Microsoft Finance Code of Professional Conduct

The Microsoft Code of Professional Conduct is put in place to reinforce the mission of promoting professional conduct in the practice of financial management worldwide. All employees are expected to adhere to this code or the results may include disciplinary action or termination of employment.

The code asks that employees avoid conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships, provide stakeholders with accurate and timely information, adhere to the rules set by the federal and state governments, act responsibly with sound judgment, respect confidentiality within the work environment, share information and act professionally in regards to Microsoft’s stakeholders, promote ethical behavior at work and in the community, use company resources responsibly, and avoid interference in the auditing process or any form of manipulation directed at the accounting or finance departments.

All Microsoft employees are expected to report any suspected violations of the Code of Professional Conduct, the Standards of Business Conduct, or any other professional policies and guidelines to a member of the management team, the Human Resources department, an LCA contact, the Director of Compliance, or the Business Conduct Line 24-hour number.

There is a section of the employee handbook that outlines standard procedures for reporting such concerns. If there is reason to suspect questionable activity in the accounting or auditing sectors then either the Director of Compliance should be notified, an anonymous email sent, or the Business Conduct Line should be called. Microsoft will try to keep the confidentiality of anyone reporting suspicious behavior to the company.

Read more

Nintendo Marketing Mix

The ideal answer analyzed gamers and a few non-gamer segments, such as moms. Analysis should have included qualitative description why is this segment interested in the Wii and quantitative data, such as the segment’s size and value. Finding quantitative data required research beyond the case, perhaps to the U. S. Census website. Such data is not easy to find, but this extra effort is what distinguishes an “A” paper. Extra credit was given to creative segmentation, such as targeting businesses and office workers, who might play the Wii on breaks, or doctors who would recommend Wii to their patients. Company (keep this brief: focus on 2006 no Nintendo history required): A company analysis is not a history report. It should describe the company’s brand, resources, internal stakeholders, strengths and weaknesses. An ideal answer noted that Nintendo has a long reputation in gaming, but with the Wii it built a family-friendly brand “that puts smiles on surrounding people’s faces. ” In contrast, the competition had numerous violent games. In addition, unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo is not a diversified company.

Its total income is much lower than either of its primary competitors (the case Appendix contains these figures), which meant fewer resources and much more at stake. Either the Xbox or the PS3 could fail, and the parent companies would survive; Nintendo could not afford to have the Wii fail. At the same time, the gaming focus helped position Nintendo as the only pure gaming company: its name is synonymous with electronic gaming. In terms of internal stakeholders, the case talks at length about Satoru Iwata, whose vision drove the company. In a footnote, the case mentions that Iwata had experience as a game developer.

By contrast, the CEO’s of Sony and Microsoft have no game development experience. Competitors (keep this brief: describe both direct competitors and indirect competitors, but focus on strengths and weaknesses how much of a threat do they pose? ) The case discusses the key direct competitors, Sony and Microsoft. Sony had a strong reputation in high-quality electronics, and its PS2 and PS3 systems emphasized technological sophistication. Sony focused on hardcore gamers with increasingly violent games. This recipe translated into early sales success but also high prices.

Sony’s weakness was its increasingly bureaucratic nature, and the decline of its other businesses. While Sony was cutting costs and laying off workers, they also had production problems with the PS3 a complicated and expensive piece of technology that is supposed to be a multimedia entertainment hub. This made Sony vulnerable to a challenge. Microsoft was primarily a software company with a controversial brand. Research beyond the case reveals criticisms of Microsoft’s monopolistic tendencies, and the fact that Apple was positioning Microsoft as dull and low quality.

Research also reveals significant quality-control problems with the Xbox. Microsoft relied heavily on market timing and quantity of games to promote the Xbox, along with Xbox Live, which enables consumers to play each other online. Despite weaknesses, Microsoft and Sony were still formidable competitors Nintendo knew it couldn’t compete by doing the same things they were. Nintendo had to do something vastly different even disruptive. Indirect competitors include PC games, Web-based games and phone-based games. You could even mention non-gaming entertainment, such as YouTube and Facebook, as indirect competitors. Community (focus on complements and collaborators): Game-software developers were both collaborators and complements. These developers worked with Nintendo to create games exclusively for the Wii such games do not work on any other platform, so their fate is tightly tied into the Wii’s. They were complements in that hardware sales affected software sales, and an interesting game could boost Wii sales. The broader community, according to the case, includes doctors and therapists who recommend the Wii Fit to patients.

Thinking outside the case study, the community also includes the news media like the New York Timesreviewed the Wii and reported on the shortage and long lines of buyers. This increased desire for the product, and enabled Nintendo to limit its advertising expenditures.  Create a positioning map. Your map must include the Nintendo Wii, Sony PlayStation and Microsoft Xbox, and the target consumer segments you described in question 1. You may hand-draw the map or use any software you prefer, but the map must be pasted into the body of your document.  You choose the criteria that are most relevant and important. You’re allowed to guess what the consumer segments want, but you will receive extra credit if you can find any research or data on gamer preferences.  Do you see any opportunities on this map for new competitors? We discussed positioning maps in the forum. You needed to draw a similar map here. The two criteria must be product features important to consumers. For video games, this might include price, complexity, family friendliness or graphics quality. It does NOT include sales (few consumers care how much money a company makes) — though you could argue for “scarcity” or “popularity” as viable criteria.

