Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
KM
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 year ago
in Why does Microsoft Need to Play in Search? on loupaglia
Believe it or not, MSFT is noodling in biotech, more on the genetic analytics side. And they are starting to tackle SMBs also with Office Live Small Business. When you have a $60B+ business, one has to make a portfolio of bets across businesses...big bets...because not all of them will work.
One knock against MSFT is exactly what you've captured...that they are all over the place...
I enjoy your blog...cheers...
One knock against MSFT is exactly what you've captured...that they are all over the place...
I enjoy your blog...cheers...
1 reply
1 year ago
in Why does Microsoft Need to Play in Search? on loupaglia
Hi Lou,
One reason Microsoft may want to play in search is purely defensive - if Google gets too strong via search, they can use that cash flow to attack other Microsoft businesses.
Also, digital advertising is too big a market to ignore.
One reason Microsoft may want to play in search is purely defensive - if Google gets too strong via search, they can use that cash flow to attack other Microsoft businesses.
Also, digital advertising is too big a market to ignore.
1 reply
loupaglia
KM: Thank you for the comment, much appreciated.
However, my view is that Microsoft could make that argument about anything technology-oriented. And one argument to that would be that is all the more reason for Microsoft to be investing this time, energy and capital into developing adjacent lines of business to their core, and thus further developing defensible barriers to others, including Google.
As far as the advertising market being too big to ignore? Again, that debate could be made to any big technology-oriented market. Why aren't they developing Microsoft Biotechnology Organization and taking on Genentech and Biogen. It is a big market, it is around technology albeit I will admit a wider diversion technologically than software and web search.
Why not consider building a web-based office suite, ASP-based and targeting SMB marketplace, making it also ad-supported. Instead they let Google in that door with Apps while they've been spending five years competing with them head-on in Google's core competency.
However, my view is that Microsoft could make that argument about anything technology-oriented. And one argument to that would be that is all the more reason for Microsoft to be investing this time, energy and capital into developing adjacent lines of business to their core, and thus further developing defensible barriers to others, including Google.
As far as the advertising market being too big to ignore? Again, that debate could be made to any big technology-oriented market. Why aren't they developing Microsoft Biotechnology Organization and taking on Genentech and Biogen. It is a big market, it is around technology albeit I will admit a wider diversion technologically than software and web search.
Why not consider building a web-based office suite, ASP-based and targeting SMB marketplace, making it also ad-supported. Instead they let Google in that door with Apps while they've been spending five years competing with them head-on in Google's core competency.
And I couldn't agree more that with a $60B business, you have to drive new businesses and make big bets within them. My perspective is simply that they do it inline with some a core strategy of who Microsoft is and inline with what the future Microsoft is to be. As you said "they are all over the place".
On the flip side of this argument, I do have to admit if they followed singular logic, we would have never seen the likes of the XBox, a bet that worked for them. And I do like where are heading in this regard by really trying to build a comprehensive digital home strategy around the XBox penetration that they've made.