By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RVDondaPC on 25 October 2012
Edit Thread
ebw said:
RVDondaPC said:

XBOX is now a profitable, world wide known brand. Microsoft can now also use it to leverage it with their othe products/Window devices. It helps to diversify Microsoft's protfolio. It has a large and engaging userbase. And it also helped deleverage Sony and other companies from completely taking over the living room space and hurting it's Windows division, which was it's only real goal at birth. How can you label it, not a success?  Because a company had to invest capital at it's inception to get it off the ground? That makes no sense. We might as well label Google buying Motorola, not a success either. Since it spent $12 Billion buying it and it lost half a billion dollars last quarter. Progress and time means nothing about success to you, lets just label things failures squarely on the initial cost of something.  

So, judging by the phrasing, you disagree with labelling Google's purchase a failure?  I would argue that it is a complete and utter failure, business wise.  At the time of the deal the consensus was that the purchase was for the patents, and those patents have proven to be rather worthless in court, certainly not justifying the exorbitant cost.  Others speculated it was for the set-top business, but that's been discontinued.  Motorola's smartphone business is moribund (Samsung is the only one making any profit selling Android phones), so Google's claim that the purchase would "supercharge" the Android market is vastly overblown.  As far as I can tell we haven't seen any business justification that the $12.5 billion will ever pay itself off.  It is tempting to speculate that the high asking price was forced by Motorola's ex-CEO, but did Google really have to spend that much money to eliminate one rogue agent?


You're missing the point. How can you label it a failure so soon? You're basing it all on the initial cost of the transaction. That is the same thing that was done with the XBOX. It cost MS Billions to establish the brand, but now that it is making money and the added value it brings to MS and will continue to bring to MS that is being ignored by you guys.

Google has just barely purchased Motorola. They have said that Motorola products that have been influenced by Google now owning the company wont even hit the market until 2013 holiday season. So what does current profit selling Android phones have to do with anything? They haven't released a Google influenced phone yet to even measure it's success and profitability. Also you don't know what influence Motorola's patent portfolio has had on mobile phone litigation for Goog. It was purchased to prevent Google from being bombarded with lawsuits from all the other mobile players. As of now I don't think there has been any serious lawsuit judgments against Goog that has to do with mobile since they purchased Motorola and they have even filed some lawsuits of their own. That is a much prettier picture than being the punching bag that it was when Android first came out. Goog also isn't even done restructuring Motorola as a company, so just relax before you go labeling something a complete failure. Wait a few years then you can start to make a judgment. It took XBOX about 7 years to make a profit, and it's been a profitable business ever since.