Consumer segments should appear on the map according to their preferences. This example uses Price and Game Complexity as criteria:  The blue star represents the Wii, the green triangle Xbox, and the red circle PS3. The PS3 combines the highest price with the highest complexity, while the Wii combines the lowest of both. Consumer segments are represented as letters: NG = Non-Gamers, CG = Casual Gamers, HG = Hardcore Gamers. The Hardcore Gamers prefer the PS3 in terms of complexity, but would like a lower price. The Non-Gamers want a low price (they don’t want to pay anything) and a simple game.

The Casual Gamers want something in between, but are closest to the Wii. You can see that the Wii appeals to two segments, while the PS3 and Xbox fight over just one segment. This leaves an opening in the middle for a competitor who can appeal to the Casual Gamers the iPhone, perhaps? All these positions are based on qualitative analyses presented by the case. For this exam, I allowed you to simply estimate what consumers wanted. In the real world, you would conduct market studies and consumer surveys to find exact preferences.

If you actually did find actual research or survey data on segment preferences in video games, I gave you extra credit. Also, on an ideal map, the symbols vary in size depending on sales and value. Since Wii led the market, its star would be bigger than either the circle or the triangle. Hardcore Gamers might be the most valuable segment, since they’re willing to spend more money on games; the HG would then be bigger than the other letters. Drawing a positioning map tends to be the most challenging question in this exam, so I am fairly lenient in grading. However, many students still have trouble with it.

That’s why it’s important to participate in the forum. Describe Nintendo’s Marketing Mix strategies for the Wii. Be sure to describe the strategies behind each element of the marketing mix, and how they differentiated the Wii from the competition.  Product (keep this brief: focus on Wii’s Unique Selling Proposition  what makes it truly different): The Wii’s unique selling proposition compared to the Xbox or PS3 is simple games based on physical motion. Consumers don’t need thick manuals or long learning curves to enjoy the Wii, which attracts casual gamers and non-gamers.

You could also discuss Wii’s family-friendly, non-violent games.  Price (for the United States only): In 2006, the Wii sold for $250 (or $249) and included five games for a “complete” product, yet Nintendo still profited on each unit sold. (The games are less sophisticated and cost less to produce than the competition’s. ) Sony’s PS3 started at $599 and was cut to $499. The Xbox sold at $479. Despite these significantly higher prices, both Sony and Microsoft lose money on each unit sold. Neither the PS3 or the Xbox originally came with games, so to make a profit, Sony and Microsoft charged high licensing fees to game developers.

This in turn translated into expensive games.  Place (think in terms of retailers and product supply): The Wii sells through traditional and online retailers, such as Best Buy. More significantly, in 2006, the Wii was continuously in short supply. This is an important distribution (place) issue. If consumers can’t buy your product, you not only won’t make money, you send business to your competition. However, in the case of the Wii, the shortages actually increased consumer desire for the product. Since there were long lines and waiting lists for the product and numerous major news stories about it  consumers assumed the Wii was good.

Since there was a greater supply of PS3’s and Xboxes than demand, consumers assumed they weren’t as interesting. Consequently, some consumers simply waited for new Wii shipments; others searched stores and websites and paid higher than the retail price. Some analysts believe Nintendo had a policy of intentional scarcity. This is a common practice in marketing: some companies produce a limited supply of a certain product to increase its perceived value. For example, luxury car companies have “limited edition” models, fashion designers produce a few of each product, most universities do not accept everyone who applies.

The Wii shortages increased both consumer desire and news coverage  which was key since Nintendo could not compete against Microsoft and Xbox in advertising.  Promotion (describe the advertising budget and any ads): This required research, since the case was not explicit about advertising expenditures. Searching for Nintendo advertising budget on Google reveals a number of estimated figures, ranging from $85 million to $200 million. Any reasonable estimate was fine if it was referenced and came from a trustworthy source (not someone’s personal blog).

The important point was to have you practice corporate research, and to show that Nintendo did not rely on “word of mouth” alone to generate sales; it spent millions of dollars to get the word out. More research reveals the Nintendo Wii commercials , which emphasize people enjoying the game, not the graphics. The very first commercial (found on YouTube and other video sites) shows two Japanese men visiting American homes with the game and announcing, “Wii would like to play. ” This underscored the Japanese origins of the Wii, which enhanced its credibility.

In addition, the case mentions a word-of-mouth campaign in which suburban housewives were given games in hopes that they would share its value as family entertainment. Overall, the promotions establish the Nintendo brand as family friendly, fun and physical. By contrast, ads for the Xbox and PS3 emphasized the sophisticated graphics and often fast, violent action  not an attraction for casual gamers.  Answer just ONE of the following questions. If you answer more than one, only the first answer will be accepted. This is your opportunity to use your imagination, so be creative.

