Microsoft Should Replace Ballmer?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
A hedge fund manager, speaking at an investment conference yesterday, said that Microsoft should replace Stave Ballmer. As with most advice from armchair quarterbacks, no actual recommendations were given on who would replace Ballmer...he just "has to go."

“It’s time for Microsoft’s board to tell Steve Ballmer, ‘All right, we see what you can do, let’s give so-and-so a chance,’” Einhorn said. “His continued presence is the biggest overhang on Microsoft’s stock.”
Click to expand...
 
That advice ranks right up there with cries from the peanut gallery "The company needs to do better!!" No advice on how...they just "need to do better! " :D


Edit: (not directed at your post phide)
 
I think yes, but only if they replace him with Steven Sinofsky. He did a great job with Office and Windows. He's also not loud and annoying as Ballmer. He plans and executes well, and I think he'd be the best fit to lead MS.
 
developersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopers
 
Advice from a man whose job hinges on exploiting market inefficiencies and asymmetries of information to make unsustainable long-term gains to a man managing a company making real tangible products that actually do something and that needs to think long term.
 
Steve said:
That advice ranks right up there with cries from the peanut gallery "The company needs to do better!!" No advice on how...they just "need to do better! " :D


Edit: (not directed at your post phide)
Click to expand...

I disagree. Microsoft is a huge company that is withering on the vine while the competition is eating their lunch. They are at the brink of MIDs completely smashing the desktop paradigm. There is a reason i named my latest gaming rig "Omega"

They need someone with vision. Not a guy who was in the right place at the right time 20+ years ago. Ballmer has never shown himself to be a visionary or even a good manager of people.
 
I think Balmer should stay. There is a lot coming down the pipes and it takes time for executive decisions to materialize. The Metro UI is finally making it's way out (Office 15 too), Windows Phone is a great OS and has a huge improvement in the pipes and Nokia partnership. Xbox is increasingly more successful and Kinect is a big hit. Skype deal. Windows 8 will probably be the most amazing OS yet and profits are great. Replacing Balmer may be the biggest mistake the company could make when so much innovation is almost reaching the consumer level. Put someone new in there and things tend to get stirred up or maybe even cancelled.
 
Windows 7 did great, latest office is pretty good, servers are doing good, xbox is making money. I think that is the 'problem' most people are trying to 'fix' when they say Balmer should go...
 
I never did like Ballmer. He's whiner. I recently saw a 60 mintues (the show) interview, and he was bitching about how Bill was treating him back in the early days of MS.
 
Steve said:
A hedge fund manager, speaking at an investment conference yesterday, said that Microsoft should replace Stave Ballmer. As with most advice from armchair quarterbacks, no actual recommendations were given on who would replace Ballmer...he just "has to go."
Click to expand...

Uh yeah...put J Allard at the top. He is the only man that has the vision to bring MS out of the dump. The Courier, the Xbox, the Zune, etc.

If the Courier had actually come out, the iPad wouldn't be where it is today.
 
Microsoft as a company feels very stale. Yes they've had some major wins with a few of their products but they're up against much tougher competition now. Basically Microsofts ability to make decisions and have those decisions reflect on the market are based on a timeline that was formed back in the 90s. They have not evolved to compete with what's happening today. Their direct competitors are innovating and delivering those innovations at break neck speed while Microsoft lumber along with no real direction. Balmer needs to go and needs to go NOW!
 
Hell yes. That stock hasn't done a damned thing in almost 10 years. I don't know what Gates was thinking in the first place.

The best thing that could happen for MS right now would be if Gates temporarily came back (or whatever) and set things back right and install someone else that would be better off for the job.

Just imagine right now what that stock would do simply on this headline: "Gates mulling return to Microsoft" let alone if it went past that.
 
I think you give him two more years. As SparkedFire has mentioned, Microsoft has a lot in the pipeline. If Windows Phone fails to take off and Windows 8 is a dud in the tablet and slate space then you kick him to the curb. Microsoft has been EXTREMELY slow to respond and inept in the mobile space thus far and Vista was a flop but Microsoft has also has some some great success as well. But mobile is the key thing that Microsoft HAS to get right and if Microsoft's performance doesn't improve there and soon then he has to go.
 
