Investors Suing Microsoft Over Misleading Surface RT Info

[exfileme]

Investors were mislead by positive statements amidst poor Surface RT sales.

Investors Suing Microsoft Over Misleading Surface RT Info : Read more

 

[sean1357]

Give me a break and look at Ballmer face...

 

[gamerk316]

Knew this was coming down eventually. This could be big, because this lawsuit, unlike so many others, has legs.

MSFT would be wise to settle, ASAP.

 

[dextermat]

What's up with industries always lying to sell their stuff. That's too bad

 

[gggplaya]

It's clear to me that microsoft's first priority is figuring out ways to make more money instead of actually predicting what consumers want. They need to build a new roadmap, and design their products and financial model around their customers. It seems now they are trying to copy the competition, build products to try and draw in new customers but alienate existing customers, and nickel and dime for fees on everything.

Not the way to do business.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Honestly I find the Surface to be a better option than the iPad but the truth is that the masses are blind sheep and appeal to mass marketing. Microsofts current RT adverts have been pretty good but its going to be hard for anyone, even MS, to break Apples hold on the public.

As for the lawsuit, this is normal. When there is leftover inventory the company liquidates it and pulls it from profits. Not sure how this will go but it makes me feel like this is investors suing a company who started something new but failed. At least in the old days you used to invest with the risk of total loss. But I guess now you just sue to get your money back.

 

[gggplaya]

[quotemsg=11353241,0,149725]Honestly I find the Surface to be a better option than the iPad but the truth is that the masses are blind sheep and appeal to mass marketing. Microsofts current RT adverts have been pretty good but its going to be hard for anyone, even MS, to break Apples hold on the public.

As for the lawsuit, this is normal. When there is leftover inventory the company liquidates it and pulls it from profits. Not sure how this will go but it makes me feel like this is investors suing a company who started something new but failed. At least in the old days you used to invest with the risk of total loss. But I guess now you just sue to get your money back.[/quotemsg]

Surface pro yes, but not the surface RT. It fails as a tablet due to the lack of apps in comparison to IPAD and Android and it fails as a PC because you can't install windows programs on it. Then you get to the price, and you're like no thanks!!!!

Now if the surface pro came down to ipad/android price level, then we're talking. But as it stands now, you can buy a dedicated tablet with better battery life as a tablet, as well as a cheaper PC that outperforms the surface pro for the same amount of money.

 

[JPNpower]

Ugh Microsoft! We're supposed to make unfair amounts of money easily! what you expect us to work and earn our money like peasants!? We invested in you for free money and we'll get it from you some way or other. My third Rolex ain't gonna pay for itself!

Cheers
Investors

 

[cRACKmONKEY421]

whoopsies
should have just stuck with x86. duh.

 

[pedro_mann]

Intel had Itanium. Microsoft has Windows 8/Surface RT. Looks like coming out with a device that costs too much, has an ugly sounding name, and doesn't support Group Policy, among other things - could be considered a disaster. All these decisions to alienate existing customer bases and push the new app store model, where M$ gets a bigger chunk of the pie.

I actually believe there is a way to do both, elegantly. But this isn't it.

 

[aevm]

LOL, "Microsoft failed to make public the fact that Surface RT was suffering poor demand and lackluster sales". Didn't everybody know that even BEFORE Surface RT was released?

 

[killerclick]

If was fairly obvious how Surface RT was selling.

 

[ethanolson]

So... the investors are stupid and want someone to pay for their stupidity? Sounds like an enticement made available by a liberalized legal system. Not good.

 

[sykozis]

[quotemsg=11353241,0,149725]Honestly I find the Surface to be a better option than the iPad but the truth is that the masses are blind sheep and appeal to mass marketing. Microsofts current RT adverts have been pretty good but its going to be hard for anyone, even MS, to break Apples hold on the public.

As for the lawsuit, this is normal. When there is leftover inventory the company liquidates it and pulls it from profits. Not sure how this will go but it makes me feel like this is investors suing a company who started something new but failed. At least in the old days you used to invest with the risk of total loss. But I guess now you just sue to get your money back.[/quotemsg]

Microsoft misrepresented the risk, which is illegal. That's the only reason this class-action suit has an extremely high probability of succeeding in court. Had MS presented their financial information accurately, most of those investors would have steered clear. Since MS misrepresented their financial information by not accurately reporting sales data for Surface and SurfaceRT, many investors believed the stock was safe.

[quotemsg=11353955,0,127804]LOL, "Microsoft failed to make public the fact that Surface RT was suffering poor demand and lackluster sales". Didn't everybody know that even BEFORE Surface RT was released?
[/quotemsg]

Not all investors read tech news prior to buying stock. If they did, there'd be much less shock when things like this happen.