Your recommendations here had to make sense based on the company’s brand and resources. You couldn’t just say “spend more money on advertising” or “increase distribution. ” Of course, all companies would like to do that (unless product scarcity is part of their plan) but could they afford to? Your answers also had to be specific you couldn’t just say you would make your product “higher quality” or “more fun. ” You needed to state exactly what you wanted to achieve. More points were granted for originality and creativity. If you decided to work for Sony or Microsoft, and all you did was copy Nintendo, you didn’t get many points.

Above all, your answers had to be marketing driven. If you talked about improving factory efficiency or hiring the best engineers, those were answers for another class. A. If you were the VP of Marketing for Nintendo, what would you have done differently? This is the hardest of the three questions, since Nintendo was already successful. You could make more products available so that there weren’t any shortages, but how would this affect the benefits of product scarcity? Also, assuming Nintendo was already producing as many games as it possibly could, where would it get the extra production capacity?

You could argue that Nintendo should have launched with a higher price, using a skimming strategy to profit off early adopters, and then lower pricing as production caught up. That would make sense but it wouldn’t have created the buzz of the product shortages. Some other ideas could involve different target segments, such as schools or hospitals. B. If you were the VP of Marketing for Sony, how would you respond to the Wii? One of Sony’s advantages is that it’s the only one of the three companies to produce entertainment content, such as music and movies (like “Spider-Man”).

How could they have leveraged that content to make the PS3 more attractive? Sony also produces other electronics equipment. Could you have integrated those products, perhaps in a bundling special (buy a Sony HDTV and get a PS3 free) or by making a game that uses a Sony Camcorder?  If you were the VP of Marketing for Microsoft, how would you respond to the Wii? Microsoft’s key advantage is that it creates the operating system that runs most of the world’s computers. Is there a way to combine personal computers and the Xbox? (That would have helped them compete against Apple, as well. Since Microsoft lost money on the Xbox console, why not just focus on the software market?  Is there another competitor that might be a significant threat to all three of these companies? If so, who is it, and why are they a threat? How should Nintendo respond to them? PC Games and the phone-based games are two possible competitors. Dell, for example, makes sophisticated gaming computers under its Alienware brand. Nintendo’s response could include making its controllers compatible with Dell computers. Or perhaps Nintendo could collaborate with Apple to make iPhones interact with the Wii. There were lots of possibilities here.

Read more

Microsoft Office 365 To Get Smarter With Artificial Intelligence

Office 365 is going to get a whole lot smarter, all thanks to

Genee, an AI that has been around for two and a half years, is essentially a digital assistant that books appointments, sets reminders, and can even reschedule meetings on the fly using simple commands from your phone or computer. Now, Genee is set to come to Office 365, and it is not exactly clear what role it will play.

“As we continue to build new Office 365 productivity capabilities and services our customers value, I’m confident the Genee team will help us further our ambition to bring intelligence into every digital experience,” writes Corporate Vice President for Microsoft Outlook and Office 365, Rajesh Jha,

According to Genee co-founders Ben Cheung and Charles Lee, the service shuts down on September 1 in its current form. Current Genee users will no longer have their reminders and schedule sent to them, but any entries that the program has already put into their calendar, will still continue to exist.

We are still not sure how exactly Genee will augment Office 365, but there are chances that it might have something to do with Microsoft Bookings, Microsoft’s own scheduling service.

This article was originally published on  and has been reposted on Entrepreneur Middle East based on a mutual agreement between the websites.

Related: 

Read more

Microsoft Gets Support From Other Companies in its Lawsuit Against U.S. Government

Technology, media, pharmaceutical and other companies, along with major corporate lobbying groups, filed legal briefs on Friday in support of a Microsoft Corp lawsuit that aims to strike down a law preventing companies from telling customers the government is seeking their data.

Friday was the deadline for filing of friend-of-the-court briefs by nonparticipants in the case. The filings show broad support for Microsoft and the technology industry in its latest high-profile clash with the U.S. Justice Department over digital privacy and surveillance.

Microsoft’s backers included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Delta Air Lines Inc, Eli Lilly and Co, BP America, the Washington Post, Fox News, the National Newspaper Association, Apple Inc, Alphabet Inc’s Google, Amazon.com Inc, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and many others.

Microsoft filed its lawsuit in Seattle federal court in April, arguing that a law allowing the government to seize computer data located on third-party computers and often barring companies from telling their customers that they are targets is unconstitutional.

The Justice Department argues that Microsoft has no standing to bring the case and the public has a “compelling interest in keeping criminal investigations confidential.” Procedural safeguards also protect constitutional rights, it contends. A Justice Department spokesman declined comment on Friday’s filings.

Microsoft says the government is violating the Fourth Amendment, which establishes the right for people and businesses to know if the government searches or seizes their property, in addition to Microsoft’s First Amendment right to free speech.

In the suit, which focuses on the storage of data on remote servers that are often referred to as “cloud” computers, Microsoft said it had been subjected to 2,600 federal court orders within the past 18 months prohibiting the company from informing customers their data was given to authorities pursuing criminal investigations.

