Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta Steve Ballmer. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando las entradas con la etiqueta Steve Ballmer. Mostrar todas las entradas

2018/07/04

Steve Ballmer: Why Good U.S. Data Are Hard to Find – and How to Fix That

Ballmer
When former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer retired in 2014, a lot of media attention was focused on his new passion as the owner of a professional basketball team, after he bought the L.A. Clippers for a reported $2 billion. Far less attention went to his creation of USAFacts, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that strives to shine a light on the U.S. government’s financial status and report the findings to its stakeholders, the American people.
Ballmer founded the group last year based on a conversation with his wife right after he retired. “My wife grabbed me immediately and said, ‘OK man, it’s time. You’ve got to help me now with our philanthropic stuff,’” he said at the first annual Spring Policy Forum of The Penn Wharton Budget Model, whose data powers USAFacts. “It’s time to ramp up. We’ve been blessed with a lot, and it’s time to make a difference.” She told him she wanted to help economically disadvantaged kids move up in the world.
Ballmer’s response: “Don’t worry about it.” He told her that the government takes care of these social issues. “There’s really not much for philanthropy to do because in the grand scale of [all the money] that gets spent, philanthropy is just a drop in the bucket. So let’s happily pay our taxes and feel good about it.” Her reply? “What? Come on, we can do better than that,” he told the forum audience. So Ballmer agreed, but “secretly in the back of my mind, I still said to myself: Government really does all this stuff.”
Then, when he was in Washington, D.C., he met with some legislators and repeated his belief that there was “no reason” to do philanthropy but instead give money to the government to solve social ills. “They looked at me, and their eyes [bulged] big in their heads and they said, ‘You want to give your money to the government? You can certainly do better than that.’”
So Ballmer decided to do some digging if he was going to get involved. “I really was trying to get to the bottom of whether I was right about where government money goes,” he said. “If we don’t believe that the government’s going to solve many problems, we have to understand why, and if it’s something that can be addressed, let’s … address it.” He asked the following questions: “How much has the government raised? Whom did they raise it from? What do they spend it on?”
Ballmer began searching for government data and he found a lot of figures, but they weren’t always organized coherently. Government agencies tend to be siloed and their figures don’t always fit with each other. Because of how the data is kept, he pointed out, politicians can rattle off an isolated figure devoid of context to support their agendas. “Government data is not always timely or accessible, or frankly, it doesn’t always agree with itself,” he said. “How does anybody make a decision with data which sometimes doesn’t reconcile and isn’t out on a timely basis?”
“They looked at me, and their eyes [bulged] big in their heads and they said, ‘You want to give your money to the government? You can certainly do better than that.’”
Ballmer’s first task was to organize government data in a better way. “For me, the sensible way was to look at it through the same kind of lens that a business person would look at their business,” he said. He was determined to use only the government’s numbers — not forecasts, estimates or data from outside organizations. “A business has to use its own numbers, and the government has to use its own numbers,” he noted. “Government decision makers should work off government numbers. Otherwise, fire everybody and get the numbers right.”
Government, by the Numbers
First, Ballmer had to come up with a “logical” structure of government. Companies organize themselves into “lines of business.” “What are the lines of business of government? What is the mission of government? How do you think about that?” he posited. “After a while, it became clear that we look at the Preamble of the Constitution.” Here, Ballmer found the following goals: to establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility, to provide for the common defense, to promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. “That’s the mission of government” in the U.S., he said.
Under these four goals, his team organized various government functions.
  • Establishing justice and ensuring domestic tranquility: crime and disaster, consumer and employee safeguards, child safety and miscellaneous social services.
  • Providing for a common defense: national defense and support for veterans, foreign affairs and foreign aid, immigration and border security.
  • Promoting general welfare: the economy and infrastructure, health, standard of living and aid to the disadvantaged, and government-run businesses (post office, hospitals, transit systems and others).
  • Securing the blessings of liberty: education, wealth and savings, sustainability and self-sufficiency and the American Dream (civil rights, economic mobility and community participation).
