You have no idea what you are talking about.

Microsoft as a corporation makes money. Whatever the perceived value of the shares reflected on the stock price is largely irrelevant since Microsoft doesn't need to perform operations with its own stock since they are churning over four billions of profit per quarter.

If you were talking about Sony, a corporation losing tons of money, then share value might have some relevance since they are in need of resources.

That's in of itself is correct.  But in context, it is illegal to use a monopoly to influence decisions on others.  See "Department of Justice vs. Microsoft."  In this specific case of Microsoft buying exclusives in the console industry it might not be illegal, but in principle it's unethical.  It can be argued that Microsoft's "deep pockets" stemmed form their monopolistic practices that has now establish themselves in a somewhat financial secure situation.  This does put Microsoft in an unfair position when compared to other competing companies because most of those those companies will not have that financial leverage gained from legit competition as opposed to monopolistic practices employed by Microsoft.  At one time Microsoft did go on a shopping spree... to buy out Nintendo during "Project Dolphin" now known as the Gamecube.  Whether or not Nintendo took them seriously, Microsoft wanted Nintendo to stop making console hardware.  So Nintendo politely said "Go screw yourself."  So Microsoft blatantly lied to the public that Nintendo wasn't in competition with them.  If Nintendo wasn't, Microsoft would not have tried to employ their monopolistic practices to remove Nintendo from the competition to begin with.  Thank God Nintendo stuck with their guns in the face of Microsoft.  So... What if Microsoft goes on a shopping spree?  The answer is simple: Because of the past and current nature of Microsoft, they hurt the gaming console industry.

Ah. I'd like to take issue with this. I don't think 360 and PS3 sales are either/or. In fact, I don't believe the 360 or Wii would have sold a single unit more if the PS3 did not exist. A lot of the PS3 system sellers so far have been made by Sony. If Sony did not exist these games wouldn't have been made and the gamers who bought them probably wouldn't have spent those dollars on alternative games because those alternatives wouldn't be Sony-quality or continuing the franchises they loved. I can't think of any big PS3 exclusive save MGS4 that Sony didn't develop, publish and/or throw huge amounts of cash and dev help at.

I think the reason most of the people who currently have only a PS3 is the Sony owned or co-developed franchises. If they liked the wider HD game market, they would also have a 360. So Sony's titles are the only reason they even play console games, and if they didn't exist then they wouldn't own any console.

Then why are they firing 17% of their employees? I guess all those pinkslips will be somthing for them to perceive right?

Oh god. Trying to explain finances to people not acquinted with the matter at hand is... ugh.

Profitable business (like Microsoft) fire employees during economic downturns for two reasons: first, it's easier to trim the fat when the economy is shaking. Second, to lower operating costs in order to turn the same profit with lower revenue.

@kowenicki: no, of course not. Megadude ain't in the business of being rational. He just has an agenda to push.

You mean like how only nintendo fans bought the n64 and the gamecube, in order to play their classic nintendo franchises?

In other words, you are saying the ps3 has become the niche of sony-lovers. Hmm... you might not be that far from the truth...

You can't use market cap that way. It doesn't say anything about the liquidity of Microsoft. It's simply the perceived value of the company.

200 million is probably not an extreme amount of money for Microsoft, the problem is that these games aren't worth that amount of money and that gaming isn't MS's core business. If Microsoft thought that they could make a nice ROI on investing 200 million in these games they would do it.

Have a tissue.

Microsoft is only doing the exact same thing Sony did to enter the market: overpower the traditional players using resources from HQ. Buying exclusives was one of the elements used by Sony in these days as well: Tomb Raider is just an example.

Why does it bother you that Microsoft is doing the same Sony did?

Do you think Sony using the massive resources from their electronics business to trample Nintendo and Sega was fair and ethic?

Their stock is the lowest it's been since the 90's they're getting sued left and right. They've lost over 20 billion on the X-Box brand, cutting employees, vista was fail, Google is killing..... But you say all is well. They should loose more market value it wouldn't matter if their stocks traded for free you sez.

Now I'm not a CPA but my wifey is. We live in downtown Manhattan not the first stage in RE4. Show me the numbers that back up your statement that Microsoft is doing better then ever and has more money to burn then ever before or I call BS on you.

And I'm NOT talking about Sony; the OP is saying that M$ should go on a 200 million dollar shopping spree. Alls I'm telling you is that MS may not have as much money to burn as you think, (and you seem to think it's infinite).

Assassin's Creed easily.  But do you really see Bioshock 2 PS3 selling two million?