Under the authority of the 30-year-old Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), the government is increasingly directing investigations at parties that store data in the cloud, Microsoft argued in its suit.

Five former law enforcement officials who worked for the FBI or Justice Department in Washington state also submitted a brief supporting Microsoft.

In July, a federal appeals court sided 3-0 with Microsoft in a separate case against the Justice Department, ruling the government could not force the tech company to hand over customer emails stored on servers outside the United States.

The Justice Department has not decided whether to appeal that decision, a spokesman said.

The case is Microsoft Corp v United States Department of Justice et al in the United States District Court, Western District of Washington, No. 2:16-cv-00537.

(Reporting by Dustin Volz; Editing by Jonathan Weber and Cynthia Osterman)

Read more

Microsoft Bans Stupid Passwords

As long as we use alphanumeric passwords, people will always try to safeguard personal data with codes like “123456” or “password.”

But Microsoft is taking a stance against stupid passcodes by banning those it deems weak.

Gathering data from 10 million-plus daily account attacks, Redmond maintains a regularly updated list of taboo passwords — “dynamically banned” codes that the company prevents customers from using. In place of the usual sliding scale of “weak” to “strong,” a new program forces users to “choose a password that’s harder for people to guess.”

“The most important thing to keep in mind when selecting a password is to choose one that is unique, and therefore hard to guess,” Alex Weinert, group program manager of the Azure AD Identity Protection team, wrote in a .

That means  like “qwerty,” “welcome,” “login,” “football,” “baseball,” and “monkey.” Unless you’re not particularly attached to banking, medical, and other intimate personal details.

Redmond is already banning these passwords on Microsoft Accounts; it’s in preview in Azure Active Directory (AD) and will roll out to all 10 million Azure AD users over the coming months.

The company’s smart password lockout system, which locks people out after too many incorrect password guesses, will remain in place.

Read more

Microsoft and their market strategy

Introduction

Founded in 1975 Microsoft (NASDAQ “MSFT”) Microsoft is the worldwide leader in computer software technology that is used by millions of people around the world. Microsoft windows operating system Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP and other business related softwares are extensively used by Microsoft customers. The success of Microsoft is apparent with its indomitable source code that is used in designing of operating system which is extremely useful for beginners and computer professionals who work on computers all through the day. Today, not a single computer works without Microsoft product and such is the benefit and use of Microsoft products. On one side, Microsoft is growing and continues to receive reputation from across the world about its products and usage and on the other side, Microsoft is encouraging and paving the way for global growth in computer technology which is absolutely outstanding and none can stand without appreciating the works of Microsoft. In fact Microsoft has already acclaimed with the global leadership in computer software technology  and is the key source for finding latest technologies.

Preparation of word documents, power point presentations, excel data sheets are extremely useful for businesses to prepare documents, present project reports and store financial data and other technical data.  Prior to the development of windows operating system, in many countries the data was stored in manual files by using typewritten documents and by using various techniques of printing to store financial records. It used to be quite a laborious job for business people and staff members to maintain manual filing system and there was no question of retrieving a copy of document, in case if the document was lost. Such as these hurdles, were many faced by businesses and corporate companies and there was no solution until  the launch of Windows 95 by Microsoft Company. A user-friendly operating system with a number of features for keeping a document in tact, neat and facility to take a print was an outstanding and commendable product that was launched by Microsoft.  Microsoft began its marketing strategy for supplying its products around the world and the demand for Microsoft products is a never end as customers are still growing and there is a growing demand for Microsoft products.  The turnover of Microsoft in the year 2005 was $39,788 million having 44,298 employees within U.S and 27,255 employees outside U.S. The Microsoft headquarters are situated at Redmond, Washington.  As on today, Microsoft is one of the 100 best companies that employees would like to get placement for the purpose of work.  Each year there are new jobs created and there is a job growth and there are always applicants nearly totaling to 947250 waiting to get recruited in Microsoft. The Average annual pay in Microsoft is $118,500 for a software developer and for administrative support hourly average annual pay is $52,560.  The company is absolutely professional in work environment and in finding new talents in every area which keeps the freshness of Microsoft. Microsoft has enabled to the growth directly or indirectly with the medium of its products to the entire world and many nations and governments must admit and accept this fact that growth in GDP is not possible without setting up businesses and products. Exchange of communication, exchange of goods and services leads to import and export of businesses through which the people receive consumer goods and products and with the purchases made by consumers businesses grow leading to the growth of GDP of a nation. Without computer technology, the system of working was absolutely slow and so also the process of business whereas with the launch of Windows 95 and other operating systems, the functioning of working system has become much faster and in every country, there are massive expansion programs in software development, industries, factories and other production centers. The success of Microsoft is also apparent in meeting the need which was vacant up to the year 1990 wherein electronic typewriters, manual typewriters, fax machines were replaced by Windows 95 with much more facilities of storing documents, retrieving documents, printing documents and sending documents as an attachment via email from one place to another with a matter of a mouse click. Microsoft  products are user-friendly, need no excessive training, great facilities to store large amounts of data and another great feature to deliver the product over web sources. Windows operating system are multi-user, mutli-facilitated and extremely efficient in functioning.  In many parts of the world, there are computers in homes, offices, businesses, government offices, schools, colleges, universities and the software used in computers is Microsoft Windows operating system with many features. Microsoft products have further lead to create new jobs in computers viz., data entry workers, typists,  programmers, LAN analysts, data analysts and system analysts.  There are other jobs created in administrative support by virtue of the launch of Microsoft products.  In order to work on computer, one must necessarily know how to use Microsoft products and without this knowledge, it is very difficult to carry on jobs in offices.  The benefit of home jobs is massive with the fact that stay-at-home moms bring work from companies, prepare documents and deliver to the companies which is again another wonderful source of income.  There is no area that does not give scope for growth with the usage of Microsoft products, such is the immense success of Microsoft products.  In a way the development of Microsoft products has lead to the creation of jobs, needs, businesses, growth in companies, less paper work, growth in employment and a reduction in poverty in various countries. In this manner, Microsoft has performed an extremely commendable job with its products and is continuing to perform a great job while strengthening its reputation from end to the other.