StryderxX said:
Microsoft as a company feels very stale. Yes they've had some major wins with a few of their products but they're up against much tougher competition now. Basically Microsofts ability to make decisions and have those decisions reflect on the market are based on a timeline that was formed back in the 90s. They have not evolved to compete with what's happening today. Their direct competitors are innovating and delivering those innovations at break neck speed while Microsoft lumber along with no real direction. Balmer needs to go and needs to go NOW!
Click to expand...

What competition? Latest counts for products shows Microsoft at a 77% market share with servers, desktops and laptops in OSes. Apple had 1.7%. Turns out servers make up a huge portion of the market.

Xbox has a strong second place, and even if Kinect has nothing to play with it, it sold over 8 million units.

Windows phone 7 is an actual contender in the mobile OS front (I think it sucks, but a massive improvement over phone 6 series), even if it only sold just over 1 million units or so.

The only place Microsoft isn't improving is in stocks, and that's just because the social conception is that Microsoft is already at the top and has no where to grow.
 
ballistic90 said:
What competition? Latest counts for products shows Microsoft at a 77% market share with servers, desktops and laptops in OSes. Apple had 1.7%. Turns out servers make up a huge portion of the market.

Xbox has a strong second place, and even if Kinect has nothing to play with it, it sold over 8 million units.

Windows phone 7 is an actual contender in the mobile OS front (I think it sucks, but a massive improvement over phone 6 series), even if it only sold just over 1 million units or so.

The only place Microsoft isn't improving is in stocks, and that's just because the social conception is that Microsoft is already at the top and has no where to grow.
Click to expand...

Everything you mentioned comes from inertia not from capturing new revenue. MS is getting VERY stale while their competition has huge buzz around them. Even if desktop share remains the same, it doesnt mean people are going to be using them anywhere near as much as they have in the past. The MIDs are coming and the desktop is toast for ALOT of users. Also your server estimate is way too high, as the numbers you pulled (I can read wikipedia too..) only count paid-for server OS (via service contract or license).



MIDs + a small server is the future of computing. I have already moved several of my clients to MID-only solutions for their business and they couldnt be happier.
 
The Economist has a post up today on short-termism actually...funny.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/05/short-termism

Now that myopia can be measured. Mr Lambert cites "The Short Long", a paper published this month by Andrew Haldane and Richard Davies of the Bank of England. It documents the British and American stockmarkets' tendency to feel the morrow only dimly, discounting future earnings more heavily than is rational. A pay-out in a dozen years' time, for example, was undervalued by almost 54% by the markets over the period 1995-2004 (which largely overlaps with Sir Ralph's tenure as chairman). In the industrials sector, it was undervalued by more than 60%.
Click to expand...
 
Spire3660 said:
Everything you mentioned comes from inertia not from capturing new revenue. MS is getting VERY stale while their competition has huge buzz around them. Even if desktop share remains the same, it doesnt mean people are going to be using them anywhere near as much as they have in the past. The MIDs are coming and the desktop is toast for ALOT of users. Also your server estimate is way too high, as the numbers you pulled (I can read wikipedia too..) only count paid-for server OS (via service contract or license).



MIDs + a small server is the future of computing. I have already moved several of my clients to MID-only solutions for their business and they couldnt be happier.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how much of that 'buzz' is because they are under dogs and newcomers (to the mainstream)? It's going to be difficult to do that with MS, and once you get rid of Balmer, and if things go south, you won't be able to undo any of that (easily if at all).
The internet loves underdogs, I think we all know that, in light of that and with MS' current and near future line up I think they're doing pretty good and Balmer is as responsible for that as anyone else.
 
without actually reading the artical, I think Id say I have to disagree. I think a lotta people just have a natural hate for people wealthier than themselves, and naturally since he has more than you do... I think the products Microsoft has released since he has been there has been pretty good
 
devil22 said:
Yes, but how much of that 'buzz' is because they are under dogs and newcomers (to the mainstream)? It's going to be difficult to do that with MS, and once you get rid of Balmer, and if things go south, you won't be able to undo any of that (easily if at all).
The internet loves underdogs, I think we all know that, in light of that and with MS' current and near future line up I think they're doing pretty good and Balmer is as responsible for that as anyone else.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have anything to do with buzz per se. Both Google and Apple have completely kicked Microsoft's ass when it comes to cloud and mobile computing. I know what's coming in 8, but it may be too late. Nobody cares about Microsoft anymore. At the very least, they haven't led a charge- they've been trying to catch up. They had (and still have) piles of money. Why they haven't led in this direction is pure incompetence.
 
