91 posts in this topic

No, it's actually very important. Companies typically retain some portion of ownership in an entity they spin off. If it were to be spun off, of course they'd get some support, but they're not going to get what I described above -- it's simply not a good arrangement for either entity in that case.

Any spin-off would involve a licensing deal for the proprietary software (operating systems, etc) and backend (cloud computing, Xbox Live, etc). Microsoft would actually make money from such a deal, rather than the Xbox brand being a liability as it is currently.

 

I can't see Microsoft selling a portion of its business as substantial as Xbox to one of its two leading competitors -- the press and investors would have a field day, and it would have the possibility to go down as one of the biggest blunders in business, if the competitor were successful. No company wants that.

That assumes that they would be successful with the brand when Microsoft hasn't been. But you're right that it wouldn't be Microsoft's first choice to sell it to either of them. My point was simply that it could be sold to them, not that it would be without consequence. Turning to private investors would be the more likely option.

 

You're right in that it's more likely to go private, but that still puts both Microsoft and Xbox in bad positions.

But I would argue that Microsoft is already in a bad position now. The Xbox brand has been going for over a decade and it has yet to pay for itself, while Sony seemingly has a cheaper and more powerful console this time around. And as I said, I don't see the traditional business model of consoles holding up beyond this generation and there is likely to be increased competition. We've already seen Microsoft make several serious U-turns due to consumer backlash when it comes to the XB1 and it hasn't even launched yet.

 

Businesses exist to make money and the Xbox division isn't helping Microsoft to do that. In fact I think it has been a major distraction, with Microsoft shuttering several of its major games developers and letting DirectX stagnate. It's the same with Bing, which has cost over $10 billion and is designed simply to deprive Google of market share rather than being a legitimate competitor. Bing is the default search engine on all Windows devices yet users are going out of their way to avoid it. I want to see Microsoft focus on what its good at, rather than trying to force its way into other markets (i.e. like it did with Windows 8 and tablets).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's talking about "getting rid of Xbox?"

 

Spinning off the Xbox division doesn't mean it goes away.

 

 

The original story claims that Elop would be interested in spinning off or shutting it down.  So they are talking about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Businesses exist to make money and the Xbox division isn't helping Microsoft to do that. In fact I think it has been a major distraction, with Microsoft shuttering several of its major games developers and letting DirectX stagnate. It's the same with Bing, which has cost over $10 billion and is designed simply to deprive Google of market share rather than being a legitimate competitor. Bing is the default search engine on all Windows devices yet users are going out of their way to avoid it. I want to see Microsoft focus on what its good at, rather than trying to force its way into other markets (i.e. like it did with Windows 8 and tablets).

 

I'm not sure how Bing is not a legitimate competitor.  I mean its easy to claim that based on market share, but your saying that MS had no intention of competing.  I'm not so sure about that. 

 

Basically, it sounds like your calling for them to ignore the tablet market and focus on a win 7 strategy that basically pushes windows into the enterprise more and more as people move away from the standard pc as a their daily use device.

 

The thing I don't get is why more people aren't looking for ways to actually do better in markets instead of abandoning them.  Why cant a new CEO come in and help fix the systemic problems that have kept MS from excelling in these markets that people continuously bash them for trying to enter?  Its as if its seen as impossible. Why is the only option to cut ties to the consumer markets and crawl back into an enterprise focused market? 

 

If MS' only future is as the next IBM, then so be it, I just thought a new CEO could come in and actually fix problems that have held them back, not retract the reach they have spent so long trying to foster.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft can't go running back to a business only game if it wants to grow. Microsoft needs XBox, it needs Surface, it needs Windows 8, and it needs Bing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Source for that quote?

the link is there. Bloomberg :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the link is there. Bloomberg :laugh:

Crap. They would bury that quote in the article and yet continue on spewing that nonsense.  :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH, My pops who is a business major firmly stated that a business like Microsoft is worth more split into small entities then as a whole.

 

problem is, MS wouldn't do this because there would "probably" be complaints of "our product vision of Windows across all device platforms would be hindered.

 

XBOX might do better as it's own MS entity then if it were part of the whole. This would go against the past MS mantra of colaboration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH, My pops who is a business major firmly stated that a business like Microsoft is worth more split into small entities then as a whole.

 

problem is, MS wouldn't do this because there would "probably" be complaints of "our product vision of Windows across all device platforms would be hindered.

 

XBOX might do better as it's own MS entity then if it were part of the whole. This would go against the past MS mantra of colaboration.

Seems to me that's an old way of thinking now, when each major tech company is gathering an integrating their own devices and services. Splitting up Microsoft would effectively kill them in the marketplace now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft was just fine without XBOX in the past,
and it will be fine too without One in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft is a huge company and has done very well despite being known as uncool.  Microsoft is the best at software and business aspects and that is what made them successful, Microsoft's success didn't come mainly from consoles or devices. I think it could be best to spin off the Xbox  into another company that is under the tutelage of Microsoft. Spinning the Xbox division off could work best for Microsoft and the Xbox division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft was just fine without XBOX in the past,

and it will be fine too without One in the future.

Really? That's because console gaming didn't exist like it does today. Besides, the rumor isn't even true, and is shot down by Frank Shaw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how Bing is not a legitimate competitor.  I mean its easy to claim that based on market share, but your saying that MS had no intention of competing.  I'm not so sure about that. 

By that I mean that Bing hasn't made any money but has in fact cost Microsoft billions of dollars, with most of its success based on its bundling with Windows.

 

Basically, it sounds like your calling for them to ignore the tablet market and focus on a win 7 strategy that basically pushes windows into the enterprise more and more as people move away from the standard pc as a their daily use device.

Absolutely not. My criticism is that Microsoft tried to force its way into the tablet market by leveraging the Windows platform at the expense of desktop users. Having used the Surface 2 I think that Microsoft's tablet offering is actually quite compelling and the software is better than what Apple has to offer.

 

The thing I don't get is why more people aren't looking for ways to actually do better in markets instead of abandoning them.  Why cant a new CEO come in and help fix the systemic problems that have kept MS from excelling in these markets that people continuously bash them for trying to enter?  Its as if its seen as impossible. Why is the only option to cut ties to the consumer markets and crawl back into an enterprise focused market? 

 

If MS' only future is as the next IBM, then so be it, I just thought a new CEO could come in and actually fix problems that have held them back, not retract the reach they have spent so long trying to foster.

Sometimes businesses have to cut their losses and focus on what works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Sometimes businesses have to cut their losses and focus on what works.

 

I agree that happens, but I've seen so many people complain that the reason MS hasn't been more successful in certain markets is due to the CEO and how things were run in general.

 

Well if that is the case, why not bring in a CEO that can fix those problems.  That's a lot more ambitious then just downsizing.  Sometimes you need a little risk to score big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. Kill Bing with fire. Worst search engine as well as Yahoo. Google  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.