8 ms·

Also stepped down from the Berkshire board as well. Given that he stepped away from a day to day role in 2008 and then stepped down as the chairman in 2014, I'

Also stepped down from the Berkshire board as well. Given that he stepped away from a day to day role in 2008 and then stepped down as the chairman in 2014, I'm guessing he's focusing on his foundation. He's still the 8th largest shareholder according to Bloomberg's records(103,000,000 share), which is pretty impressive given that the 7 entities above him are all funds. Incase you wanted to know who the remaining 12 board members are: With Gates’ departure, the Board will consist of 12 members, including John W. Thompson, Microsoft independent chair; Reid Hoffman, partner at Greylock Partners; Hugh Johnston, vice chairman and chief financial officer of PepsiCo; Teri L. List-Stoll, executive vice president and chief financial officer of Gap, Inc.; Satya Nadella, chief executive officer of Microsoft; Sandra E. Peterson, operating partner, Clayton, Dubilier & Rice; Penny Pritzker, founder and chairman, PSP Partners; Charles W. Scharf, chief executive officer and president of Wells Fargo & Co.; Arne Sorenson, president and CEO, Marriott International Inc.; John W. Stanton, chairman of Trilogy Equity Partners; Emma Walmsley, CEO of GlaxoSmithKline plc (GSK); and Padmasree Warrior, founder, CEO and president, Fable Group Inc.

thinkingkong 7y ago
Whats the advantage or strategy behind having someone from Marriott?
- jrandm 7y ago
  I can't speak for them, but I'd imagine an international hotel chain would have some unique views on things like travel trends.
  - goatherders 7y ago
    I doubt it has anything to do with travel trends anymore than GSk being there has anything to do with pharma. These are business executives whose specific domain of expertise is business, not travel or pharma or banking, etc.
    - dave5104 7y ago
      They can also represent the enterprise software needs for those industries.
      - DonHopkins 7y ago
        Yes, but probably quite incompetently. And the Marriott board member probably knows how to make mediocre cup of coffee with the machine in their hotel room, but would be insulted if you asked them to make you a cup. But Microsoft has other experts who are competent to speak about those things (both enterprise software and good coffee), fortunately.
  - david-gpu 7y ago
    ...which are immediately relevant to the interests of Microsoft because...?
    - jrandm 7y ago
      As a software giant Microsoft's products intersect most parts of most economies. A hotel chain has its own technology needs and has views of the technology needs of its customers. Whether a high-placed member of Marriott has specific insights to Microsoft I don't know, but I don't think it takes much imagination to fill in hypothetical reasons the person could be helpful.
- dlp211 7y ago
  Nothing. It's a way for the C-class to give each other more money.
  - Marsymars 7y ago
    I always find this paper kind of funny, showing that academics on corporate boards are correlated with both higher company performance and lower CEO compensation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411
- dahart 7y ago
  Boards serve in part to guide networking and policy for executives, and some are required to be external. It makes complete sense to have executives from other large corporations like Marriott. Marriott doesn't seem to stand out as any further away from software than any of the other board members, so maybe I'm not understanding your question; what about Marriott specifically caught your eye?
  - spsful 7y ago
    He would probably like to know why it makes sense to hire these external heads. If you were talking about the most outlandish of these board members, why would you say they deserve to be on the board? (I'm genuinely asking here as I don't know why myself)
    - dahart 7y ago
      Boards are required, and there are different kinds of board members, some of them are are appointed and/or voted in by shareholders. So it's not exactly a question of being "deserving". While Microsoft is probably going to have some sway, this process is not necessarily about Microsoft picking people to guide their development strategy, or picking people who are in their best interests. This is sometimes shareholders putting in people who can (among other things) - 1) oversee the corporate governance, make sure the company is playing fair with their stock, 2) put in people who are successful and can guide the company toward business success, 3) create a network for hiring & replacing executives when they leave for any reason. That said, having diverse input from other large businesses seems like it's always going to be an advantage.
- nradov 7y ago
  Marriott is a typical example of the type of large corporate customers who buy a lot of Microsoft products and services. Having customers on the board is one way to help validate market strategy and gain insight into future IT purchasing trends.
- refurb 7y ago
  You often see people sitting on boards from entirely different industries. One reason might be having a entirely different perspective on your business. When you have a board that entirely from the same sector, you end up with a lot of group think.
daxfohl 7y ago
Kind of odd, being an employee there, I've never heard of eleven of the twelve board members before.
- chx 7y ago
  Usually you don't. The board is not something that directly affects employees lives.
  - sjwright 7y ago
    A self-evidently false assertion.
  - subaru_shoe 7y ago
    what ? that’s not remotely close to reality
  - haecceity 7y ago
    What do they do exactly?
    - therealmarv 7y ago
      Chat, meet and get a ton of money. E.g. stop crazy managers to buy a Finnish mobile phone company if they are good ;) https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-does-a-corporate-board-of-directors-do-398865 https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-does-a-corporate-board-of...
  - sytelus 7y ago
    They do. In a healthy company board is a sort of dampening force that steers CEO away from bad moves and advice him/her so that opportunities are not missed. Elizabeth Holms would be at much better place if board had excercised its authority. They are legally required to be part of almost all big decisions that are being made and they have the authority to at least bring in stockholder vote if they lose confidence in CEO.
    - 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Aeolun 7y ago
Seems microsoft is jointly controlled by a whole bunch of other companies.
- legitster 7y ago
  That's how boards of directors work.
- ta999999171 7y ago
  Wait until you read the attendee list of the Bilderberg Meeting!
lowdose 7y ago
You have to wonder what a suit from Pepsi has to offer to a technology company. Pepsi sells sugar water that is causing obesity at scale. Pepsis most recent investment is a $4 billion energy brand called Rockstar. That romance between Jobs and the Pepsi CEO was in hindsight also a Hindenburg idea. What happend to we are changing the world with technology?
- tootie 7y ago
  Business is business. No one on the board is debugging C++. Most of what they talk about is financials.
  - alasdair_ 7y ago
    Gates can still code. Larry and Sergei can still code. Zuckerberg can still code. Being to do this is still relevant for a tech company ceo or leader.
    - tootie 7y ago
      Boards don't run companies. They represent the shareholders.
- pvg 7y ago
  The Pepsi exec at Apple was CEO, the top executive of the company. This one is a mere board member, boards don't run companies.
- badsectoracula 7y ago
  > What happend to we are changing the world with technology? Well, we did. Are you sure you want more?
adventured 7y ago
> He's still the 8th largest shareholder according to Bloomberg's records(103,000,000 share), which is pretty impressive given that the 7 entities above him are all funds. Steve Ballmer has a far larger position in Microsoft than Gates does. Ballmer has $52.9 billion in Microsoft stock presently (333m shares), per Bloomberg. A little over three times that of Gates. Ballmer appears to be the third largest holder, behind Blackrock (which has 515m shares).
bythckr 7y ago
Can public view the data on Bloomberg or is this from the terminal? The closest I got is from Yahoo Finance (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MSFT/holders?ltr=1 https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MSFT/holders?ltr=1) & that is all different. If my understanding is not wrong, board members are representing shareholders and they themself are also share-holders. So, is Pepsi Cola, Gap Jeans, GSK (Sensodyne) & Marriott Hotel (just the household brands I recognised) shareholders of Microsoft or are the people Shareholders of Microsoft and their day job is at those companies?