Shotglass01 said:
Nobody cares about Microsoft anymore.
Click to expand...

350 million plus copies of Windows 7 tend to disagree. Microsoft is still very relevant. Sure they have issues but they are correctable They are still making plenty of money and are still more profitable than Apple and still make more money than Google.

But Microsoft would love nothing more than to be underestimated.
 
Motley said:
I never did like Ballmer. He's whiner. I recently saw a 60 mintues (the show) interview, and he was bitching about how Bill was treating him back in the early days of MS.
Click to expand...

That was Paul Allen, try again buddy.
 
Don't replace Ballmer! All they wanna do is find a skidzo Steve Jobs wanna be, Ballmer give MS personality that Apple dearly lacks.
 
My problems with Microsoft is that it seems like it is fading from public view. When people (at least people my age) think tech these days, they'll mention Apple/Jobs or Facebook/Zuckerberg but Microsoft isn't the first thing that comes to mind.
 
I always see people hating on Ballmer, not really sure why though. Windows is successful, Xbox is successful, Office is successful, Windows server products are getting better. Is everyone upset because they don't have a good Windows phone? Or maybe they want to anger him into throwing a chair?
 
Shotglass01 said:
It doesn't have anything to do with buzz per se. Both Google and Apple have completely kicked Microsoft's ass when it comes to cloud and mobile computing. I know what's coming in 8, but it may be too late. Nobody cares about Microsoft anymore. At the very least, they haven't led a charge- they've been trying to catch up. They had (and still have) piles of money. Why they haven't led in this direction is pure incompetence.
Click to expand...

Why does MS have to conquer everything? I see no reason why one company can't do cloud, another OSes, another tablets/phones. Hell, apple and google get their ass kicked in desktop operating systems. Maybe it's just me but I see desktop OSes as much more interesting and healthy than cloud and MIDs. Anyone can eat apple and google's lunch, and there are a ton of competitors in those areas, despite the fact that both are still new. MS has conquered everyone in OSes for damn near 20 years and I don't see viable alternatives to Windows coming any time soon. There are many people who care about MS (like heatlesssun said, 350 million Windows 7 copies in a year and half), it's kinda ignorant to say otherwise. It's a lot easier to switch phones and search engines, then to switch OSes, making them, in my mind, way less important (regarding *which* one you choose). Anyways, I don't want to write a book about this stuff so I'll stop here.
 
Spire3660 said:
They need someone with vision. Not a guy who was in the right place at the right time 20+ years ago. Ballmer has never shown himself to be a visionary or even a good manager of people.
Click to expand...

You misunderstood my point. My point isn't whether Ballmer has to go or not...my point is that the call for change comes from the peanut gallery with no real solutions.


Standing / sitting around complaining = easy. Actually coming up with solutions, acting on them is entirely different. ;)

Kinda what he said:

TwistedAegis said:
Advice from a man whose job hinges on exploiting market inefficiencies and asymmetries of information to make unsustainable long-term gains to a man managing a company making real tangible products that actually do something and that needs to think long term.
Click to expand...
 
I'm no fan of Steve Ballmer, but I'm not so sure he's the (only/main) problem. Really, once a company grows beyond a certain size, it doesn't generally have the nimble ability to exploit those areas of opportunity that arise and still maintain a dominant presence/focus in their traditional/core markets as well. Microsoft is well beyond that "critical mass" to react to changing market conditions like a smaller company could. There's also the effect of the corporate mindset/culture, and the concerns about what meeting new market conditions would have on current "cash cow" products. At some point the whole management structure becomes less effective/innovative and more reactive. *Also never discount the role that "timing/luck" plays in the equation.
I'd say as far as the core business (Windows/Office), and the Entertainment/X-box division, Ballmer had been ok (Window 7 was much better received than vista, but that's not exactly a "ringing endorsement," and it is likely that Microsoft could benefit greatly from the woes that are currently facing Sony-PS3), but it is clear that the company has "missed the mark" so far in the mobile business place. Replacing Ballmer may bring about the change in the culture and focus to exploit the opportunities in the mobile business place without harming or losing focus on their other core business units (Windows/Office, Entertainment/X-box), but then again, it might not.
 
