3 ms·

My speculation from previous report (note: All involved contracts are still secret.) Microsoft's earnings from Android trolling are not a matter of public reco

My speculation from previous report (note: All involved contracts are still secret.) Microsoft's earnings from Android trolling are not a matter of public record. Each agreement M'soft has made is secret. In fact, there is no strong, solid evidence that M'soft is making any money at all off Android. When Barnes and Noble's Nook refused to pay the danegeld, M'soft sued and then settled to avoid discovery. Nook actually got paid by M'soft in the settlement, though M'soft ended up with considerable control of the unprofitable Nook in exchange. Speculation is that HTC agreed to make and market Windows Phone phones instead of paying royalties. If that kind of agreement was common, it's no wonder that all the non-Nokia Windows Phone phones were garbage: They were produced under duress. Also, my Android 4 devices no longer support any kind of FAT filesystems the way my Android 2 phones did. I think Google already started making FAT optional just so as to avoid paying for patents like this one.

av500 13y ago
sources close to Google that cannot be named confirm that e.g. Samsung or HTC paid nothing to Microsoft. or rather got all license fees back in terms of Windows Phone marketing kickbacks
- ZeroGravitas 13y ago
  Do you have an actual source, a newspaper story or something? I personally believe this to be true, it's how Microsoft often does these things and the fact that a bookstore stood up to them and won makes me think the agreements with Samsung etc. are more about showmanship. But I've never seen this side of the story repeated anywhere with quotes from sources, even anonymous ones.
crazygringo 13y ago
I'm curious, as a publicly traded company, why are these specific earnings not public? Presumably this would be a crucial element in any valuation of Microsoft shares, since it would affect the future value of Microsoft in relation to Android market share. Forgive me for my ignorance, but what determines the level of scrutiny that a publicly traded company has to make available, in terms of its sources of revenue? How far do they get broken down, either by law/regulation or by custom?
- WildUtah 13y ago
  You can read Microsoft's SEC filings.[0] As is typical for large public companies, nothing very useful can be gleaned from these filings about any business smaller than Windows or Office licensing (maybe XBox?). Everything else is buried in noise. And the SEC is really more interested in seeing the regular boilerplate than informing investors. It would take extraordinary leadership to make any large regulator operate in a more truly informative way. [0] http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx
  - tedunangst 13y ago
    If investors really wanted to know, they could make a big stink about it and MS would release more detailed numbers. But the investors have (quite rightly, imo) decided the precise breakdown doesn't affect the quality of the investment. On the other hand, announcing to all of your competitors exactly how you make your money and from which products seems like a poor strategy.
- tanzam75 13y ago
  > Forgive me for my ignorance, but what determines the level of scrutiny that a publicly traded company has to make available, in terms of its sources of revenue? How far do they get broken down, either by law/regulation or by custom? Companies are only required to provide an aggregate financial statement. They are not required to provide a line-item breakdown. They're not even required to provide a breakdown by division, although companies usually supply that. There is no convention. Two different companies in the same industry may provide different breakdowns. Typically, companies provide the same breakdown that they have historically provided in the past. However, as they grow, they tend to roll things up into ever-larger chunks. So you lose some granularity.
twistedpair 13y ago
'danegeld' - what a wonderful word. I didn't realized the vikings invented trolling.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- Roboprog 13y ago
  Bloody vikings! Stop singing!
- r00fus 13y ago
  Given the history of man is several hundreds of thousands of years old, I doubt the invented it. However, it seems they might have innovated and popularized it. It's not unlike the mafia "protection" model, though, is it not? Take a look at the Crassus model of firefighting [1] which predate the Danes' innovation, for example. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome
- phonon 13y ago
  http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html

av500 13y ago

sources close to Google that cannot be named confirm that e.g. Samsung or HTC paid nothing to Microsoft. or rather got all license fees back in terms of Windows Phone marketing kickbacks

ZeroGravitas 13y ago
Do you have an actual source, a newspaper story or something? I personally believe this to be true, it's how Microsoft often does these things and the fact that a bookstore stood up to them and won makes me think the agreements with Samsung etc. are more about showmanship. But I've never seen this side of the story repeated anywhere with quotes from sources, even anonymous ones.

crazygringo 13y ago

I'm curious, as a publicly traded company, why are these specific earnings not public? Presumably this would be a crucial element in any valuation of Microsoft shares, since it would affect the future value of Microsoft in relation to Android market share. Forgive me for my ignorance, but what determines the level of scrutiny that a publicly traded company has to make available, in terms of its sources of revenue? How far do they get broken down, either by law/regulation or by custom?

WildUtah 13y ago
You can read Microsoft's SEC filings.[0] As is typical for large public companies, nothing very useful can be gleaned from these filings about any business smaller than Windows or Office licensing (maybe XBox?). Everything else is buried in noise. And the SEC is really more interested in seeing the regular boilerplate than informing investors. It would take extraordinary leadership to make any large regulator operate in a more truly informative way. [0] http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx
- tedunangst 13y ago
  If investors really wanted to know, they could make a big stink about it and MS would release more detailed numbers. But the investors have (quite rightly, imo) decided the precise breakdown doesn't affect the quality of the investment. On the other hand, announcing to all of your competitors exactly how you make your money and from which products seems like a poor strategy.
tanzam75 13y ago
> Forgive me for my ignorance, but what determines the level of scrutiny that a publicly traded company has to make available, in terms of its sources of revenue? How far do they get broken down, either by law/regulation or by custom? Companies are only required to provide an aggregate financial statement. They are not required to provide a line-item breakdown. They're not even required to provide a breakdown by division, although companies usually supply that. There is no convention. Two different companies in the same industry may provide different breakdowns. Typically, companies provide the same breakdown that they have historically provided in the past. However, as they grow, they tend to roll things up into ever-larger chunks. So you lose some granularity.

twistedpair 13y ago

'danegeld' - what a wonderful word. I didn't realized the vikings invented trolling.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Roboprog 13y ago
Bloody vikings! Stop singing!
r00fus 13y ago
Given the history of man is several hundreds of thousands of years old, I doubt the invented it. However, it seems they might have innovated and popularized it. It's not unlike the mafia "protection" model, though, is it not? Take a look at the Crassus model of firefighting [1] which predate the Danes' innovation, for example. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome
phonon 13y ago
http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/dane_geld.html