Investors want MS CEO to dump Xbox Brand

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

Sauce

"Some investors have suggested that Microsoft spin off its money-losing consumer products and focus solely on the enterprise. Even the Xbox deserves to go, Paul Ghaffari, the wealth manager for Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, said last year."

#2 Edited by _Matt_ (8737 posts) -

I can see why they would want to kill Bing and the Surface, they suck balls;

but why Xbox?

#3 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

Sauce

"Some investors have suggested that Microsoft spin off its money-losing consumer products and focus solely on the enterprise. Even the Xbox deserves to go, Paul Ghaffari, the wealth manager for Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, said last year."

LOL.

Sony will go bankrupt before MS will sell off XB1.

#4 Posted by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

@_Matt_ said:

I can see why they would want to kill Bing and the Surface, they suck balls;

but why Xbox?

If you read the article (It was way too long to post) It says this If Nadella does choose to turn more decisively toward business customers, he may find a useful ally in a man named Mason Morfit. Morfit is a 37-year-old activist investor whose employer, the private hedge fund ValueAct, acquired a 0.8 percent stake in Microsoft in August. That was enough to put Morfit on the board.

It seems as if some of the board wants to move to a more business oriented customers.

#5 Edited by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

#6 Edited by juarbles (801 posts) -

Real gamers everywhere and people who care about gaming want that too.

#7 Edited by Draign (517 posts) -

Haters gonna hate.

#8 Posted by Bishop1310 (874 posts) -

old news, and wont happen.

#9 Posted by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -

In reality, they should.

Microsofts problem these days is the amount of pies they have fingers in. Too many pies, not enough fingers. They're trying to branch out in a million different directions. Couple this with the in-fighting between the various fractured departments, and you just end up with a mess. Autocratic leaders doing whatever they want doesn't help either.

They've lost their focus. In the last ten years, they catch onto trends too late in the day, or if they come too early, they don't seize the opportunity and market and let it stagnate until someone competent comes along and plugs the gap. In the last decade - 15 years, Microsoft has come to each endeavor SECOND or THIRD, and it's already too crowded by then.

Ballmer was jaded and outmatched by opposing leadership. Nadella looks like he could apply some direction to the company. I wouldn't say he is averse to the idea of flogging the Xbox brand. It would probably be better for all involved.

But who the hell would buy it?

#10 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

#11 Posted by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

#12 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

In reality, they should.

Microsofts problem these days is the amount of pies they have fingers in. Too many pies, not enough fingers. They're trying to branch out in a million different directions. Couple this with the in-fighting between the various fractured departments, and you just end up with a mess. Autocratic leaders doing whatever they want doesn't help either.

They've lost their focus. In the last ten years, they catch onto trends too late in the day, or if they come too early, they don't seize the opportunity and market and let it stagnate until someone competent comes along and plugs the gap. In the last decade - 15 years, Microsoft has come to each endeavor SECOND or THIRD, and it's already too crowded by then.

Ballmer was jaded and outmatched by opposing leadership. Nadella looks like he could apply some direction to the company. I wouldn't say he is averse to the idea of flogging the Xbox brand. It would probably be better for all involved.

But who the hell would buy it?

Apple seems to not have a problem with it. Neither does Google.

Only stupid cows - and yes, stupid - would want the Xbox to go away. Competition breeds innovation. Without MS, the PS3 would have stayed at $600, and the PS4 would be a $1000.

#13 Posted by Shewgenja (7773 posts) -

ZuneBone'd

#14 Edited by Desmonic (12370 posts) -

Hope they decide not to. I mean purely from a financial standpoint the investors have a point (they still haven't made a penny of a profit with the brand itself) but the plan MS is trying to employ (control the living room) could lead to potential billions of profit...in time.

As a gamer I hope they don't sell out honestly. I don't know who could buy the Xbox brand and do a better job with it really... more than likely the new owners would just f*ck things up beyond salvation.

#15 Posted by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

In reality, they should.

Microsofts problem these days is the amount of pies they have fingers in. Too many pies, not enough fingers. They're trying to branch out in a million different directions. Couple this with the in-fighting between the various fractured departments, and you just end up with a mess. Autocratic leaders doing whatever they want doesn't help either.

They've lost their focus. In the last ten years, they catch onto trends too late in the day, or if they come too early, they don't seize the opportunity and market and let it stagnate until someone competent comes along and plugs the gap. In the last decade - 15 years, Microsoft has come to each endeavor SECOND or THIRD, and it's already too crowded by then.

