Microsoft Corporation

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hi Weijian,

I see. It is hard to quantify and contextualize anecdotal evidence. Hence, did a quick survey, WoW is definitely losing players since 2016 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/2766...y-quarter/). COD still have some legs (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1243273/cod-mau/). 

Activision as a whole certainly is not "in decline", at least by the numbers.

That's the issue with IPs, they usually have limited shelf-life, unless IP holders constantly puts in capital and effort to refresh it (ala Disney). And even then, it's not risk-free.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply
(22-09-2015, 08:46 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: The new cloud-based Office, may achieve the same success as Adobe...

(not vested)

Microsoft begins worldwide release of Office 2016
22 Sep 2015 18:31
[BENGALURU] Microsoft Corp said it began the worldwide roll-out of Office 2016, the latest addition to its cloud-based subscription service Office 365, on Tuesday.

Microsoft said Office 2016 brings new versions of desktop apps for Windows including Word, PowerPoint, Excel, Outlook and Access and allows people to collaborate and work together. "These latest innovations take another big step forward in transforming Office from a familiar set of individual productivity apps to a connected set of apps and services designed for modern working, collaboration and teamwork," Chief Executive Satya Nadella said in a statement.
...
REUTERS

Source: Business Times Breaking News

A short and comprehensive write-up about Adobe Systems:
https://learntoinvests.com/adobe-stock-analysis/

Let me know what are your thoughts about them!
Reply
After 25% down, Is Microsoft a buy now?

A company which has adapted and transitioned from the 20th century to the 21st century, is none other than Microsoft. Microsoft was founded in 1975 by Bill Gates and Paul Allen to create PC operating system software at the commencement of the personal computer age. The company’s Windows operating system eventually emerged to dominate the PC market. Microsoft has grown into productivity software, server software, internet services, video games, and PC hardware and accessories over the years.

Today, I am still a user of Windows, Microsoft Office, LinkedIn and Xbox almost daily. These suites of products have already become part of my life to do literally any task.

Current Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella took the reins of the Redmond, Wash.-based company in 2014 and led Microsoft into cloud computing. Many believed he is the one that saved Microsoft, Satya essentially did a 180-degree turn on Microsoft’s philosophy. He not only embraced open source development but actively started supporting it, so much so that one of Satya’s biggest moves was to acquire Github.

Microsoft is the 3rd largest company by market cap – $1.95 Trillion (as at 15 May 2022). As Microsoft has shown its successful pivot from desktop computing to cloud computing, Microsoft stock has naturally risen as well. However after a recent pullback, many investors may be wondering: Is Microsoft stock a good buy right now?

Let’s take a look at what Microsoft has to offer. Let’s find out!
https://learntoinvests.com/microsoft-stock-analysis/
Reply
Microsoft was not known to be a dot com stock; neither was it part of the FAANG stocks (though some try to slip in in as FAANMG). It has indeed proven itself to be quiet bellwether but that's also contingent on the management. So yes Nadella saved Microsoft from decline of bummer Ballmer. But without ruthless Gates, Ballmer created the perfect environment for the rise of Jobs Big Grin

But using it daily is quite irrelevant if it is an a decline for eg you use it less daily. Most of have been using Windows daily for past 20 years but stock price has not cared about that Smile It's the same "sounds good but flawed logic" of oil is non renewable resource so can only go up.
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply
(24-05-2022, 11:45 AM)specuvestor Wrote: Microsoft was not known to be a dot com stock; neither was it part of the FAANG stocks (though some try to slip in in as FAANMG).

..

lol, I have heard this a few times, "Microsoft was not a dotcom stock". This is their multiple during the dotcom bubble (source: https://money.cnn.com/2002/01/14/investi...aluations/):
[Image: caQAthR.png]

59x forward PE (probably with aggressive earnings growth projections). Considering the weightage in indexes. One can reasonably come to a different conclusion that 2000 was a large cap bubble; and the dotcom companies were just a side show.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply
I'm not sure if you were in the market during dot coms but nobody really mention Microsoft or Intel or even Dell as dotcom names. Even Softbank, Cisco, US Robotics, AOL, Pacific Century Cable & Wireless, Global Crossing, SUN (Java) was a dotcom name. Not even talking about those "real" dotcoms like Webvan or Pets or Tom.com etc which are pretty large cap back then, so you have to define what you mean large cap bubble. A good single analogy of that would be like SEA worth more than top 10 STI stocks to give you a flavour of that craziness. And there were hundreds of such. If you just looking at PE then a rising tide raise all ships why is that surprising. But if we take a step back we will also realise >90% of dotcom ideas came to pass today. Just that Capitalism couldn't wait and tend to be most optimistic in timeline. Ditto for the automobile industry that Buffett mentioned in the 2021 AGM