In each of these areas, key sub-segments were further identified. For example, under “crime and disaster” would fall the police, prisons, federal courts and others. Under “securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” would fall public education, conservation, Social Security and Medicare, financial aid and others. “This is to me a logical view of government,” Ballmer said. “It’s not organized like … cabinet departments, it’s not organized like the Senate or House committees … it’s not organized by categories in the budget” nor by political platform.
With this framework in mind, Ballmer went to work. USAFacts’ partners include the Penn Wharton Budget Model, the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Lynchburg College. The Penn Wharton Budget Model expands and maintains the data used by the nonprofit. USAFacts collects and presents publicly available data on federal, state and local government revenue, expenses and other metrics. “It really is a comprehensive look at the government by the numbers,” Ballmer said. (He added that some local government data can only be accessed by visiting public officials’ offices in person.)
USAFacts presents government data in the form of an annual report and a 10-K — a detailed, historical and contextual filing of a company’s operations and financial standing for a fiscal year. It is a filing that the Securities and Exchange Commission requires of U.S. publicly traded companies. (The annual report is a simpler and more visual version of the 10-K.) “Companies … have to report to external partners,” Ballmer said. “They report through shareholder meetings, annual reports and the granddaddy of them all — the 10-K.” He said 10-Ks have to be “rigorous, they have to be absolutely correct, factual. They can show no bias.
“Government data is not always timely or accessible, or frankly, it doesn’t always agree with itself. How does anybody make a decision with data which sometimes doesn’t reconcile and isn’t out on a timely basis?”
“Your 10-K can’t say, ‘Well, we’re going to do better next year,’” Ballmer continued. “The SEC shuts that down. Just the facts. Just tell us the history.” The 10-Ks have to be comprehensive. “It’s not like you can say, ‘We’re going to tell you about the part of the business that’s going well, but we’re going to skip other things.’ They have to be contextual.… It shows how the all the numbers roll up into a common place” in a consolidated report.
USA Inc.
What did Ballmer find? In 2015, the latest year for which USAFacts has comprehensive figures, the federal, state and local governments brought in total revenue of $5.2 trillion. About 91% of the revenue came from taxes and the rest from non-tax revenue such as portfolio investment gains from state and local governments. Ballmer noted an accounting quirk: Revenue does not include fees that the government charges, such as what a family pays to visit a national park. Instead, those fees offset the cost of running the park. So their expenses show up as smaller.
While the government hauled in $5.2 trillion, it spent $5.7 trillion in 2015, according to the country’s 10-K created by USAFacts. The deficit is at $484 billion. Total assets were $21.1 trillion and total liabilities were $25.7 trillion. America’s net worth was a negative $4.6 trillion. (USAFacts has figures going back to 1980.) In the section describing the country’s performance, the 10-K states that the U.S. made progress in areas such as the economy, reducing overall crime and making environmental gains. But it retreated in health metrics for Americans and homeownership, among others. Safeguarding of children also had a setback, with more fatalities due to poverty, maltreatment and homelessness.
For folks who think the government employs too many paper-pushing bureaucrats, Ballmer has surprising news. The government employs 23.3 million people, but nearly half of them are teachers from kindergarten to universities. The second biggest bloc comprises hospital workers at 1.9 million. Active duty military, police and firefighters also count towards the total. It turns out there are 1.6 million actual bureaucrats in federal, state and local governments, out of 23.3 million government workers. That’s about 7%. “It’s not significantly different than you’ll find in most companies,” which runs around 4% to 5%, he said.
Overall, the 10-K concludes that “our government’s operations are financially unsustainable. It continues to spend more than it takes in each year, accumulating an overall deficit that reached $10.8 trillion at September 30, 2015.” It noted that expenditures rose 48% between 2005 and 2015, when they reached a record high of $5.7 trillion annually. The good news: The government lowered its annual deficit by nearly 80% from its peak of $2.3 trillion in 2009. How? Through higher revenue. This revenue bump came from increased prosperity and tax policy changes.
“Government decision makers should work off government numbers. Otherwise, fire everybody and get the numbers right.”
To grow the GDP, Ballmer said, three factors are in play: inflation, productivity gains and population growth. If inflation is a non-starter, and productivity growth is lackluster, that leaves the U.S. with population growth. He said the U.S. population increases by two million a year — half of the growth is from births exceeding deaths and the other half from immigration. “You can drive up inflation, you can drive up productivity, which has not been at an accelerating pace, or you can drive up population, which is primarily an immigration matter.”