Ballmer was jaded and outmatched by opposing leadership. Nadella looks like he could apply some direction to the company. I wouldn't say he is averse to the idea of flogging the Xbox brand. It would probably be better for all involved.

But who the hell would buy it?

Yeah that's the big question, Less competition is obviously detrimental to the industry. But IF ( it seems like a pretty big if now) who would buy it?

#16 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

#17 Edited by charizard1605 (54090 posts) -

@_Matt_ said:

I can see why they would want to kill Bing and the Surface, they suck balls;

but why Xbox?

Surface is amazing :|

Anyway, investors are by nature short sighted, this is something I have always maintained- Xbox is Microsft's most visible brand, and their breakout hit with consumers. It helps act as a Trojan horse for other Microsoft services (Bing, Skype, Azure, Windows, Marketplace, Xbox Live, Xbox Music), and is an integral part of their strategy- there is absolutely no chance of Microsoft selling it off.

Similarly, they are not selling Bing off, not only is Bing now central to the functioning of all their products (and even non Microsoft products- all iOS devices use Bing now), but people keep forgetting, Bing is more than just a search engine, it is also a set of APIs that Microsoft builds on, one that is essentially completely embedded in all their products and services now. Getting rid of Bing would mean having to reconstruct all of Microsoft's products from the ground up.

TL;DR- as much as cows probably want Microsoft to dump Xbox (and Bing and Surface and what not), they won't. All of these are integral parts of a long term strategy, and dropping any of them would be extraordinarily stupid and myopic. Then again, investors are usually both, so I can see why they would float this idea so many times.

#18 Edited by N30F3N1X (7956 posts) -

If these investors had any clue about investing they'd axe the MS CEO instead of asking him to do stuff.

#19 Edited by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Cool story. Instead of being a half baked troll how about you comment with a little more intelligence?

#20 Posted by dabear (3606 posts) -

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Yes, Animal-Mother, this is StormyJoe's original account that I do not use anymore. Check the date...

#21 Edited by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -

@balfe1990 said:

In reality, they should.

Microsofts problem these days is the amount of pies they have fingers in. Too many pies, not enough fingers. They're trying to branch out in a million different directions. Couple this with the in-fighting between the various fractured departments, and you just end up with a mess. Autocratic leaders doing whatever they want doesn't help either.

They've lost their focus. In the last ten years, they catch onto trends too late in the day, or if they come too early, they don't seize the opportunity and market and let it stagnate until someone competent comes along and plugs the gap. In the last decade - 15 years, Microsoft has come to each endeavor SECOND or THIRD, and it's already too crowded by then.

Ballmer was jaded and outmatched by opposing leadership. Nadella looks like he could apply some direction to the company. I wouldn't say he is averse to the idea of flogging the Xbox brand. It would probably be better for all involved.

But who the hell would buy it?

Yeah that's the big question, Less competition is obviously detrimental to the industry. But IF ( it seems like a pretty big if now) who would buy it?

Nobody, realistically.

Who would want that burden weighing on their bottom line? Apple has always done their own thing and clearly has different ideas of how entertainment should play out in the living room. And they, aside from Google and maybe even Yahoo, are the only ones that could actually weather that financial impact.

End of the day, nobody is going to buy the brand during it's current cycle. Any offers would have to come after the Xbox One, and then I'd say the industry would have moved on. The Xbox brand is probably something MS has to bear until they inevitably wind it down and focus on Xbox Music and Xbox Video etc. as the continuation of the name

#22 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Cool story. Instead of being a half baked troll how about you comment with a little more intelligence?

Really? First, check my "dabear" response. Second, you are the one acting as thought the Xbox brand has no worth, when: 1) the Xbox One had a successful launch, 2) the Xbox 360 is still selling well and was a very successful console.

You live in a moo-filled fantasy world.

#23 Posted by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -
#24 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27084 posts) -

Ummm this happens all the time. Lots of short term investors want parts of companies sold (esp hedge funds) because it generates quick income. This really isn't news.

#25 Posted by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -
#26 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

#28 Posted by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

Why would they charge 1000 Euro? Sony is not staffed by moronic apes. The Xbox isn't the sole reason they charge 399 for the PS4. There's a plethora of other factors at play. The console doesn't even cost half that to produce.

#29 Posted by charizard1605 (54090 posts) -

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

The primary issue here is, the PS3 would never have sold at $600.

