Microsoft’s Dismal Future

"Microsoft's Dismal Future" is the title of my most recent column on Forbes.com In it I compare Microsoft with such formerly great, but now struggling, companies as Xerox and Kodak.  Looking at all the Lock-in at Microsoft, Balmer's complete unwillingness to Disrupt traditional Lock-ins, and the total lack of White Space for new market projects – Microsoft is a very likely candidate to follow Silicon Graphics. Sun Microsystems, DEC and a host of other formerly great technology companies into the history books.  And it could well happen in less than a decade.  Don't forget, in 2000 Sun was worth $200billion – and now the company no longer exists!

If I gave you $1,000 and told you keeping it required you invest it all in Microsoft or Apple, which would you pick?  For followers of this blog, there can be only one answer – it has to be Apple.  While Microsoft has a great past, it has not been using White Space to exploit technology developments in new markets.  All go-to-market projects have been around Defending & Extending the traditional PC market.  With products like Vista, OS 7 and now Office 10.  But reality is that all of us are using PCs a lot less these days.  Increasingly we use smart mobile devices to get out work done – eschewing even the laptop – much less the desktop machine.  Increasingly we are happy with PDF files and HTML text – not needing elaborate Excel Spreadsheets, or Word documents or flashy Powerpoint files.

Meanwhile Apple is a major participant in the new markets being developed!  It's iPhone is a leader in smartphones, where its mere 5% market share has allowed the company to sell 2 billion downloaded applications in the first 18 months!  And although digital music is becoming the norm as CDs disappear, iTunes maintains a very healthy 70% market share of digital music downloads.  And Apple is moving forward into digital publishing with the iPad launch, as well as hundreds of new applications for low-cost but highly functional tablets (a market Microsoft pioneered but exited.)

Many people invest by looking in the rear view mirror.  But Microsoft increasingly looks like a "has been" story.  Looking out the windshield, it's hard to place Microsoft on the future horizon.  Give the Forbes article a read and let me know what you think!

Defend & Extend versus White Space – Microsoft vs. Google

Two tech giants are Microsoft and Google.  The former has been around for over 30 years.  The latter about a decade.  Which is the company you should work for, or invest in?  The one that has demonstrated a long history and great record of earnings, or the newer one participating in new markets still not well understood with a slew of new – but largely unproven – products?  You might think the older one is less risky, and feel more comfortable backing.

But we know that Microsoft is losing market share, especially in growing markets.  Although its products have been dominant, the market for those products (personal computers used as servers, desktop machines and laptops) has seen substantial slowing.  New solutions are emerging that compete directly with Microsoft (new operating systems like Linux and others) and compete indirectly (cloud computing and thin applications on mobile devices.) 

Chrome v IE 3.10
Source:  Silicon Alley Insider

In just 18 months Microsoft Internet Explorer has lost 13 market share points – dropping from 68% of the market to 55%.  Almost all of that has gone to Safari (Macintosh) and Google ChromeChrome has risen from nothing to 7% of the market.  And since internet usage is growing, while desktop usage is shrinking, this is the "leading edge" of the market.

Also, the Chrome operating system will be launching later in 2010.  It also will go directly after the "Windows" franchise which had a very unexciting launch of System 7 in 2009. 

Let's look at valuation:  First Microsoft – which has gone basically sideways.  Huge peak to trough, but overall not much gain for investors despite launching two major upgrades during the period (Vista and System 7 as well as Office 2007).  Obviously, upgrade products have produced very little growth for Microsoft, or its valuation.

Microsoft 5 year chart 3.5.10

Now we can look at Google. Google investors have doubled their money, while employment has grown.  All those new products have helped Google to grow, and investors have an optimistic view of future growth.

Google 5 year chart 3.5.10 

Do you make decisions looking in the rear view mirror, or out the windshield?  It can be tempting to be influenced by a great past. But that really isn't relevant.  What's important is the future.  And we can see that Microsoft, which keeps trying to Defend & Extend what it knows is rapidly falling behind the market changer, Google, which is rapidly moving toward where markets are heading.

D&E Management never creates growth.  By trying to recapture the past, new market moves are missed and growth opportunities lost.  Companies have to move forward, with new products, into new markets.  And if you have any doubt, just compare the results of Defend & Extend Management at Microsoft the last 5 years with Phoenix Principle management using White Space at Google.

Old White Men and changes at GM

Great blog today at MidasNation.com.  Rob Slee is a book author and blogger focused on privately held companies.  And today he took on "Old White Men" – or OWM – in his blog "Why 60 Year Old White Men are Killing America."  Telling the story about how GM management drove the profits out of suppliers while bankrupting the company, he contrasted GM's behavior with the Japanese run firms in America who partnered with suppliers to make a better product customers more highly valued.  We know who ended up with the profitable approach.

Similar to Defend & Extend management, Mr. Slee talks about "past as predicate" as he discusses older managers who keep doing what they always did, even though results keep worsening.  And how "command and control" hierarchies sucked the value out of the traditional Big 3 automakers.  His views about how OWM leaders expect a "return to the norm," creating a recipe for disaster in an ever changing world increasingly producing black swans.  His stories are an action call for all leaders to change their behavior.