Every successful company has a marketing strategy to maintain the demand, supply and delivery of its products.  Microsoft company strategy was to create a need and that need was to have a facility to own a computer and use Microsoft products which was a massive success throughout the world and as on today there is no rural area that does not have a computer or Microsoft products.  In the year 2007, Microsoft unveiled new online facilities as a part of CRM viz., Microsoft Office Live Workspace which permits people to access documents online and share work with others, Microsoft Exchange Labs, for the purpose of exchange of communication for those who are in research and development programs, Continued Customer and Partner support for Microsoft Dynamic (CRM) Microsoft Live support for business services and Microsoft BizTalk Services to develop greater business opportunities for small enterprises.  The strategy of Microsoft here is to bring people together to coordinate with Microsoft for various business solutions as well to develop new software products. Customers of Microsoft completely rely on Microsoft for finding solutions and to buy new products launched by Microsoft.

Tying is another marketing strategy that is adopted by Microsoft which is basically referred to as a situation wherein a firm makes a purchase of one of its products on a condition to purchase one of its products.  A case in this context was between U.S vs. Microsoft.   According to the leverage theory “tying provides a mechanism whereby a firm with monopoly power in one market can use the leverage provided by this power to foreclose sales in, and thereby monopolize, a second market” (Whinston 1990)  Tying is also considered as one of the basic concepts in anti-trust laws and policies.  Microsoft tying of Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint and other programs into O±ce was also a case of tying. Bundling is more general than tying  and refers to a situation wherein a package containing at least two different products are offered.  If a company is offering a particular offer only, it is called as pure bundling whereas there are offers on some other products it is called as mixed bundling. This strategy of bundling and tying leaves a great scope to gain monopoly position with the fact that there is no scope for a competitor to give away products as all the products required by a customer are already available within Microsoft. U.S. Government particularly raised an issue against Microsoft in the aspects of bundling and tying as a marketing strategy.  The Government claimed that Microsoft was heading towards monopoly with the bundling tying of Microsoft Internet explorer with Microsoft Operating System.  The bundling of two distinct products by Microsoft as its marketing strategy was not required as it was extending the monopoly power of Microsoft to both business houses and to personal computer segment of customers.  In reply to this, Microsoft contended that the feature of browsing by Microsoft Internet Explorer was not a distinct product as it was a desired feature that was demanded by Microsoft customers. The District court was in favor of U.S. Government whereas the Court stated Microsoft was a monopolist in personal computer operating system and that the bundling of Internet Explorer with operating system was termed as an illegal arrangement as a part of marketing strategy.  In continuation of this, the Court ordered that the Microsoft be divided into two companies, one to distribute operating system and the other to distribute all other products that are developed by Microsoft. The Microsoft appealed to the Court’s ruling.  After several discussions and negotiations, a final negotiated settlement was made between U.S. Government along with other States with Microsoft. Further Court Appeals also determined that bundling of an Internet Browser or other features of Microsoft products does not constitute to a monopoly power system and illegal tying arrangement. The Court further concluded a fact that it is the customer who is benefited with this arrangement while evaluating the linkage of the products by Microsoft.  Antitrust bundling laws continue by competitors against Microsoft whenever a new generation of Microsoft products are launched.   For instance new Vista operating system and Office 2007 was launched and objections to Vista products had been raised by competitors McAfee and Symantec.  Microsoft is built with intellectual property and not with any business motive and therein lies the company’s success.  Companies which are commenced only with the motive of profits do not stay for longer period of time in the consumer market.  The professional expertise of Microsoft is absolutely strong and knowledge-based and the workforce continue to grow and the company is expanding its operations even to the field of takeovers as in the recent months of the 2008, Microsoft placed a bid on takeover of yahoo.com with $47 billion and which is yet to be finalized and settled at both ends.  This once again reiterates a fact that Microsoft is not concentrating on just personal computer products whereas it is also concentrating on takeovers, mergers and other innovative products that are useful in computer technology.  Microsoft is playing a vital role in the field of computer technology whereas a portion of market share is still available for its competitors which reinstates a fact that the motive behind Microsoft product development is not covering the entire consumer market whereas to sell products that meet the needs of different customers, business and offices.  Further the company abides by the corporate rules, legal frameworks of U.S. Federal Government and is also shoulders Corporate Social Responsibility in funding to various organizations.  In this aspect, the Courts and competitors must consider a lenient view and not impose any unregulated legal practices on Microsoft for the benefit of customers and for upholding the reputation of Microsoft.