When it comes to jobs, Ballmer said USAFacts shows that 69% of people of working age are actually employed. “It’s the highest it has ever been,” he said. “One of the big boons that drove that higher was the number of women in the workforce.” So if a politician were to say that some policy can drive that 69% number to 80%, he is amused. “I look at the trend line — I fall out of my chair, laughing,” Ballmer said.
More Automation in Government?
Ballmer also had figures to back up the contention that there is a hollowing out of the middle class. USAFacts defines middle class as households landing in the middle 20% of income. What he found was that it in 2000, it took $38,000 to get into the middle 20%, adjusted for inflation. “That shocked me by itself,” he said. But by 2016, the figure had fallen to $33,000. “It is true the middle income is shrinking,” Ballmer said.
There is mixed news on the education front. Spending is up dramatically — from $10,100 per child in 1998 to $12,500 in 2013. High school graduation rates are up and the teacher-student ratio has risen as well, Ballmer said. However, math and reading proficiency is largely flat around 33% of eighth graders, he said. How likely will a child move up in the world? There are still stark differences by race. He said three times as many white kids stay in the bottom as move up, while for African-Americans, the number soars to 10 times. “I don’t think that’s OK,” he said.
“[The] general prevailing sentiment that says if we just had more [money] our numbers would be better — I don’t buy that.”
As for foreign aid, Ballmer said nearly 40% of the funds are used to help military allies and partners, including Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel is one of the biggest beneficiaries, he added. “That’s not what I think about when I think foreign aid,” Ballmer said. Most people probably think much of U.S. foreign aid goes to sub-Saharan Africa. But America gives in the single billions to Africa. “It’s a rounding error in our defense budget, for example,” he said. “You can decide whether it’s too much or too little.”
In immigration, border arrests are down dramatically and the number of agents are up significantly, Ballmer said. “One caused the other? Maybe, maybe not.” He added that most immigrants actually are family members of existing residents, who petition for them to enter the United States. About 11% to 13% of the U.S. population is foreign born. Ballmer said that level has been consistent for decades.
All of these figures are available from the government, but they could be better. Ballmer said one way to improve the quality of government data is timely reporting and double-checking of figures across agencies. Also, there should be an agency that is chartered to assemble the figures and cross-check them. “There’s nobody chartered right now,” he said. “Apparently, there’s no pressure in Congress to get the numbers on a timely basis.”
Ballmer doesn’t think throwing more money at the problem is necessarily a solution. “Just like working at Microsoft, more money in a function doesn’t mean you’re going to get better work,” he said. “Maybe you need fewer people and more automation. Maybe you’d get a better result. So I’m not arguing one way or another. But I think the general prevailing sentiment that says if we just had more [money] our numbers would be better — I don’t buy that. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case.”
Philanthropy Matters
Going back to Ballmer’s conversation with his wife that started him on this journey to find out whether the government does take care of disadvantaged kids, he found out that 23%, or $1.3 trillion, of the government’s $5.7 trillion budget goes to poor kids and their families, including $128.7 billion to education, $99.3 billion to welfare, $103.5 billion to nutrition, $80.1 billion to housing and community development and $572.5 billion for health care (Medicaid), and others.
“The facts are the facts, and what we’re trying to do, in the most … neutral way through numbers, is to explain where the country is and bring [the data] together.”
So it turns out that “we don’t make a negligible investment in kids who need opportunities,” Ballmer said. But he conceded that “philanthropy does have a role.” While the government pays for many things, “philanthropy has to fill in around the edges for things the government programs don’t fund and stitch things together across communities.” In the end, Ballmer and his wife are both right. “She is right that philanthropy matters, and I’m right that government mostly pays for these things.”
In the end, America is best served if politicians base public policy on indisputable, historical and timely facts. “I think it was [Democratic Senator Patrick] Moynihan who said we can all disagree about what to do but we should not disagree about what the facts are,” Ballmer said. “The facts are the facts, and what we’re trying to do, in the most … neutral way through numbers, is to explain where the country is and bring [the data] together. Ultimately, government should do that job for itself.”