Things barely sell at prices that high, they need to have an incredible amount of multiple, variable utility, that a game console, even a media centric one such as PS3 or Xbox One, can by definition not offer.

#30 Posted by hoyalawya (327 posts) -

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

And each PS4 game will be $80 as Sony will demand a bigger cut from the publishers to run games on their system. PS+ fee would be doubled.

#31 Posted by cainetao11 (15599 posts) -

@juarbles: disagree. Real gamers play games on anything, if possible everything. We don't sit and say "oh poo on teh Xbox, dey bad." Grow up

#32 Posted by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -
#33 Edited by Animal-Mother (26152 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Cool story. Instead of being a half baked troll how about you comment with a little more intelligence?

Really? First, check my "dabear" response. Second, you are the one acting as thought the Xbox brand has no worth, when: 1) the Xbox One had a successful launch, 2) the Xbox 360 is still selling well and was a very successful console.

You live in a moo-filled fantasy world.

Please tell me where i've acted it has no worth. I'm simply stating what the article has. Are you paying attention at all? Take your fanboy goggles off. Instead of coming into a thread assuming everyone's a cow if they post something news related to MS.

#34 Posted by Kjranu (758 posts) -

In other words, the investors want the IBM-ification of Microsoft. I will give them a resounding NO, even as meaningless as it may be. I loved my IBM prebuilt and I was sad that I couldn't buy them since they had sold their division to Lenovo, a Chinese company. The last thing we need is more selling off of precious American patents and trademarks to the all consuming beast that is China.

#35 Posted by jdc6305 (3763 posts) -

I've seen a lot of systems come and go over the years Atari Intellavision NES SNES Turbo Grafix Sega ect. Microsoft is the worst company to ever enter the race. I hate what they've done to gaming. The brought DLC milkage and multiplayer to forefront of gaming. They gave Sony the nerve to try things they thought they'd never be able to get away with. It's a good thing M$ seriously fucked up with trying to bring DRM to consoles. It's even better that gamers fought back. If M$ bows out of the race the gap will be filled by Nintendo and Sony. I doubt Sony would be able to monopolize the industry. M$ can fuck off as far as I'm concerned.

#37 Edited by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -

@balfe1990: please tell me you're not serious. PS4 doesn't cost $200 to produce? Here: PlayStation 4 to sell at a loss, but Sony expects profit ...

news.cnet.com/8301-10797_3-57603901-235/playstation-4-to... Cached

PlayStation 4 to sell at a loss, but Sony expects profit. The company says that it'll be able to make up the loss by generating revenue off PlayStation ..." if it sells at a loss, how much does it cost to make?

Bro, I was referring to his figure of 1000 Euro, not 399.

#38 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

The primary issue here is, the PS3 would never have sold at $600.

Things barely sell at prices that high, they need to have an incredible amount of multiple, variable utility, that a game console, even a media centric one such as PS3 or Xbox One, can by definition not offer.

But... the PS3 DID sell at that price point. Sony lost users to the 360 because it was cheaper. If the 360 was not there as a viable alternative, those gamers would have bought the PS3.

#39 Posted by charizard1605 (54090 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

@StormyJoe said:

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

The primary issue here is, the PS3 would never have sold at $600.

Things barely sell at prices that high, they need to have an incredible amount of multiple, variable utility, that a game console, even a media centric one such as PS3 or Xbox One, can by definition not offer.

But... the PS3 DID sell at that price point. Sony lost users to the 360 because it was cheaper. If the 360 was not there as a viable alternative, those gamers would have bought the PS3.

The PS3's sales were abysmal. The system was a flop, its sales didn't pick up until multiple price cuts were instituted.

If the Xbox 360 had not existed, then either the Wii would have sprung up as a credible alternative to the PS3 (likely, with cheap development costs, and cheap costs to the front end consumer, and no other viable 'hardcore' alternative like the Xbox 360) or the console market would have undergone a catastrophic contraction. Or, simply put, a new competitor would have decided to spring up. Under no circumstances would a $600 console sell.

#40 Posted by cainetao11 (15599 posts) -

@balfe1990: no, I know. I was editing while you were replying. I am trying to do to many things at same time here, and just brain farted on that. Sorry.

#41 Edited by charizard1605 (54090 posts) -

Huh. Didn't know that, they've obviously been quiet on the matter.

Lesser of two evils for them I suppose.