Microsoft shares the wealth of the company with U.S economy through the software business that is internationally supportive in marketing of Microsoft products. In the recent years, Microsoft expanded its marketing in China, Brazil and Russia.  U.S economy is passing through a period of recession whereas the business and profits of companies including Microsoft are going very strong with the fact that for the year 2007 the sales for Microsoft were recorded at $51,122 million quoting $22.46 per share in NASDAQ.  The company foresees no negative impact either from U.S economy or vice-and further there are greater opportunities for Microsoft to expand its operations in a wider perspective throughout the world by launching its new products.  Microsoft has 44th place in FORTUNE 500 and #3 in FT Global 500.  Microsoft competitors are Google, IBM and Oracle.  The U.S economy is heavily influenced by business spending on software products and the success of programming companies are strongly dependent on technical and professional expertise.  The chief financial officer of Microsoft Chris Liddell stated “We certainly are conscious of the fact we might see some economic slowdown, but overall, our business hasn’t been substantially impacted to date. We won’t be insulated from it. But having said that, our overall view is that technology spending remains relatively well intact, software spending will probably outgrow technology spending, and we believe we can outgrow software spending,” [1]

Microsoft does foresee economic slow down in U.S and this does not leave any impact on the business of Microsoft.  As U.S is a land of many opportunities, there is a great scope for more American businesses to be commenced and creation of new jobs in order to bring an end to economic slow down. Futurist Mark Anderson stated about Microsoft as a company that is “making plumbing”  whereas Google is a “river of money” which gives a fact that Microsoft prepares technology that businesses and consumers use for everyday tasks while Google is at success gate of macro stage on advertising and making dollars online.  Anderson also emphasized that Microsoft impact on U.S economy is bigger than Google with the fact that Microsoft is a giant company for IT businesses and IT global market. [2]

Conclusion

Marketing strategy for every product that is adopted by a company is distinct and cannot be compared with another product or by another company.   Marketing always carries stiff competition, demand for quality service and good customer relation management and whichever company offers good products, quality service and CRM that company prevails in market dominance and no other issue that is outside the purview of marketing is not a matter of interest either for consumers or for companies.  It is a fact that Microsoft is playing an important role to the U.S economy either directly or indirectly which indicates another important fact more number of successful business for U.S indicate economy growth for U.S economy  which is at present is 0.60%  and inflation at 3.88 as on date. [3]

References

Books

Luís M. B. Cabral

Accessed May 16, 2008
Introduction to Industrial Organization

George B. Delta, Jeffrey H. Matsuura

Law of the Internet
Accessed May 18, 2008
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=huqb4yxV01MC&pg=RA1-PA55&lpg=RA1-PA55&dq=case+against+microsoft+for+bundling+and+tying&source=web&ots=8oZPTPGqoj&sig=i2hJBViv_pWg7fNcBkNWJIIckLg&hl=en

Web sources

Bundling, tying and portfolio effects

Accessed May 18, 2008

http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file14774.pdf

Product bundling and tying in competition

Accessed May 18, 2008

http://www.uni-bonn.de/~kovac/papers/bundling_kovac1.pdf

[1] http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Microsoft-feeling-no-major-impact-from-US-economy-CE3KL?OpenDocument
[2] http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/01/who_helps_the_e.html
[3] http://www.forecasts.org/gdp.htm

Read more

Microsoft Becoming a Monopoly

Over the years of Microsoft’s tight grip in the field of digital and computer products and services, the company has been considered plotting a monopolizing scheme against other brands of the same field. Microsoft has evolved its powers to control the market and competition for Intel-compatible PC operating systems, which enable them to control supply, costs of products and services and market competition. b. Monopoly and Microsoft: Overview During the early years of Microsoft expansion in the global marketplace, their growing market share was not given much attention since monopoly laws in United States were inexistent in their constitution.

However, by the time Microsoft extended its virtual monopoly to act unfairly and with belligerence in the global market, the United States Justice Department and European Commission prosecuted the marketing and economic participations of Microsoft (Seidman 87-88). Antitrust case against Microsoft began in the late 1990s after uncovering their company’s dominion over the marketplace, which consequently altered the market competition (Croteau and Hoynes 145).

According to Nadir (2004), Microsoft used its Office franchise to negate market share of competitors and create a dominating sphere for Internet marketers (57). Microsoft Corporation was under strict investigations by U. S Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission for their monopolization of various lines of products and services of software industry (Grimm, Lee and Smith 174). The emphasis of the study centers on the Microsoft’s monopolizing economic schemes contradicting the ideal market setup and violating economic laws of fair trade. II. Discussion a.