2014/10/27

Ballmer could net $1 billion in tax credits from Clippers deal

  • by 
  •  
  • Former Microsoft  MSFT -0.70%  Chief Executive Steve Ballmer could claim as much as $1 billion in tax benefits from his purchase of the Los Angeles Clippers, which is half of what he paid for the NBA franchise earlier this year.
    An analysis of U.S. tax laws complied by The Financial Times found that Ballmer could claim about half of the purchase price in current terms over the next 15 years against his taxable income. Those credits could be claimed under an aspect of the tax code covering so-called active owners of sports franchises, the Financial Times said.
    Ballmer, a basketball fan, bought the Clippers earlier this year in a bidding battle that included other big names in business, such as Oracle  ORCL -0.31%  Chairman Larry Ellison. The final price Ballmer paid easily topped the previous record for an NBA team of $550 million.
    Ballmer’s decision to own an NBA franchise comes at a lucrative time for the league. The NBA reportedly reached long-term media rights deals with two networks that would more than double the fees it received under the previous contracts. ESPN has touted a number of ratings records earlier this year around the timing of the NBA finals, and consumer demand for basketball footwear has been strong, another indication of the league’s popularity.

    2013/11/20

    Steve Ballmer Doesn’t Want His Successor to Kill the Xbox, Bing Read more: Steve Ballmer Doesn’t Want His Successor to Kill the Xbox, Bing

    steveballmer
    By 

    Steve Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive, is on his way out. But he made clear what he thinks his successor should do: Ignore calls to sell the company’s Bing search engine and its Xbox video game console business. Speaking at his final annual shareholder meeting on Tuesday, Ballmer described the money-losing units as vital for the future. Their technology is integrated with other Microsoft products, he said, which helps to make them stand out from rivals.
    Ballmer’s comments are aimed at a chorus of critics who say that Microsoft would be better off narrowing its focus after years of disappointing growth and a depressed stock price. What those critics want the company to do is jettison businesses that hemorrhage cash to instead lift profits and provide funds for investing in other areas. Microsoft’s next chief executive will have to at least consider the idea. The ultimate decision won’t be easy, however.
    Ballmer, chief executive for the past 13 years, is stepping aside during a challenging time for Microsoft. Once dominant in the technology industry, the company is now under attack by GoogleApple and an array of smaller rivals. Slow to recognize the importance of search and mobile devices, Microsoft now has to play catch-up.
    Despite big investments and millions of users, Bing and Xbox have never really made much money. Bing, coupled with the rest of the company’s online properties, has lost billions of dollars over the years. The Xbox’s financial performance is somewhat better but still weak. In the last quarter, the division that includes the video game console along with Surface tablets and Windows smartphones lost $110 million.
    Earlier this year, Rick Sherlund, an analyst with Nomura Securities, suggested that Microsoft stanch the bleeding by selling both units and focusing on the core Office software and enterprise businesses. Profits would quickly rise, he said, and help to lift the company’s shares, which are down 40% from when Ballmer took the chief executive job in 2000. While people like the Xbox, Sherlund said, “it doesn’t seem like a good enough business for Microsoft to focus on.” Meanwhile, Microsoft could sell Bing to Facebook or Yahoo, he added.
    Stephen Elop, Nokia’s chief executive and a leading candidate to succeed Ballmer, is open to such a sale, according to a recent Bloomberg News report. Citing unnamed sources, the article said that he would divest of any unit he considered to be tangential to the company’s strategy.
    Colin Gillis, an analyst with BGC Partners, countered that while “there’s a lot of clamoring” to spin out Bing and Xbox, they are, in reality, too important for Microsoft to get rid of. With a little cost cutting and time, they could both be turned around.
    In most countries, Bing trails only Google in terms of users in most countries, Gillis pointed out. In October, Bing’s U.S. market share reached 18.1 percent, an all-time high, compared with 66.9 percent for Google, according to comScore. In a duopoly like search, even the second place service is usually able to make profit, Gillis said. Furthermore, surrendering would let Google focus more on its Android mobile operating system and Chrome laptop computers. Both products are chipping away at Microsoft’s software business. “I don’t like that its losing money, but I do like that it gives Microsoft an opportunity to push back against Google,” Gillis said.
    Spinning out the Xbox division would be another bad move, Gillis said. The games console has been a big seller—Microsoft has sold 80 million Xbox 360s, for example—and getting rid of the console would be counter to the company’s strategy of becoming a leader in consumer devices. “We’re going to be a devices company, but our most successful device, we’re going to sell?” Gillis said.
    Ballmer didn’t directly address Wall Street pressure to divest certain businesses. Instead, he highlighted the importance of both Bing and Xbox to Microsoft’s overall business. He spoke about Microsoft increasing focus on building “unified” products that are better together than alone. The obvious implication was that product quality would suffer if various units were sold or spun off.
    For example, the next-generation Xbox One, which will go on sale Friday, leverages Bing for making queries using natural voice. Ballmer called it “a reflection of what is possible when a company, our company, is unified under a common vision.” Bing is also integrated into Window 8.1, to provide so that users can search the Web, their hard drive or data stored in the cloud.
    In general, Ballmer said that the customer data provided by Bing and other services is highly valuable. The information is particularly important for mobile apps, which increasingly rely on a customer’s search history and other user data to provide personalized information. “Owning Bing allows Microsoft to control Web navigation to some extent, to lock out Google on mobile, and to gather tremendous data about what people are looking for online,” said Ross Rubin, an analyst with Reticle Research. Still he said that Microsoft could conceivably sell Bing to Yahoo and license the technology back.
    Rubin also gave a mixed assessment of whether Microsoft should sell the Xbox unit. Having a huge installed base of users would be an advantage if the company ever pushes into connected television. But Microsoft’s checkered history with new businesses—it was years ahead of Apple with tablets, after all—doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.