According to Marketwatch.com today, "GM Hires Microsoft Exec Liddell as CFO."  Is this good, or just more OWM?  According to BusinessWeek, Mr. Liddell is 50 – which makes him 10 years shy of the minimum 60 Mr. Slee denotes for OWM.  More disconcerting was the final paragraph of his bio at Microsoft.com which claims Mr. Liddell "has completed a number of triathlons, including an Ironman and also enjoys rugby, yoga, golf and tennis."  Pretty seriously testosterone laden language – and appealing primarily to OWM types.  Like his new boss, the retired Southwestern Bell Chairman, now running GM.

Triathlon and rugby often have a way of making people Lock-in on the values of persistence, hard work and sacrifice.  Jim Collins is a rather famous triathlete who loves Lock-in.  Creativity and innovation are rarely the stuff of winners in those sports.  Of course, competing in a global marketplace with fast changing competitors who defy all rules is a far cry from any sport.  Sport analogies are usually more harmful than good in today's global marketplace, where adaptability is worth more than repetitive behavior seeking scale. 

Mr. Liddell's last boss, Steve Ballmer, is one of the 10 most Locked-in CEOs in corporate America.  Not a great mentoring for open-mindedness.  And during Mr. Liddell's 4.5 year career at Microsoft the company's big launches were the me-too, and underwhelmingly exciting, Vista and System 7 products.  Mr. Liddell didn't seem to push the innovation engine much in Seattle. 

From appearances it would seem likely he'll focus on cost reductions pretty hard — something unlikely to make GM a success.  GM doesn't need to launch it's own version of Vista.  GM doesn't need a tough guy to whack the chicken coop hoping to get more eggs – instead just making the hens all upset.  GM needs significant Disruption – attacks on its Success Formula – with a revitalization of new product development and technology application.  GM needs an entirely new Success Formula, not just a better Defended and Extended one.

Keep your eyes on Mr. Liddell.  Perhaps he'll surprise us.  Look for Disruptions and White Space.  It doesn't seem to be Mr. Liddell's nature.  But watch.  Until then, there's no sign yet that GM is taking the right actions to make itself a vital competitor against Hyundai, Kia, Tata Motors, Honda and Toyota.

Microsoft – Another GM in the Making?

"Is the Party Over for Microsoft?" is the headline at Marketwatch.com.  In case you missed it, last week Microsoft reported sales and earnings, and "Microsoft declines on disappointing results" was the most appropriate headline.  Sales dropped 17%.  Let's see, the last  time we heard about a mega-corporation with double-digit revenue declines that would have been – oh yes – GM – and Chrysler.

This blog has been brutally negative on Microsoft for over 3 years.  A quick look at the long-term chart and you'll note that the stock has not come near its 2000 high this decade.  It's been mired in a go-nowhere range, and has recently broken down to prices last seen in the late 1990s.  For investors, Microsoft has been only a disappointment. 

But that's because the company has been equally disappointing for customers.  Microsoft has been very consistent about trying to "milk" it's near-monopoly in desktop operating systems and office software.  Even though the market has moved, Microsoft has done little to move with it.  It's applications are "more of the same."  It's operating systems have become bloated, and new versions have offered practically no advantages to switch.  Meanwhile, customers are learning to enjoy Linux – and Macs again – as well as Unix for servers.  There's literally been nothing for customers, investors — or suppliers to get excited about.  Ask Dell, itself stuck in the doldrums as a Microsoft devotee.

It's not due to a lack of opportunities in the dynamic IT world.  Since 2000 we've seen the emergence of Google, which simply cleaned Microsoft's clock in search and ad placement.  The world of digital music became dominant, but that was claimed by Apple.  Hot websites for information became valuable – but Marketwatch and HuffingtonPost (examples) are laying claim to attracting lots of readers.  Microsoft simply missed these marketsAlways late, and never really in step with shifting market requirements.  The company tried, failed, and just kept "clipping coupons" from its near- monopoly.

It hasn't been hard to see the market shifting.  Customers were put off by Microsoft's disregard for their needs in the 1990s.  They searched for better solutions, and found them.  Microsoft kept being Microsoft, but the world moved.  Now, Microsoft is stuck.  And what are they going to do to get out of their rut? 

When a company is large, has a lot of cash, and has strong market share analysts are reluctant to predict it will do poorly.  But Microsoft has been so Locked-in, for so long, it has been quietly letting all new markets go to new competitors.  There have been NO Disruptions to the Success FormulaWindows and Office have dominated the investments.  "Taking care of the franchise" has been the mantra.  That meant doing more of the same.  Which got us Vista – an operating system that was over a year late to market, and very easy to ignore.  There hasn't been any White Space to develop new solutions.  And as a result whenever Microsoft has tried to do anything new it has been late, with inferior product, a significant lack of knowledge about what the market really wanted, and out of step with new requirements for performance and price.

Microsoft won't declare bankruptcy in 2009 – or 2010.  But it's acting just like GM.  It's spending all its time trying to Defend & Extend its past.  But in fast changing markets, that's not enough to remain viable.  In markets moving as fast as IT, it's deadly.  Remember DEC?  Wang?  Lanier?  Burroughs?  Univac?  IBM mainframes?  Cray supercomputers?  Microsoft is more like GM than it's like Google.  Thus, it's future isn't hard to predict.  If you're an employee, time to brush up the resume.  If you're an investor, time to look for the exit.

Do'nt miss the new ebook "The Fall of GM:  What Went Wrong and How To Avoid It's Mistakes"