Monopoly of Microsoft Windows operating system, Internet explorer and Microsoft Office package suites are the three principal products of the company used in manipulating and controlling the existing market and pressing competitors (Levinson 88). In fact, according to Grimm, Lee and Smith (2005), Microsoft’s MS-DOS and Windows Operating Systems attained control on approximately 85% of overall computer market share in the year 2000 (174). Microsoft has always been able to control price setups and indications of their products offered to the ever-demanding consumers.

According to Croteau and Hoynes (2006), the court cited three significant features of economic monopoly applicable to Microsoft’s case. First, Microsoft possesses a large and stable economic participation in terms of production, marketing and demand of digital products and software. Second, Microsoft utilizes strict and exceedingly high barriers to counteract competitors and their potential market share. Lastly, consumers possess no pronounced or comparable alternative to the Microsoft’s product (Croteau and Hoynes 145).

The establishing of Microsoft’s monopoly powers is due to its Intel products’ high compatibility and operating system that lets variety of software applications ride on top of the Windows platform. Unfortunately for these overriding software producers, according to Neuchterlein and Weiser (2005), the United States government does not render regulation on Microsoft’s price manipulation enabling the company to maximize its monopoly profits and market share by overcharging the prices of their products offered to operating system market (17).

In the study of Economides (2001), the monopoly and legal grounds in the accusations filed by U. S. Department of Justice together with the 19 States of America against Microsoft has been investigated. Allegations made by these State and legal bodies include (a) monopoly of Microsoft in the market for operating systems of personal computer, (b) bundling of Windows O. S together with an official Internet Browser – Windows Explorer, (c) attempts to monopolize competitions on Internet Browsers, and (d) its several engagements in a number of anti-competitive exclusionary arrangements (Economides 2001).

Microsoft’s first attempt in monopolizing the industry of computer and digital software started in 1994 and eventually continued up to 2001. According to Evans (2002), the initial legal attacks against Microsoft monopoly left the company undamaged even after the U. S. Justice Department charged Microsoft with market violations of engaging in anticompetitive and exclusionary schemes to retain its monopoly status in personal computer OS and Internet browser (4).

In the study of Baseman, Warren-Boulton and Woroch (1995), the strategies of Microsoft in retaining its monopoly extend from overcharging licensing of OS for personal computers to induction of technical incompatibility between their OS and competitors’ applications (e. g. MS-DOS and DR-DOS). Nonetheless, Microsoft continues to decline the alleged charges against their monopolizing schemes and claims to uphold appropriate pricing for their PC OS (Werden 2001). b. Microsoft’s Court Cases: Antitrust and Monopoly

In July 1994, Microsoft made their settling agreement against the four-year antitrust investigations enforced by U. S Justice Department and European Commission. However, according to Grimm, Lee and Smith (2005), negotiations offered by the company did not pass the 1990 complaints filed by misled competitors and IBM, which consequently led to the allegations of stricter antitrust enforcement policy against Microsoft (175). On October 20, 1998, DOJ Antitrust Division’s Assistant attorney general – Joel I. Klein – together with other 20 state attorney generals filed an official legal suit (Civil Action No.

98-1232; filed in U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia) against William Gates, CEO of Microsoft Corp (Steiner and Steiner 337). Charges made by the group of Attorney generals consisted several violations in Section 1 of Sherman Act declaring the unlawful “every contact, combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce…”, which was interpreted as prohibition of monopoly practices including price-fixing, exclusive dealing, resale price maintenance and tying.

According to Evans (2002), Microsoft had violated Section 1 because of their entry in exclusive contracts with different parties together with the bundling of Internet Explorer to Windows (4-5). However, Microsoft immediately denied the accusations made by these legal bodies against their company (Steiner and Steiner 33). The Supreme Court claims the unlawful bundling of Microsoft OS with their Internet Explorer restraining competition and competitors’ market share thereby producing monopoly in the line of computer applications (McKenzie 2001).

Furthermore, allegations against Microsoft also included Sherman Act Sect 2 consisting of two violated elements: (a) “the possession of monopoly power in the relevant market”, and (b) “the willful acquisition or maintenance of such power as distinguished from growth or development as consequence of a superior product” (Evans 6).

According to Neuchterlein and Weiser (2005), Microsoft initiated their plans to inhibit the growing market share of Netscape not because of Netscape’s potential to increase its value over Window’s official Internet Browser, but because Netscape can actually decrease the overall economic value of Windows by breaking the applications barrier protecting Windows monopoly (18).

Charges against Microsoft consisting of (a) violation due to entry in exclusive contract, (b) bundling or tying, (c) monopoly leveraging, (d) attempted monopolization of web browsers, (e) maintenance of PC OS monopoly and (f) predatory pricing led to the break-up of Microsoft into two different companies under the umbrella of the general Microsoft Corporation (Evans 7-10; Grimm, Lee and Smith 175). c. Defining the Market Microsoft’s progressing monopoly is due to the “integrated nature of software and operating systems” that creates the pressing “Chicken and Egg” economic problem (Croteau and Hoynes 145).