    Read more: Steve Ballmer Doesn’t Want His Successor to Kill the Xbox, Bing | TIME.com http://business.time.com/2013/11/20/steve-ballmer-doesnt-want-his-successor-to-kill-the-xbox-bing/#ixzz2lD8NRoLh

    2013/10/09

    Steve Ballmer's Final Letter To Shareholders As CEO 'Of The Company I Love'

    Steve Ballmer
    Steve Ballmer's long, slow good-bye to all things Microsoft continued on Monday afternoon when he published "the last shareholder letter I will write as the CEO of the company I love."
    In it, he tried to sell shareholders again on his vision for the company. This includes his major reorganization last summer, the value of Bing, a justification for buying Skype for $8.6 billion in 2011 and for buying Nokia's device business for $7 billion last month.
    The letter was published with Microsoft's annual report.
    It's Ballmer's latest in a long string of good-byes as he prepares to retire from the CEO job. Always an emotional guy, in recent weeks, Ballmer wept through his final speech to 13,000 Microsoft staffers; talked about how weird it was to come to work these days and opened up about his biggest regrets.
    Here's the letter:
    TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS, CUSTOMERS, PARTNERS AND EMPLOYEES:
    This is a unique letter for me — the last shareholder letter I will write as the CEO of the company I love. We have always believed that technology will unleash human potential and that is why I have come to work every day with a heart full of passion for more than 30 years.
    Fiscal Year 2013 was a pivotal year for Microsoft in every sense of the word.
    Last year in my letter to you I declared a fundamental shift in our business to a devices and services company. This transformation impacts how we run the company, how we develop new experiences, and how we take products to market for both consumers and businesses.
    This past year we took the first big bold steps forward in our transformation and we did it while growing revenue to $77.8 billion (up 6 percent). In addition, we returned $12.3 billion (up 15 percent) to shareholders through dividends and stock repurchases. While we were able to grow revenue to a record level, our earnings results reflect investments as well as some of the challenges of undertaking a transformation of this magnitude.
    With this as backdrop, I’d like to summarize where we are now and where we’re headed, because it helps explain why I’m so enthusiastic about the opportunity ahead.
    Our strategy: High-value activities enabled by a family of devices and services
    We are still in the early days of our transformation, yet we made strong progress in the past year launching devices and services that people love and businesses need. We brought Windows 8 to the world; we brought consistent user experiences to PCs, tablets, phones and Xbox; and we made important advancements to Windows Server, Windows Azure, Microsoft Dynamics and Office 365. We are proud of what we accomplished this year and continue to be passionate about delivering better devices and services more quickly.
    To increase innovation, capability, efficiency and speed we further sharpened our strategy, and in July 2013 we announced we are rallying behind a single strategy as One Microsoft. We declared that Microsoft’s focus going forward will be to create a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most.
    Over time, our focus on high-value activities will generate amazing innovation and new areas of growth. What is a high-value activity? Think of the experiences people have every day that are most important to them — from communicating with a family member and researching a term paper to having serious fun and expressing ideas. In a business setting, high-value activities include experiences such as conducting meetings with colleagues in multiple locations, gaining insight from massive amounts of data and information, and interacting with customers.
    Microsoft will enable these types of high-value activities with a family of devices — from both Microsoft and our partners — as well as with our services.
    As we go to market, we will primarily monetize our high-value activities by leading with devices and enterprise services. In this model, our consumer services such as Bing and Skype will differentiate our devices and serve as an on-ramp to our enterprise services while generating some revenue from subscriptions and advertising. Enterprise services continue to be an area of great strength, growth and opportunity as businesses of all sizes look to Microsoft to help them move to the cloud, manage a growing number of devices, tap into big data and embrace new social capabilities.
    Executing and accelerating
    In the past year we took many bold steps forward in executing on our strategy.
    First, we are well underway in implementing the new organization structure announced in July. The teams are working together in new and exciting ways. The key change we made is deceptively simple but profoundly powerful: Instead of organizing our teams around individual products, we’ve organized by function, including, for example, engineering, sales, marketing and finance. It ensures we have one strategy and work as one team with one set of shared goals.
    Second, in September we announced we are purchasing Nokia’s Devices and Services business — including its smartphone and mobile phone businesses; award-winning engineering and design teams; manufacturing and assembly facilities around the world; and teams devoted to operations, sales, marketing and support. This is a signature event in our transformation and will bring together the best mobile device work of Microsoft and Nokia. It will accelerate our growth with Windows Phone while strengthening our overall device ecosystem and our opportunity.
    Third, in September, we also announced a new segment-reporting framework. We have five new reporting segments tightly aligned with our focus on delivering innovative devices and services for both our enterprise and consumer customers. This framework was designed to give valuable insight into our progress in the key transformations we are undertaking in our businesses to drive long-term growth.
    As I think about what’s ahead, I’m incredibly optimistic about what Microsoft will deliver. We are accelerating as we bring to market Windows 8.1 PCs and tablets with our partners, Surface 2, Xbox One and new phones; advance our enterprise services including Windows Server, Windows Azure, Microsoft Dynamics and Office 365; and innovate on new high-value activities.
    Moving forward
    With the decisions we’ve made this year, the strategy we’ve put in place, the organization we’ve designed, the world-class talent we have, and the devices and services we are creating, we are well-positioned to deliver growth and world-changing technology long into the future.
    We have seen incredible results in the past decade — delivering more than $200 billion in operating profit. I’m optimistic not only as the CEO but as an investor who treasures his Microsoft stock.
    Working at Microsoft has been a thrilling experience — we’ve changed the world and delivered record-setting success — and I know our best days are still ahead.
    Thank you for your support.
    Steven A. Ballmer
    Chief Executive Officer
    September 27, 2013