thinkingkong 7y ago

Whats the advantage or strategy behind having someone from Marriott?

jrandm 7y ago
I can't speak for them, but I'd imagine an international hotel chain would have some unique views on things like travel trends.
- goatherders 7y ago
  I doubt it has anything to do with travel trends anymore than GSk being there has anything to do with pharma. These are business executives whose specific domain of expertise is business, not travel or pharma or banking, etc.
  - dave5104 7y ago
    They can also represent the enterprise software needs for those industries.
    - DonHopkins 7y ago
      Yes, but probably quite incompetently. And the Marriott board member probably knows how to make mediocre cup of coffee with the machine in their hotel room, but would be insulted if you asked them to make you a cup. But Microsoft has other experts who are competent to speak about those things (both enterprise software and good coffee), fortunately.
- david-gpu 7y ago
  ...which are immediately relevant to the interests of Microsoft because...?
  - jrandm 7y ago
    As a software giant Microsoft's products intersect most parts of most economies. A hotel chain has its own technology needs and has views of the technology needs of its customers. Whether a high-placed member of Marriott has specific insights to Microsoft I don't know, but I don't think it takes much imagination to fill in hypothetical reasons the person could be helpful.
dlp211 7y ago
Nothing. It's a way for the C-class to give each other more money.
- Marsymars 7y ago
  I always find this paper kind of funny, showing that academics on corporate boards are correlated with both higher company performance and lower CEO compensation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411
dahart 7y ago
Boards serve in part to guide networking and policy for executives, and some are required to be external. It makes complete sense to have executives from other large corporations like Marriott. Marriott doesn't seem to stand out as any further away from software than any of the other board members, so maybe I'm not understanding your question; what about Marriott specifically caught your eye?
- spsful 7y ago
  He would probably like to know why it makes sense to hire these external heads. If you were talking about the most outlandish of these board members, why would you say they deserve to be on the board? (I'm genuinely asking here as I don't know why myself)
  - dahart 7y ago
    Boards are required, and there are different kinds of board members, some of them are are appointed and/or voted in by shareholders. So it's not exactly a question of being "deserving". While Microsoft is probably going to have some sway, this process is not necessarily about Microsoft picking people to guide their development strategy, or picking people who are in their best interests. This is sometimes shareholders putting in people who can (among other things) - 1) oversee the corporate governance, make sure the company is playing fair with their stock, 2) put in people who are successful and can guide the company toward business success, 3) create a network for hiring & replacing executives when they leave for any reason. That said, having diverse input from other large businesses seems like it's always going to be an advantage.
nradov 7y ago
Marriott is a typical example of the type of large corporate customers who buy a lot of Microsoft products and services. Having customers on the board is one way to help validate market strategy and gain insight into future IT purchasing trends.
refurb 7y ago
You often see people sitting on boards from entirely different industries. One reason might be having a entirely different perspective on your business. When you have a board that entirely from the same sector, you end up with a lot of group think.