[quotemsg=11353984,0,258983]So... the investors are stupid and want someone to pay for their stupidity? Sounds like an enticement made available by a liberalized legal system. Not good.[/quotemsg]

The investors are stupid for believing financial information that's required by law to be as accurate as possible? MS intentionally hid financial data from investors knowing full well what the outcome would be once it was made public. The investors had no way of knowing that MS was falsifying financial data as it's an illegal act to do so. MS could actually end up facing criminal charges by the time this is over....if the DoJ even cares anymore...

 

[DavidC1]

Microsoft DID mislead investors in Surface sales. There were rumors once that Surface RT alone in 2012(since that was the only Surface) would sell close to 4 million, when its clear the COMBINED sales of Surface Pro and RT amounted to approximately only 1 million*. Microsoft did not ONCE try to repute the fact, rather pushing with irrelevant news like how there were xx millions of Windows 8 licenses sold.

*$853 million in revenue, and assume most of the sales are Surface Pro. Surface Pro's cheapest model is $800, but because its likely majority of the sales, the Average Selling Price won't be much lower than $800. The Surface RT's starting price(sans the recent price cut) is $499 now? Even assuming the ASPs of combined RT/Pro is $499, it means they have sold only 1.7 million. Likely the ASP is close to $700 and therefore end up with only 1.1-1.2 million in sales.

That's pathetic. Unfortunately it'll take more than that to convince Board to fire Ballmer.

 

[jdwii]

I said it over and over again yet microsoft fanboys would not listen, Nobody want a surface tablet not too many people want windows 8, no one wants a windows phone and people are already used to the android OS and IOS because their smartphones have it why change?

 

[JPNpower]

I'm confused how people believe that sacking Ballmer must be the great solution that would change everything. Why?

 

[teknic111]

Microsoft should have introduced the Surface RT for $300 and the Pro for $500. Their number one goal in the beginning, should have been building a user base, not sell tablets for profit!

 

[STravis]

The Ballmer pic is just funny.

 

[nuvon]

The real winners are the fxxxing greedy lawyers

 

[Avus]

With so many RT tablet piled up, MS should consider bundle them with Xbox180 and made them like a Wii U controller....

 

[teh_chem]

Rich people need some cheese with their whine.

Everyone else knew about the poor sales of the surface RT, I see no reason to assume any competent investor would assume otherwise.

Question being, did MSFT actually lie to investors? It doesn't sound like they can prove it. You can say that they played a numbers game by reporting overall windows tablet sales vs. surface pro and surface RT separately. But I don't think it's lying.

How about practice some personal accountability, and don't believe that everything is going to make you money.

 

[w8gaming]

[quotemsg=11353241,0,149725]Honestly I find the Surface to be a better option than the iPad but the truth is that the masses are blind sheep and appeal to mass marketing. Microsofts current RT adverts have been pretty good but its going to be hard for anyone, even MS, to break Apples hold on the public.[/quotemsg]

Well, every product has its share of fans, even Blackberry has some people buying up their latest devices while public in general ignore it. While you like Surface RT, most of the people looking for a tablet don't, including me, who bought two Windows 8 Pro tablets instead of RT. And you are wrong to assume that Apple has a better hold on the tablet market, it is Android now. The latest statistics has already shown more people buying Android tablets than iPad. It is just that single vendor vice Apple still sells more, but against the many vendors Apple market share is shrinking fast.

Well, it is easy to find comfort by thinking whoever that doesn't like RT is one of the blind mass, but it will not change anything as far as the appeal of RT is concerned. If MS wants to sell more RT devices, they better start changing their approach, soon.

 

[rantoc]

JPNpower: Your question about sacking Balmer and why? Its quite easy to see that he have directly been involved in several experienced and good people leaving the company, its typical of a aging questioned Ceo who wants to retain the position to make sure no competition remains in the company. I would call that even working AGAINST the company. The big question is if his loyalty lies towards his own wallet or the company...

 

[JPForums]

Anyone else notice how no specific investors are mentioned. Did they even have a complaint by investors to start with or did the Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd law firm go looking for something to get investors complaining. By the sounds of it, the Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd law firm saw an opportunity to make a boatload of money by bringing this lawsuit up. The rest of the piece sounds like an advertisement to malign Microsoft and get the investors feeling entitled. If only Microsoft didn't make it so easy.

Most investors accept that there is risk in investing. I'd guess that not many were looking to bring up a law suit until this law firm started advertising. Unfortunately for Microsoft, they appear to have left the door for this lawsuit wide open. Unfortunately for investors, if they hold onto MS stock, then they will at best come out even as the MS stock will devalue proportionally to the lawsuit award. If they no longer own MS stock, then they may do a little better, but they've already lost some with the recent drop in stock prices. Furthermore, amount awarded in court that actually makes it to individual investors is almost always laughably low. The real winners here are the lawyers who all too often take unjustifiably high (my opinion) payment for the services rendered. It just makes no sense to me why the exact same services could warrant such vastly different payment, depending on the award amount. I digress.