    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-ballmers-letter-to-shareholders-2013-10#ixzz2hEvPPwwb

    2013/09/21

    Should Microsoft's Ballmer Channel Henry Singleton And Load Up The Truck With Buybacks?

    Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft.Microsoft MSFT -2.52% surprised investors this week by announcing a 22% increase in its dividend and an open-ended, $40 billion stock buyback program.
    The announcement may have reflected pressure from activist investor Value Act Capital, which was promised a board seat after amassing a $2 billion stake or a little less than 1% of Microsoft shares as the software giant’s chief executive Steve Ballmer also announced plans to retire.
    Microsoft shares ticked up a bit on the news, and they’re up 20% this year. But more drastic action is needed to revive Microsoft shares, which have been going sideways for a decade. Maybe Ballmer should channel an often overlooked giant of capitalism: Henry Singleton.
    Never heard of him? Singleton was a brilliant engineer who was raised on a Texas ranch, attended the U.S. Naval Academy in the 1930s, and later assembled the quintessential 1960s-era conglomerate called Teledyne. Conglomerateers got a bad name when the “Nifty Fifty” stocks collapsed in the late 1960s. Their financial illusions — buy private companies at five times cash flow, and watch Mr. Market instantly assign those earnings a 20x multiple — were exposed as mostly sleight-of-hand.
    But Singleton responded to Teledyne’s collapsing stock price in an unusual way. He started buying it back. In incredible volume.
    As detailed in William Thorndyke’s entertaining book “The Outsiders” and this website, Singleton decided his stock was undervalued after it plunged from $40 to $8, and the price-earnings ratio fell from 20 or 30 to 10. In a 1979 interview with Forbes, Singleton said:
    In October, 1972, we tendered for one million shares and 8.9 million came in. We took them all at $20 and figured it was a fluke, and that we couldn’t do it again. But instead of going up, our stock went down. So we kept tendering, first at $14 and then doing two bonds-far-stock swaps. Every time one tender was over the stock would go down and we’d tender again, and we’d get a new deluge. Then two more tenders at $18 and $40.
    At first, investors thought Singleton was nuts. But over time those voracious stock purchases drove up Teledyne’s earnings per share and turned out to be well-timed, to boot. According to “Distant Force,” cited in the Capital Ideas blog above, Teledyne’s EPS climbed from $1.64 in 1970 to more than $16 a share by 1977. By 1984 Singleton had paid $2.5 billion to buy back 85% of Teledyne’s shares and it was the highest-priced stock on the New York Stock Exchange.
    This all smacks of financial engineering, but the real lesson of Teledyne is that well-timed stock buybacks combined with prudent management can compound wealth. According to Distant Force, by Teledyne co-founderGeorge Roberts, an $86,000 investment in 1,000 shares of Teledyne in 1966 grew to a value of $12.6 million by 2004, including accumulated dividends and the value of spinoffs. Teledyne generated a 17.9 percent annual return over 25 years, or more than 57 times the original investment, compared with 6.7 times for the S&P 500, and 9 times for General Electric.
    Could Ballmer and his successors pull off a similar feat? Microsoft’s share price has basically gone sideways since plunging from a 1999 split-adjusted high of $58 to its 10-year trading range between around $20 and $35. Over that time, net income has almost doubled to $22 billion and earnings per share have more than tripled, from 75 cents in 2004 to $2.58 in the fiscal year ended June 30.
    That outsized increase in EPS, of course, is because of Microsoft’s stock buybacks, which have run between $2 billion and $3 billion a year in recent years. But the company is showing decent growth and throws off prodigious amounts of cash.
    What if they kicked those buybacks up, Singleton-style? Microsoft has about $30 billion a year in earnings before  interest, taxes and depreciation, up from $23 billion in 2009. Assuming that grows at 6% a year and the company decides to turn 75% of cash flow toward buying back its stock, I figure it could retire almost half its 8 billion shares outstanding by 2023. Earnings per share in this highly hypothetical construct would be over $8 even with lackluster growth, implying a stock price of $150 at a 16 P/E. Kick the growth rate up to 8% and the stock price could hit $200.

