's possible for Apple to best MS on that level, too, but the next stop is besting their revenue, which looks like it will happen within the next year. Also, if Exxon keeps falling and/or Apple keeps rising, Apple becoming the highest valued company in the world is also possible within the next year.
lol.. except in the mobile division, the xbox console department and microsoft's incompetence, the touchscreen magical trailer...err table...surface. How are those Window's Store..I heard a big hoopla and then *crickets....
lol.. except in the mobile division, the xbox console department and microsoft's incompetence, the touchscreen magical trailer...err table...surface. How are those Window's Store..I heard a big hoopla and then *crickets....
Yeah, stock splits don't really do anything, the psychological effect just doesn't hold up in this case. The idea that stock splits are beneficial has been largely abandoned, thankfully. Why there are still people that hold into it, I don't know, outside of just not getting the memo?
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¢.
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.
Microsoft will be in the same position it is in today even if Bill Gates ran the company. The timing is coincidental. The reason Apple flourished this much is ecause of the genius of Steve Jobs and not the failure of Ballmer.
Not long ago Bill Gates stated that the future of the User Interface is a combination of a Stylus, physical keyboard, and a mouse!! Sheesh! What kind of user experience would that be
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¢.
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.
You probably already know what I think. Someone who "feels" like they are getting more for their money because of a stock split should not be investing in stocks.
You probably already know what I think. Someone who "feels" like they are getting more for their money because of a stock split should not be investing in stocks.
Oooh yes, I know your point very well. And I do agree with it the contents of your point, I just don't agree with the overall affect it can have on a stock and that a split should never be done as there are very clear reasons why a company would want to do it.
Oooh yes, I know your point very well. And I do agree with it the contents of your point, I just don't agree with the overall affect it can have on a stock and that a split should never be done as there are very clear reasons why a company would want to do it.
I wouldn't say never, but I don't think AAPL is close to the point where a split would be more than window dressing.
"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.
Comments
Would any other CEO survive that sort of performance, over such a long period of time? It can't hurt Ballmer's position that he's an old FOB and a major MSFT stockholder himself.
Seems like he'd look at his portfolio and start coming up with reasons to shape things up. Commentary on what goes on inside the company suggests that internal turf battles are often what hold them back. Steve Ballmer probably tolerated it, Steve Jobs would have had some heads roll.
Think of what a pointless waste of effort that would be.
Yeah, stock splits don't really do anything, the psychological effect just doesn't hold up in this case. The idea that stock splits are beneficial has been largely abandoned, thankfully. Why there are still people that hold into it, I don't know, outside of just not getting the memo?
Good points! The wind is certainly at Apple's back....Maybe MS needs more of a shake up than just changing to Division Heads?
I look at Ballmer's track record and can't help thinking of "They shoot horses don't they?"
When boxers get hit with a hard shot, not enough to knock them down but really rocked them, they often smile and shake their head to indicate "you didn't hurt me" to their opponent. The ringside TV announcers always comment that whenever a fighter is smiling and saying "that didn't hurt," then that was a blow that hurt the most.
Ballmer is smiling and shaking his head. He isn't down, but he's been rocked to the core. Everyone knows that one hurt real bad.
"I will make more profits and certainly there is no technology company in the planet which is as profitable as we are," Ballmer said. "Stock markets will take care of the rest."
While that might be true, if Apple brings out a good competitor to Exchange and a solid OS X Server that can become a reliable corporate server, then MS will be no more a giant.
"We are executing very well," the chief executive said. "That's going to lead to great products and great success."
...
...
"It's a long game," Ballmer was quoted as saying. "We have good competitors... We, too, are very good competitors."
Yea right, they "executed" their mp3 player, their tablet, and their new phones really well. Not to mention all the nightmares that came with IE or the sypware and virus vulnerabilities since Windows 95.
Seems like he'd look at his portfolio and start coming up with reasons to shape things up. Commentary on what goes on inside the company suggests that internal turf battles are often what hold them back. Steve Ballmer probably tolerated it, Steve Jobs would have had some heads roll.
He might have the motivation, but not the ability. I have often wondered what sort of position he'd be in today if he hadn't been Bill's old poker buddy at Harvard. Probably middle management, running a department maybe, but not an entire company.
I wonder what he'll say when Apple's profits surpass Microsoft's....
While the market cap is a milestone achievement (despite what some of the bonehead posters with no economic knowledge want you to think), Apple is still a long way off from besting MS' profit. But that is expected as MS is software and Apple is HW and one making unbelievably high percentage of profits whilst the other doesn't.
At the current rate of growth it's growth it's possible for Apple to best MS on that level, too, but the next stop is besting their revenue, which looks like it will happen within the next year. Also, if Exxon keeps falling and/or Apple keeps rising, Apple becoming the highest valued company in the world is also possible within the next year.
I will say it here first..
Microsoft is Doomed?
lol.. except in the mobile division, the xbox console department and microsoft's incompetence, the touchscreen magical trailer...err table...surface. How are those Window's Store..I heard a big hoopla and then *crickets....
I will say it here first..
Microsoft is Doomed?
Yeah, stock splits don't really do anything, the psychological effect just doesn't hold up in this case. The idea that stock splits are beneficial has been largely abandoned, thankfully. Why there are still people that hold into it, I don't know, outside of just not getting the memo?
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¢.
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.
Bill Gates' college roommate is a failure.
Microsoft will be in the same position it is in today even if Bill Gates ran the company. The timing is coincidental. The reason Apple flourished this much is ecause of the genius of Steve Jobs and not the failure of Ballmer.
Not long ago Bill Gates stated that the future of the User Interface is a combination of a Stylus, physical keyboard, and a mouse!! Sheesh! What kind of user experience would that be
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¢.
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.
You probably already know what I think. Someone who "feels" like they are getting more for their money because of a stock split should not be investing in stocks.
You probably already know what I think. Someone who "feels" like they are getting more for their money because of a stock split should not be investing in stocks.
Oooh yes, I know your point very well.
Oooh yes, I know your point very well.
I wouldn't say never, but I don't think AAPL is close to the point where a split would be more than window dressing.
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.