08.13.08
Microsoft Claimed to Have Lost $18,000,000,000 in 1998
Has anything changed since?
“Share and share unalike” was published in The Economist back in 1999. Strangely enough, the Economist’s permanent URL is broken and the article is no longer there. Was it pulled?
Either way, we’ve managed to find this copy. Read this part closely:
For instance, Microsoft, the world’s most valuable company, declared a profit of $4.5 billion in 1998; when the cost of options awarded that year, plus the change in the value of outstanding options, is deducted, the firm made a loss of $18 billion, according to Smithers.
A reader who brought this to our attention added: “About that time Bill stepped down, probably having seen the books in advance.”
One day we may all know the truth. In the mean time, and also this week, there are those who throw away all of their Microsoft shares whilst Microsoft is claimed to be very aggressive on the buybacks side.
We recently wrote about Microsoft’s financial state in [1, 2, 3, 4]. █
“Truth is Treason in the Empire of Lies”
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.
Jose_X said,
August 29, 2008 at 11:34 pm
For explanation see http://www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html
Jose_X said,
August 29, 2008 at 11:37 pm
These are also interesting:
http://www.billparish.com/20040223persforeigngatesfoundation.html
http://billparish.wordpress.com/category/technology-and-microsoft/
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 30, 2008 at 3:02 am
The one about the Gates Foundation is interesting:
“The Concentration of Foreign Based Investment Managers in Public Pensions in the United States. Gates foundation liquidating every share of Microsoft stock and impact on Linux development also discussed.
[…]
“At the same time Bill Gates has aggressively used his foundation to invest in defense and media related companies and thereby allow himself to leverage growth of the Windows operating system in new environments by being a major shareholder. One prominent example is the foundations investment in the Mexican media conglomerate Televisa. Via this investment and subsequent mergers Microsoft now indirectly controls the radio and television broadcasts in Spanish to more than 75 percent of all Latinos in the United States.
“If foundations like the Gates foundations receive tax-exempt treatment for security sales, they should be required to be fully disclosed. Only then will the free market system work. Linux users in particular should be pressing for such disclosures because only then will the playing field be level. Thinking that a more superior product will prevail in such an environment is simply naive.”
http://www.billparish.com/20040223persforeigngatesfoundation.html
Related to this:
Microfraud?
“THE ALLEGATIONS WERE shocking: For years, Microsoft has systematically distorted its profit figures in an effort to consistently beat Wall Street expectations and keep its stock price steadily rising. The false reports would violate SEC regulations, and amount to outright fraud.
“More shocking was the source of the allegations: Microsoft’s chief of internal audits, Charlie Pancerzewski, who reported directly to the company’s chief financial officer.
“Most shocking of all was what happened to Pancerzewski when he reported the suspicious bookkeeping to his supervisors, Microsoft CFO Mike Brown and chief operating officer Bob Herbold, in the spring of 1995. Soon afterward, Pancerzewski—who for nearly five years had received stellar performance evaluations—received his first-ever unsatisfactory one, and was eventually forced to resign.
“Two months ago, Microsoft quietly settled a lawsuit containing these allegations, filed in 1997 by Pancerzewski under the Whistleblowers Protection Act. The auditor claimed he was wrongfully terminated after telling his supervisors that Microsoft might be breaking securities and tax laws. The lawsuit made its tortuous way through several rounds of pretrial motions until last fall, when US District Judge Carolyn Dimmick denied Microsoft’s final plea for summary judgment, finding credible evidence that Microsoft may have violated SEC rules, as Pancerzewski alleged. Shortly thereafter, Microsoft and Pancerzewski settled out of court. Terms of the agreement were sealed, but one source who claims familiarity with the case says that Microsoft paid Pancerzewski $4 million.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20070308032343rn_2/www.seattleweekly.com/1999-01-06/news/microfraud.php