The valuation even in Nov 2021 is frankly uncomparable to crazy dot com in my view, primarily because this time round it's mainly the millenials into Crypto and meme stocks (daytrading) and Private Equity are drawn in due to cheap money. It's not as systematic like say housing bubble in US that was very widespread.

So when we look back again in 2040 I'm sure we can also say Microsoft, Intel or Dell was not a FAANG or e-commerce hype stock Smile
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply
(24-05-2022, 12:56 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I'm not sure if you were in the market during dot coms but nobody really mention Microsoft or Intel or even Dell as dotcom names. Even Softbank, Cisco, US Robotics, SUN (Java) was a dotcom name. Not even mentioning those "real" dotcoms like Webvan or Pets or Tom.com etc. If you just looking at PE then a rising tide raise all ships why is that surprising

The valuation even in Nov 2021 is frankly uncomparable to crazy dot com in my view, primarily because this time round it's mainly the millenials into Crypto and meme stocks (daytrading) and PE are drawn in. It's not as systematic like say housing bubble in US.

So when we look back again in 2040 I'm sure we can also say Microsoft, Intel or Dell was not a FAANG stock Smile

You are splitting hairs over subjective matters such as whether you need a "dotcom" in your name or business model, or being "talked about", to be considered a so-called "dotcom" (ie bubble) stock during the dotcom bubble.

In my opinion, what's most important is the valuation, and the amount of money flowing into it, during that time period, that is of the most importance. People remember the crash in Nasdaq that took decades to recover to the peak; most of it is large cap companies. 

So-called "dotcom bubble" if you break it down into absolute dollar amount, which companies lost the most market value and investor dollars; then Microsoft (together with Cisco, Sun, Oracle etc) can definitely be considered one of the poster-child of that era. In dollar amounts, the Pets.com can certainly be considered a side-show.

And despite this (and Ballmer's mismanagement), long term investors in Microsoft investors has done well. Interesting.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply
Do you consider Amazon a large cap after it fell more than 90%?

Do bear in mind that the Fed need to get a dozen US banks to bail out $4b LTCM losses in 1998. A billion now is not the same as 20 years ago.

It's not subjective when you lived through it rather than split hair to say it is FAANMG stocks? Google for example was not a dot com stocks per se either cause it didn't even list yet. If you are just looking at numbers and market cap from some pulled up articles then we are talking about different things; and I don't think you need to defend Microsoft cause I didn't post anything for that reaction. Defend it again when I changed my view base on changed facts. For example I've changed my view on Amazon due to management, even though I still buy stuff from their site. Has long term investors in Amazon done better or worse? It depends on the timeline and the A-B-S or it's a shouting match?

In 20 years' time I would say SEA, ARKK, Teladoc, Carvana, Zoom, FAANG etc are the e-commerce bubble stocks, not Microsoft or Intel or Dell, even though they might be forgotten and not picked up by CNBC newsreel.
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply
Hi Specuvestor, 

I'm not "defending" Microsoft (or anything), just find it curious that, why one would exclude Microsoft as a "dotcom" stock; when it was a clear, frequently cited, poster child of exuberance during that era in many financial media (this is another example: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/re...om-bubble/)

That's all, lol. 2c.

(not vested)

Edit: On the side note: why would ARKK, Teladoc, Zoom, FAANG, all be considered "e-commerce bubble stock"?  Huh

Perhaps you meant, "covid bubble stock"? Either way, I think it's difficult to put all the companies you listed into the same box. FB, AMZN, GOOG, has not seen multiple expansion (or even share price appreciation) in the same magnitude of say Teladoc, Zoom etc. at their respective peaks. Another discussion for another day.
“If you buy a business just because it’s undervalued, then you have to worry about selling it when it reaches its intrinsic value. That’s hard. But if you can buy a few great companies, then you can sit on your ass. That’s a good thing.” - Charlie Munger
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)