Microsoft's Debt Surges to Unprecedented 111+ Billion Dollars

submitted by PanzersGhost from techrights.org

all 14 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They focused on The Cloud and AI and forgot to support the PC Users. Windows 11 won't run on 5+-year-old PCs so Windows 10 can't upgrade to Windows 11.

I think the debt from the Windows Phone and ARM Windows devices also caught up to them. Nobody wants to buy them.

[–]RedditButt 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nobody wanted windows 10, either, but they used their marketing prowess to collude with manufactures to only make windoze drivers, and get it on every laptop and prebuilt pc sold, so the plebs just buy anything set out and front of them, and use it anyways.

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

All they had to do was make and maintain Operating Systems.

Is it so hard to simply do the business that you are known for?

[–]Canbot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Sorry, but that is just not true in a practical sense. Take for example Blockbuster. They went under because of redbox. You could easily have said that all they had to do was start their own mail based rental. And they actually had that for a short time. But what you have to realize is that Blockbuster was bringing in 3 billion gross annually. Redbox revenue in 2010 when blockbuster went under was something like 50 million, and even today it is only 500 million. Blockbuster could never compete with that. Management would never accept a 90% reduction in pay when they could move to another company and cannibalize all the assets on their way out. Blockbuster shut down their mail order movie service because it was decimating their revenue, which was mostly driven by late fees.

Sears went under because of Amazon. They also had an online store for a while. It also undercut their business model. They tried having lower prices online to compete with other online retailers, but people expected to get the same price at the store. That is not economically viable. They tried to have discount brands online and higher quality and price brands in the stores. People expected the same guarantee as the store products and expected to do returns at the stores, online retailers did not have that problem. In the end they couldn't even pivot into only online even though they were originally only mail order.

There is a concept in business called "grown or die". In hard times you can cut fat and restructure debt and become more efficient, but you can never go back to a younger state of the company. Just like you can hit the gym at 60 and be much healthier, but you will never turn the clock back and be 25 again.

Microsoft grew past operating systems a long time ago. Their buisness model is data gathering and social engineering, just like google. The are not offering an AI app for people as a product. They want you on their system, using their AI so they have access to you. They are happy to lose money on that. The subscription is just there so you feel invested in their AI and keep coming back. If it were free you would not feel any pressure to use their AI over any other, but if you payed for it then you feel, not only that it must be better because you had to pay, but also that you already paid so you might as well use it.

They can never again be a company that makes operating systems and competes with linux. But they are definitely not making any mistakes with AI. People just don't understand the game.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

None of that is relevant.

Microsoft grew past operating systems a long time ago. Their buisness model is data gathering and social engineering, just like google.

There was no reason to do that. You know why Taco Bell doesn't sell hamburgers? Because they're not stupid.

Seriously, your argument is that they can't be a small profitable company, because they are too busy being a tremendous failure.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They can't be a small profitable business because they are an old massive corporation. They can't be that any more than a whale can be a small featherless bird.

But they are very profitable. And if they ever become unprofitable they will die the same way you will die in your old age, not because you failed to choose to be young again but because that is not an option.

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Your reply was 460 words, 2430 characters. Man you must be bored.

All they had to do

[–]RedditButt 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sure it's easy to create a company to make it go 100 billion in debt, while making you personally 100 billion richer.

[–]xoenix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Did not realize that Github was such a money pit for them, but I guess it would be. Windows etc. aside, the world depends on Github. If it ever went dark it would be pretty catastrophic. Big services like this have a kind of mutually-assured destruction pact with the world.

[–]someboy 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

microsoft should buy saidit.net and go bankrupt.

[–]ID10T 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't understand why it isn't profitable. Almost every business that builds software uses it and pays for it.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

1.5M github users losing $240/year is $360M/year. That's not chump change, but it's also not how they got to $111B of debts.

In 2022, Microsoft had gross revenues of $198B and their debt was expected to grow to this level, because they are taking on debt to build datacenters. Datacenters are money printers going brrrrr 24/7/365.

Microsoft is gonna make it, guys.

[–]boston_blackie 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

After being in the IT field for many years and using all of the Microsoft Desktop and server software since DOS 2.0, I could never understand the decision to take a polished, nice looking and functioning interface like Windows 7 pro and discard it for the clownware that was Windows 8.0 first edition. I did replace my Windows 7 pro with Windows 8.1 and use Classic Shell to hide the clownware tiles and other tools to turn oFf the telemetry. It's a very good platform for day to day computer work. This is my backup computer that I use for just a few apps that don't run well in Wine. I started with Slackware in late 1995 and switched over to MX-Linux about 4 years ago. I know there are die-hards on both sides of the Linux issue, and I'd say the interface is not as polished as Windows 8.1 but it is still good.

In my view Windows should have continued development on the Windows 7/8.1 platforms and add the capability for the user to apply themes and customization and new features.

[–]Myocarditis-Man 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was all about getting consumers to embrace Windows phones and tablets by bringing the desktop down to their level. Huge flop, obviously. Windows phones and tablets are d. e. a. d. dead, and Windows is steadily, though slowly losing market share.