That's the thing, Bing is incredibly prolific and massively important to Microsoft's overall strategy- it may be a loss leader now, just like Xbox (which still nevertheless does well for them, and is their most visible brand), or Windows Phone (which, it needs to be pointed out, has overtaken iOS in most markets outside of the US), but it is an important pillar and it is going nowhere.

#42 Posted by juarbles (801 posts) -

@juarbles: disagree. Real gamers play games on anything, if possible everything. We don't sit and say "oh poo on teh Xbox, dey bad." Grow up

Real gamers can't defend or support the xbone because the xbone has been used by Microsoft to try and destroy real gaming. First kinect and then what they tried to do in july last year. Whoever supports the xbone is either a non-gamer, an anti-gamer or just doesn't care for gaming. I just use xboner because it comprises all of those into one.

#43 Edited by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Cool story. Instead of being a half baked troll how about you comment with a little more intelligence?

Really? First, check my "dabear" response. Second, you are the one acting as thought the Xbox brand has no worth, when: 1) the Xbox One had a successful launch, 2) the Xbox 360 is still selling well and was a very successful console.

You live in a moo-filled fantasy world.

Please tell me where i've acted it has no worth. I'm simply stating what the article has. Are you paying attention at all? Take your fanboy goggles off. Instead of coming into a thread assuming everyone's a cow if they post something news related to MS.

Really? Your cow slobber-fest with balfe over the pseudo-perplexing scenario over "who would buy the Xbox brand"? As if a company buying the Xbox brand would be a bad thing?

I am not a fanboy. I don't blindly follow any company or product. I just point out cow bullshit, which is what you and balfe are shoveling in tons right now.

#44 Posted by shawn30 (4250 posts) -

One quote from the financial manager of one investor is opinion at best. But Xbox provides far to much in the way of profits going forward, as well as mind share and public image. If you look at RROD, you can never forget it. It happened, period, point blank. But if it didn't happen they 360 would have been wildly profitable. That one design error killed the profits, and its a testament to the gaming division that they have operated in the black the last five years while still eating away at the RROD debt. With the One not having any hardware issues this far (fingers crossed) The business of selling it worldwide while ensuring all features are present and constantly being updated, as well as games and apps, is the plan going forward. Moving over 3 million units in the face of overwhelming bad press, online polls, SonyGaf, and terrible decision making by key people at the debut and at E3, the One is moving at a good pace going forward and with a great gaming line-up. I don't have any worries that the business of Xbox will be slow growth and steady improvement of the OS, features, and exclusive games. Minus RROD the One will likely be in the black by year 2 going forward..

#45 Posted by Bigboi500 (28791 posts) -

I would actually buy a Xbox One is someone other than Micro$oft was in control of it.

#46 Posted by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@charizard1605 said:

@StormyJoe said:

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

The primary issue here is, the PS3 would never have sold at $600.

Things barely sell at prices that high, they need to have an incredible amount of multiple, variable utility, that a game console, even a media centric one such as PS3 or Xbox One, can by definition not offer.

But... the PS3 DID sell at that price point. Sony lost users to the 360 because it was cheaper. If the 360 was not there as a viable alternative, those gamers would have bought the PS3.

The PS3's sales were abysmal. The system was a flop, its sales didn't pick up until multiple price cuts were instituted.

If the Xbox 360 had not existed, then either the Wii would have sprung up as a credible alternative to the PS3 (likely, with cheap development costs, and cheap costs to the front end consumer, and no other viable 'hardcore' alternative like the Xbox 360) or the console market would have undergone a catastrophic contraction. Or, simply put, a new competitor would have decided to spring up. Under no circumstances would a $600 console sell.

Really, because the PS3 sold about 10 million before the slim came out. While less than the PS2 over the same timeframe, that's not a failure.

#47 Edited by balfe1990 (6747 posts) -

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

#48 Posted by Shewgenja (7773 posts) -

The reality is that no one will want to buy the XBox business because it will need to make way for the Steambox, anyway. Perhaps Valve would buy it up just to have it out of the way?

#49 Edited by blackace (19580 posts) -
@Animal-Mother said:

Sauce

"Some investors have suggested that Microsoft spin off its money-losing consumer products and focus solely on the enterprise. Even the Xbox deserves to go, Paul Ghaffari, the wealth manager for Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, said last year."

Very old news and Microsoft already so "NO, the aren't dumping XBox brand." lol

This thread can be closed by mods now.

Microsoft made $6.5 billion net profit in their entertainment division this last quarter where XBox is at. I don't think investors are unhappy with that at all.

#50 Posted by charizard1605 (54090 posts) -

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.