    All of this is just back-of-the-envelope scribbling, but Singleton showed that a combination of operating improvements and voracious stock buybacks can in fact deliver shareholder returns. Lord knows Microsoft doesn’t have a lot of other productive uses for its cash, even if it can scoop up once-great names like Nokia for the equivalent of the quarters it shook out of the couch.

    2013/09/20

    This Chart Shows Steve Ballmer's New Vision For Microsoft

    There's been a lot of change at Microsoft in the past three months and it's hard to see how it all adds up.
    First a major reorg, where CEO Steve Ballmer took independent units and blended them together into one big company. Then he said he would retire within a year. Then Microsoft bought Nokia's smartphone business.
    So on Thursday, during Microsoft's annual analyst meeting in Bellevue, Wash., Ballmer laid out his master plan.
    As usual, he was glowingly optimistic about the company's future, but he was also surprisingly frank about it's weak spots:
    • When it came to mobile devices he confessed "We have almost no share."
    • When it came to PCs, he said Microsoft must "ensure that the PC stays the device of choice for people when they're trying to be productive." 
    • With the cloud he said, "Office 365 and Azure have to be a touch down ... have to ... really kick ass."
    Given how many products and services Microsoft already has today, he said the focus has shifted from "dreaming" of "doing thousands of things" to doing "fewer things" but "more successfully."
    Taken all together this is the company's new mission: "Empowering people for the activities they value most."
    This chart lists those activities (right), Microsoft's products and services (left), and the up-and-coming technologies where Microsoft will focus (bottom).
    Still looks pretty complicated, no?


    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-ballmers-vision-for-microsoft-2013-9#ixzz2fRL058Nb

    2013/08/30

    Salesforce.com's Marc Benioff: Bill Gates Should Come Back As Microsoft's CEO

    Bill Gates
    Now that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has decided to retire within the year, the big question is, who on earth is qualified to run Microsoft and turn it around?
    The answer is obvious: Bill Gates, says Marc Benioff, Salesforce.com's CEO and a visionary in his own right.
    "There is no clear candidate with the visionary skills to turn the company around other than Bill Gates," Benioff told CNET. "He wouldn't just be a magnet for a new vision, but for a talent pool of leadership."
    Benioff is really suggesting that Gates step up as an interim CEO, for no more than three years, leaving the reigns of his charitable foundation to his wife Melinda.
    Benioff makes a good point. Gates probably is the best guy on the planet to do the job. You couldn't find another man on the planet that knows more about technology, healthcare issues, poverty, or education. And he's the kind of star power Microsoft needs.
    But the official word from Microsoft it that Gates is saying, "no way." If he was willing, he likely would have agreed to step in as interim CEO on the day that Ballmer announced his retirement.
    The general consensus among betting people is that Bill Gates is only slightly more likely to take the job than Apple CEO Tim Cook. U.K. betting pool site Ladbrokes places the odds that Gates comes back at 50-1, beat only by the odds that Cook takes the job, at 100-1.


    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/benioff-says-gates-should-be-microsoft-ceo-2013-8#ixzz2dSi4Lx6F

    2013/08/28

    Steve Ballmer's Biggest Mistakes As CEO Of Microsoft

    Steve Ballmer
    Steve Ballmer is out as CEO of Microsoft, ending one of the most polarizing runs in technology.
    While he did much right at Microsoft — tripling revenue and profits, building the Servers & Tools group — Ballmer will also be remembered for presiding over the company's loss of dominance and for what he did wrong. 
    And he did make some mistakes over the last thirteen years.