daxfohl 7y ago

Kind of odd, being an employee there, I've never heard of eleven of the twelve board members before.

chx 7y ago
Usually you don't. The board is not something that directly affects employees lives.
- sjwright 7y ago
  A self-evidently false assertion.
- subaru_shoe 7y ago
  what ? that’s not remotely close to reality
- haecceity 7y ago
  What do they do exactly?
  - therealmarv 7y ago
    Chat, meet and get a ton of money. E.g. stop crazy managers to buy a Finnish mobile phone company if they are good ;) https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-does-a-corporate-board-of-directors-do-398865 https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-does-a-corporate-board-of...
- sytelus 7y ago
  They do. In a healthy company board is a sort of dampening force that steers CEO away from bad moves and advice him/her so that opportunities are not missed. Elizabeth Holms would be at much better place if board had excercised its authority. They are legally required to be part of almost all big decisions that are being made and they have the authority to at least bring in stockholder vote if they lose confidence in CEO.
  - 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Aeolun 7y ago

Seems microsoft is jointly controlled by a whole bunch of other companies.

legitster 7y ago
That's how boards of directors work.
ta999999171 7y ago
Wait until you read the attendee list of the Bilderberg Meeting!

lowdose 7y ago

You have to wonder what a suit from Pepsi has to offer to a technology company. Pepsi sells sugar water that is causing obesity at scale. Pepsis most recent investment is a $4 billion energy brand called Rockstar. That romance between Jobs and the Pepsi CEO was in hindsight also a Hindenburg idea. What happend to we are changing the world with technology?

tootie 7y ago
Business is business. No one on the board is debugging C++. Most of what they talk about is financials.
- alasdair_ 7y ago
  Gates can still code. Larry and Sergei can still code. Zuckerberg can still code. Being to do this is still relevant for a tech company ceo or leader.
  - tootie 7y ago
    Boards don't run companies. They represent the shareholders.
pvg 7y ago
The Pepsi exec at Apple was CEO, the top executive of the company. This one is a mere board member, boards don't run companies.
badsectoracula 7y ago
> What happend to we are changing the world with technology? Well, we did. Are you sure you want more?

adventured 7y ago

> He's still the 8th largest shareholder according to Bloomberg's records(103,000,000 share), which is pretty impressive given that the 7 entities above him are all funds. Steve Ballmer has a far larger position in Microsoft than Gates does. Ballmer has $52.9 billion in Microsoft stock presently (333m shares), per Bloomberg. A little over three times that of Gates. Ballmer appears to be the third largest holder, behind Blackrock (which has 515m shares).

bythckr 7y ago

Can public view the data on Bloomberg or is this from the terminal? The closest I got is from Yahoo Finance (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MSFT/holders?ltr=1 https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MSFT/holders?ltr=1) & that is all different. If my understanding is not wrong, board members are representing shareholders and they themself are also share-holders. So, is Pepsi Cola, Gap Jeans, GSK (Sensodyne) & Marriott Hotel (just the household brands I recognised) shareholders of Microsoft or are the people Shareholders of Microsoft and their day job is at those companies?