The principal market supporting the product lines of Microsoft Corporation comprises the multi-segmented sectors, personal users of PC Windows OS and application innovators from small to large-scale companies (Eisenach and Lenard 95). The market shares controlled by the company accounts to the entire majority of consuming public, which has been estimated to be 85% to 90% of overall computer users (Grimm, Lee and Smith 174). As of September 2008, Windows OS version XP accounts to 73.

3% of overall OS users, 2. 2% for Windows 2000, 0. 2% for Windows 98, 13. 2% on Windows Vista and 1. 8% on Windows 2003. Meanwhile, major competitors of Microsoft – Linux and Mac – account to only 3. 8% (Linux) and 5. 2% (Mac) from the overall OS user population (OS Statistics, 2008). Evidently, the market shares of Windows account to 90% of the overall OS user population leaving only 10% for its competitors. d. Issues on Inhibition of Competitors

Microsoft’s aggressive strategy – embrace, extend and extinguish – has led them to (a) embrace Internet authoring tools as a dominant Office suite component, (b) extend control of the new market through their introduction of proprietary standards incompatible with competitors’ standards, and (c) extinguish the competing software through their manipulative licensing schemes (Nader 57). Unfair practices of Microsoft against its competitors are due to its massive and expanded market share accounting to approximately 90% of global PC-users (Croteau and Hoynes 145).

According to Croteau and Hoynes (2006), Microsoft has always utilized its monopolizing power to convince small to large-scaled companies to limit their participation and usage of competitors’ products, such as the famed browser-Netscape (145). Microsoft and its Chief Executive saw the potential competition threat of Netscape Navigator towards his Windows Operating System, which Gates perceived as a potential de-valuator of Windows OS (Steiner and Steiner 338).

Aside from Netscape, Microsoft also inhibited the participations of Sun Microsystem’s Java since these components can override Windows platform especially if Netscape Navigator combines with Java systems (Hahn 24). According to Steiner and Steiner (2005), shortly after the release of Microsoft Windows Internet Explorer, Microsoft executives together with Netscape executives had their meeting aimed at persuading Netscape not to compete with Microsoft (338).

In order to eliminate the marketing potential of Netscape browser, Microsoft tied or bundled Internet Explorer with Microsoft Windows promoting the use of an official web browser instead of an installable or downloadable web browser (Hahn 24). In another case, Microsoft has used its product lines monopoly to bully Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). According to Spinello (2002), since OEM is one of the two principal channels in distributing different browsers, Microsoft allegedly performed negotiations to remove Netscape browser and promote the official Windows browser to the public users (84).

Threats on Windows access were thrown against OEM executives who refused cooperating in this deals; hence, Microsoft was sued for committing anticompetitive and monopoly campaigns against its competitors (Hahn 24). Aside from OEM, Microsoft also approached various independent browser distributors, such as America Online Inc. (AOL) approached in 1996, MCI, AT&T Worldnet and Earthlink, requesting them to prioritize Internet Explorer by making it the main browser for subscribers instead of Netscape navigator (Steiner and Steiner 338-339).

III. Conclusion Evidently, Microsoft had performed anti-competitive and monopolistic actions against its competitors in order to maintain its monopoly in the industry of computer and software applications. Microsoft has violated anti-trust policies and Sherman Act sect 1 and 2 in order to retain its monopolistic powers and prevent competitors from increasing their market share in the industry of web and OS applications.

Monopolistic campaigns of Microsoft included (a) exclusive contracts, (b) bundling, (c) monopoly leveraging, (d) attempted monopolization of web browsers, (e) PC OS monopoly, and (f) predatory pricing on all Microsoft products.

Works Cited

Baseman , Karen C. , Frederick R. Warren-Boulton , and Glenn A. Woroch . “Microsoft Plays Hardball: The Use of Exclusionary Pricing and Technical Incompatibility to Maintain Monopoly Power in Markets for Operating System . ” Antitrust Bulletin 40. 2 (Mar. 1995): 265-315. Croteau, Dave, and William Hoynes.

The Business of Media: Corporate Media and the Public Interest. New York, U. S. A: Pine Forge Press, 2006. Economides, Nicholas. “The Microsoft Antitrust Case . ” Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 1. 1 (Mar. 2001): 7-39. Eisenach, Jeffrey A. , and Thomas M. Lenard. Competition, Innovation, and the Microsoft Monopoly: Antitrust in the Digital Marketplace. New York, U. S. A: Springer, 1999. Evans, David. Microsoft, Antitrust and the New Economy: Selected Essays. London, New York: Springer, 2002. Grimm, Curtis M.

, Hun Lee, and Ken G. Smith. Strategy As Action: Competitive Dynamics and Competitive Advantage. Oxfordshire, U. S: Oxford University Press US, 2005. Hahn, Robert. High-stakes Antitrust: The Last Hurrah?. New York, U. S. A: Brookings Institution Press, 2003. McKenzie, Richard B. “Trust on trial How the microsoft case is reframing the rules of competition . ” Business Horizons 44. 1 (Feb. 2001): 84-85 . Nader, Ralph. In Pursuit of Justice: Collected Writings 2000-2003. London, New York: Seven Stories Press, 2004.

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp