4 ms·
It's not "resellers" making money, it's apparent that MS' employees and salespeople are using fake contracts and "discounts" to funnel money to decision makers.
by areoform 5y ago
It's not "resellers" making money, it's apparent that MS' employees and salespeople are using fake contracts and "discounts" to funnel money to decision makers. What MS got out of it at the end of the day — a contract or perhaps some personal earmark for a salesperson — doesn't matter. Their bribes distorted the market, entrenched corruption, and made the lives of people living in these countries worse. It should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
This section in particular is damning,
> In another instance, he saw a contractor for the Saudi interior ministry receive a $13 million discount on its software — but the discount never made it back to the end customer. In another case, Qatar’s ministry of education was paying $9.5 million a year for Office and Windows licenses that were never installed. One way or another, money would end up leaking out of the contracting process, most likely split between the government, the subcontractor, and any Microsoft employees in on the deal.
These "subcontractors" are usually relatives of people in Government, and they're bribing these officials, then splitting money between all of them in exchange for contracts. This is illegal under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The whistleblower wrote a post detailing his accusations here, https://www.lioness.co/post/microsoft-is-using-illegal-bribes-in-the-middle-east-and-africa-why-is-the-sec-turning-a-blind-eye https://www.lioness.co/post/microsoft-is-using-illegal-bribe...
These provide even more color.
> In 2016, a request came through in the amount of $40,000 to accelerate closing a deal in one African country. [...] On top of that, the partner in the deal was underqualified for the project’s outlined scope, and he wasn’t even supposed to be doing business with Microsoft: he had been terminated four months earlier for poor performance on the sales team, and corporate policy prohibits former employees from working as partners for six months from their departure without special approval.
> I brought these issues up with the Microsoft services architect who wrote the request, asking why she didn’t take the work in this case to our very capable in-house team, Microsoft Services. She said our in-house daily rate is very expensive, and she needed a less expensive team to handle the pilot.
and then,
> Meanwhile, the woman’s manager sought me out, angry that I had bypassed him; I told him I was only following company policy. Soon after, he was promoted and became my manager. He immediately scheduled a one-on-one meeting, in which he told me our job is to bring as much revenue as we can to Microsoft. He added, “I don’t want you to be a blocker. If any of the subsidiaries in the Middle East or Africa are doing something, you have to turn your head and leave it as is. If anything happens, they will pay the price, not you.” When I said I would not block anything unless it violated company policy, his tone took a sharp turn. He shouted that I was not capable of doing this business and couldn’t close deals. But my 18-year track record spoke for me.
He escalates, but no one does anything, so he writes to the CEO.
> The aforementioned vice president immediately got back in touch with me, to say that by escalating the matter to Nadella, I had just “booked a one-way ticket out of Microsoft.”
> A general manager told me people panicked when I came to the subsidiary offices, and I had become “one of the most hated persons in Africa.” Only later did I realize this was because I asked too many questions; I was stopping people from skimming money off their deals.
This is a classic culture of corruption. It doesn't get starker than this.
> Examining an audit of several partners conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers, I discovered that when agreeing to terms of sale for a product or contract, a Microsoft executive or salesperson would propose a side agreement with the partner and the decision maker at the entity making the purchase. This decision maker on the customer side would send an email to Microsoft requesting a discount, which would be granted, but the end customer would pay the full fee anyway. The amount of the discount would then be distributed among the parties in cahoots: the Microsoft employee(s) involved in the scheme, the partner, and the decision maker at the purchasing entity—often a government official.
Walmart got caught recently doing something very similar, https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2019-102 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2019-102
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-walmart-fcpa/walmart-to-pay-282-million-to-settle-seven-year-global-corruption-probe-idUSKCN1TL27J https://www.reuters.com/article/us-walmart-fcpa/walmart-to-p...
You can see the timeline of FCPA cases here,
https://www.sec.gov/enforce/sec-enforcement-actions-fcpa-cases https://www.sec.gov/enforce/sec-enforcement-actions-fcpa-cas...
- madrox 5y agoI get that's the insinuation, but there's a leap the reader is expected to make between "this middleman made a lot of money" and "bribes were clearly happening" without further investigation. If a car salesman convinces me to pay more for a car than someone else pays that doesn't mean someone was bribed; the rest is a matter of degree. I get that bribery happens, and I get that the SEC stepped on Microsoft employees for bribery in Hungary. I also get the impact that bribery and corruption has on lives. None of that is material to what's being said about this situation. In fact, it's relying on the reader's passion to make these leaps.
- areoform 5y agoIt's unclear if you've read the post, or the linked audit documents. But here's the PwC audit, https://58a44b37-ba55-451b-989d-b8bc5339d45f.usrfiles.com/ugd/58a44b_456f670b335a4bf3806fb2a958e98e40.pdf https://58a44b37-ba55-451b-989d-b8bc5339d45f.usrfiles.com/ug... I am going to quote it, > For five (5) of 12 sample enrollments, complete End Customer pricing information was not provided and therefore we were unable to determine whether the related discounts were passed through. We requested Exceed IT Services to obtain end customer purchase order, contract, invoicing and payment proof from the additional resellers, however after multiple requests and follow ups during the audit, these documents were not made available. And it shows $13,693,903 in discounts as "missing" for one customer. Why do you think that the "documents were not made available"? And why do you think that MS looked the other way? I am unsure why you're going to bat for MS here. But it's not just "passion" and "leaps", there's millions of missing dollars at play and MS isn't the least bit concerned. Why do you think that is? Does MS not care that money is magically disappearing between it and Government customers? Are they that irresponsible? There are two explanations here, corruption or stupidity. They're either too stupid to read the reports that the auditors wrote about the missing money, or they're corrupt and that missing money is buying them something.
- madrox 5y agoThis is going to be my last word on the topic, because as you say my original comment is being painted into going to bat for MS, which hasn't been my intention. I've read the Verge article, the whistleblower's original words, and looked at the PWC slides. I understand the numbers involved. You ask me why I think MS looked the other way. I don't know. This article is already speculating enough, and my comment was to call that out. I've already put more effort into clarifying myself than my investment into the issue should really dictate. As you say, this is down to corruption or stupidity, and as Hanlon's razor goes, "never blame on malice what can be explained by stupidity." I look forward to the SEC investigating the whistleblower's accusations. Whether there's bribery or not, it's worth looking into. I don't think there's enough to convict anyone on based on what's offered here. I hope to be reading more detail on what exactly has been happening here at some point. However, I do see a world where this was stupidity. It happens quite often.