    Microsoft paid $500 million for Danger. It made the Kin, which was a disaster.

    Microsoft paid $500 million for Danger. It made the Kin, which was a disaster.
    There was a time when the Sidekick was a popular smartphone platform. So, Microsoft paid $500 million for its parent company Danger in 2008. Two years later that team built the Kin phones, cheap little social networking phones that were way behind the times. After months on the market, Microsoft pulled the plug on the Kin

    Microsoft took a $6.2 billion write-down for its aQuantive acquisition.

    In 2007, Microsoft paid $6.3 billion for digital marketing company aQuantive. Five years later, Microsoft took a $6.2 billion write down for the acquisition. 

    Microsoft took a $900 million charge for the Surface RT.

    Microsoft had the right idea with the Surface, but the wrong execution. It charged too much for the Surface. When it had to slash the price of the Surface, it had to take a charge to properly account for its inventory of Surface tablets.

    He burned billions and billions trying to kill Google with online services.

    He burned billions and billions trying to kill Google with online services.
    Business Insider

    Ballmer let Android take 80% of the mobile phone market.

    Ballmer let Android take 80% of the mobile phone market.
    AP
    Ballmer tried to kill the wrong Google business. He was so obsessed with Google's search that he missed Google's mobile software — Android. Really, Android is what Windows Phone should be. It should be on 80% of the mobile phones around the world. Instead it's on (about) 3% of phones. 

    He laughed at the iPhone when it was released.

    Q: People get passionate when Apple comes out with something new — the iPhone; of course, the iPod. Is that something that you'd want them to feel about Microsoft?
    Ballmer: It's sort of a funny question. Would I trade 96% of the market for 4% of the market? (Laughter.) I want to have products that appeal to everybody.
    Now we'll get a chance to go through this again in phones and music players. There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance. It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get.
    In the case of music, Apple got out early. They were the first to really recognize that you couldn't just think about the device and all the pieces separately. Bravo. Credit that to Steve (Jobs) and Apple. They did a nice job.
    But it's not like we're at the end of the line of innovation that's going to come in the way people listen to music, watch videos, etc. I'll bet our ads will be less edgy. But my 85-year-old uncle probably will never own an iPod, and I hope we'll get him to own a Zune.

    Doing the HP Slate instead of the Courier.

    Doing the HP Slate instead of the Courier.
    Engadget
    Before Apple released the iPad, there were leaks of something called the Courier from Microsoft. It was a dual-screen, pen based tablet that had gadget nerds hyperventilating. Ballmer killed it before it was even close to being real. Instead, just before Apple released the iPad, he announced the HP Slate, a totally useless tablet that was DOA. The Courier probably would have been a failure, but at least it was different and exciting. It could have evolved into something that challenged the iPad. 

    Windows Vista was a disaster.

    Windows Vista was a disaster.
    REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
    Ballmer says Vista was his biggest regret. "Oh, you know, I've actually had a chance to make a lot of mistakes, and probably because, you know, people all want to focus in on period A, period B, but I would say probably the thing I regret most is the, what shall I call it, the loopedy-loo that we did that was sort of Longhorn to Vista. I would say that's probably the thing I regret most. And, you know, there are side effects of that when you tie up a big team to do something that doesn't prove out to be as valuable."

    Trying and failing to buy Yahoo.

    Trying and failing to buy Yahoo.
    Jerry Yang is the co-founder and former CEO of Yahoo.
    Microsoft was willing to pay $45 billion for Yahoo in 2008. If Jerry Yang and Yahoo's board hadn't screwed up, Microsoft would have been saddled with Yahoo. Ballmer got lucky his initial offer was rejected. (And in an impressive recovery from this screwup, he later realized his mistake and walked away — leaving Yahoo to make an even bigger mistake).

    The pointless Zune

    The pointless Zune
    Apple
    Apple released the iPod. It was a hit. Microsoft tried to do its own device, the Zune. It was not a hit. It was released in 2006. A year and half later Apple made the category obsolete with the iPhone. 

    No Office for iPad or iPhone.

    So, Ballmer totally whiffed on mobile. He could have at least put out great versions of Office for the iPad and iPhone and started making money that way. Instead, he held back on Office under the misguided assumption that it would hold back the growth of iOS and make Windows mobile stuff work. 

    Now, see what his longtime rival Apple is up to ...



    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-ballmers-most-epic-mistakes-as-ceo-of-microsoft-2013-8?op=1#ixzz2dH5VnzMX