Windows Phone Thoughts - Daily News, Views, Rants and Raves

Check out the hottest Windows Mobile devices at our Expansys store!


Digital Home Thoughts

Loading feed...

Laptop Thoughts

Loading feed...

Android Thoughts

Loading feed...




Go Back   Thoughts Media Forums > WINDOWS PHONE THOUGHTS > Windows Phone Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-03-2010, 10:00 PM
Ed Hansberry
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Ed Hansberry's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
Default KIN Total Cost Nears One Billion Dollars

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/22/...crosoft-earnin/

So just how much did the whole Danger acquistion and KIN project cost Microsoft? It looks like the total cost is approaching $1,000,000,000. Ouch. Engadged discovered there was a $240 million writeoff in Microsoft's June 30, 2010 financial statements and notes that it paid $500 million for Danger. What is not included in any of these numbers are:

  • Routine operation expenses Microsoft incurred for the unit since the Danger acquistion.
  • Hardware upgrades and purchases for the Sidekick infrastructure
  • Revenues from the Sidekick business (that would offset any costs)
  • Expenses, penalties and fees incurred when the Danger servers went belly up and ate all of the Sidekick data and Microsoft had to go in and fix it
  • Marketing costs for the KIN

All told, I suspect the venture wound up costing Microsoft over a billion dollars above any revenue it got from the Sidekick business. A billion dollars is a lot of money, but in the world of acquisitions, I suspect more money was blown when HP acquired Compaq or AOL acquired Time Warner.

__________________
text sig
 
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-03-2010, 11:37 PM
Fritzly
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 740

Not to metion the damage to the image of MS...... which is grealy costlier...........
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-04-2010, 12:19 AM
Ed Hansberry
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Ed Hansberry's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritzly View Post
Not to metion the damage to the image of MS...... which is grealy costlier...........
Nah. The KIN fiasco is known only to tech geeks. Few Joe Consumers ever heard of it.

Vista, now *that* damaged the image of MS.
__________________
text sig
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-04-2010, 08:42 AM
vangrieg
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 24

What it also doesn't include is intellectual property, code, infrastructure, patents, consumer research data etc., that can be used for the benefit of WP7. How much that's worth I have no idea.

Also, for examples of money thrown away you don't need to go as far back in history as HP/Compaq. The recent acquisition of Palm by HP will be a much deeper money dump.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-04-2010, 05:27 PM
Fritzly
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 740

Quote:
Originally Posted by vangrieg View Post
What it also doesn't include is intellectual property, code, infrastructure, patents, consumer research data etc., that can be used for the benefit of WP7. How much that's worth I have no idea.

Also, for examples of money thrown away you don't need to go as far back in history as HP/Compaq. The recent acquisition of Palm by HP will be a much deeper money dump.
Why? It seems that HP is going to use Palm OS and IP; MS did not with the Sidekick....
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-05-2010, 12:01 AM
randalllewis
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 431

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry View Post
Nah. The KIN fiasco is known only to tech geeks. Few Joe Consumers ever heard of it.

Vista, now *that* damaged the image of MS.

I agree Vista (in its early days) hurt Microsoft's rep, but what hurt them far more was Microsoft's silence while Apple defined Vista over and over again in the PC/Mac ads. Tech issues aside, a prime rule of marketing is never, ever let someone else define your product.
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-05-2010, 06:57 PM
vangrieg
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritzly View Post
Why? It seems that HP is going to use Palm OS and IP; MS did not with the Sidekick....
What makes you think MS won't use whatever IP Danger had and was developed later?

HP is going to use Palm OS probably, but it's not worth 1.2 billion. Not anywhere near that number.
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-05-2010, 07:59 PM
Ed Hansberry
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Ed Hansberry's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228

Quote:
Originally Posted by vangrieg View Post
What makes you think MS won't use whatever IP Danger had and was developed later?
I think the MyPhone site is based on Danger technology. I'd like to see some of the KIN Studio features make it to WP7, but I suspect those two technologies fall somewhere in the $999,999,500,000 range below $1B.
__________________
text sig
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-05-2010, 09:52 PM
Fritzly
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 740

Quote:
Originally Posted by vangrieg View Post
What makes you think MS won't use whatever IP Danger had and was developed later?

HP is going to use Palm OS probably, but it's not worth 1.2 billion. Not anywhere near that number.
The fact that the Kin was built from scratch and not using those technologies.

We are all entitled to our opinion so I respect your analysis of the Palm deal; said that it is also worth to note that it is impossible and incorrect to establish an absolute value for assets like IP: Palm IP could be worth almost nothing to John Deere and extremely valuable for HP, Lenovo etc.; the latter being able to fully explit the potential of the IP. If MS spent almost a billion for the Kin, how much could be worth a scalable OS that could be used on phones, "slate" computers etc.?
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-06-2010, 10:57 AM
vangrieg
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 24

Why are you saying it was built from scratch? Danger's software was the most interesting on the server side as that's where the action was for Sidekick.

How much that's worth I have no idea, as I acknowledged earlier.

Also, you are absolutely right in saying that IP is worth different money to different companies. That's why I think 1.2B for Palm acquisition is a waste of money in HP's case (not that it's a reasonable price for anyone, but HP in particular is not the company that could take it from there for numerous reasons, internal and external to HP). 1.2B is of course not the final cost because the business is bleeding enormous amounts of money and will keep doing so for the nearest years (two in the most optimistic scenario I'd say).
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:22 PM.