famousringo said:
Both companies have billions and are spending billions on mobile. Google has an advantage in having a huge, established user base. Microsoft has an advantage in intellectual property. Which is the better move, Microsoft's spending billions to fund Nokia, developers and Windows Phone marketing, or Google spending billions to acquire Motorola and move into hardware? I'll say this, Microsoft's strategy outsources a lot of risk onto Nokia, Google's incurs a lot of risk on itself. Actually, I'm leaving something out. Microsoft is trying to leverage its desktop dominance into tablets, and it's taking a pretty big risk to do it. Windows 8 is the most radical departure in the history of the desktop GUI, and it risks pissing off a lot of desktop users if MS doesn't get it right. |
I've found basically the same forecasts all over the Internet, goog is going to grow at twice the rate of msft...
Here is what the analysts at CNN Money have to say:
Msft
Earnings growth (last year) 28.1%
Earnings growth (this year) -0.05%
Earnings growth (next 5 years) 9.30%
Revenue growth (last year) 11.94%
Earnings growth (last year) 38.48%
Earnings growth (this year) 17.38%
Earnings growth (next 5 years) 17.65%
Revenue growth (last year) 29.13%
If logic is important to you then realize that a lot of people are expecting google to grow faster than msft, and given that this pattern will remain applicable, will eventually surpass msft.