Personally I think he's terrible spokesperson / figurehead for MS, but he does fit with the companies way of operating, that of hanging in the mass market pack in back. MS has rarely been on the lead of innovation or market trend setting, they usually just follow someone else, or buy out a company if they need the talent / product design. They fail when they get so far behind that they are completely irrelevant in that market (as in mobile right now). The buy in deal with Nokia is MS paying catch up, and it that can't get them a foot in the door to mobile market, I think Ballmer should go.
 
"You single handedly fielded the revolution of the OS and videogame industry! But look! Apple's stock is higher then ours! You have to be doing something wrong! They only deal with devices where most of its use is done for piracy, you must compete with that!!"

Seriously, Steve has done a terrific job. Have you seen what Steve Jobs has done to the mass media world? iTunes is fantastic, but Apple's death grip is incredible, all of its products are built with slave labor, so much so that employee's in Apple sweatshops are even SUSPECTED of leaking any information that apple sends the -POLICE- to beat up the poor people they think is responsible

Job's is a tyrant, that's why he's made so much money. I know Microsoft's image isn't exactly squeeky clean either, but christ man Balmer at least has a freaking soul
 
SparkedFire said:
I think Balmer should stay. There is a lot coming down the pipes and it takes time for executive decisions to materialize. The Metro UI is finally making it's way out (Office 15 too), Windows Phone is a great OS and has a huge improvement in the pipes and Nokia partnership. Xbox is increasingly more successful and Kinect is a big hit. Skype deal. Windows 8 will probably be the most amazing OS yet and profits are great. Replacing Balmer may be the biggest mistake the company could make when so much innovation is almost reaching the consumer level. Put someone new in there and things tend to get stirred up or maybe even cancelled.
Click to expand...

Yep, because giving Balmer 10 years to prove himself wasn't long enough already.
How many more years should Microsoft give him to "turn things around"? 10 more?

The Skype deal was also widely panned at the price it cost MS, almost twice what all the analysts thought Skype was worth.
What about how MS handled their acquisition of Danger?

I definitely am for more "long term" thinking by companies, but IMHO, Microsoft has given Balmer enough time to "prove" himself, and he deserves no extension.
 
Hasn't miscrsoft been doing very very well? I mean their stock isn't great, but haven't they been raking in the cash?
 
Yes, Microsoft is very profitable. Investors favor growth, however, and that's just not what Microsoft does.
 
I nominate...that guy!

that_guy.gif


Dunt-dunt-DAH-dah-dunt-dunt-dunt-DAH!
 
wtiger said:
Hasn't miscrsoft been doing very very well? I mean their stock isn't great, but haven't they been raking in the cash?
Click to expand...

They should be more like LinkedIn! Look how everyone loves that stock...a P/E ratio of 655. MS currently has a P/E ratio of 9.72....1/4 of it's peers. Looks like a buy to me.
 
I think the problem is that so many people in threads like this and elsewhere have the idea that MS must be as aggressive in the consumer market as say Apple and Google are in order to be successful.

The reality is that they are being very agressive in the area that matters most to them: Business. If youve been reading anything about MS' moves the last couple of years, youd know that they are pushing agressively into the cloud and making strides to stay ahead of the attempts by Google to move into that area (such as Office 365 vs Google Apps).


Now I agree that Id love to see a MS that is just as agressive PR wise in the consumer sector, but it really doesnt look so bad to me right now. MS is actually starting to turn the corner in areas like mobile (with wp7 and soon to be windows 8 for tablets) and they already have a big stake in media/gaming thanks to xbox. People complain about things like the Nokia deal, as if its so terrible for MS to seek out partners to get thier mobile platform off the ground. Look, MS is starting from nearly 0 marketshare, they have to do these things to get attention in the market.

Most people dont think MS when they think consumer electronics/devices, so they cant rely on some cult follow/hype pr like Apple can to just jump into a market. MS is in a position where they have to build customer awareness one buyer at a time, and thats not a fast process. I dont know what level of influence or responsibility Ballmer has to these things, but I find it hard to throw him out at this moment. If wp7 cant gain acceptance and windows 8 isnt what its billed as, then you look for a replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top