All Channels
Popular
290°

Microsoft Will Outperform This Year if It Really Does Sell Xbox

TheStreet TV's Jack Mohr has already found his top European stocks to own in 2015. Now he's looking for the top five S&P 500 stocks to own in the new year.

Mohr has already said his fifth stock is social media juggernaut Facebook (FB) and No. 4 is the struggling financial giant Citigroup (C) . Who's third? Microsoft (MSFT) , Mohr said Wednesday.

One of the big catalysts going into the new year also happens to be somewhat of a "bold prediction," he said -- speculating that Microsoft would spinoff its Xbox business.

Xbox is near the top of its sales cycle, meaning Microsoft would likely fetch top dollar for the entity. Not that the $88.7 billion in cash and short-term investments are small by any means, but a spinoff of Xbox would give the tech giant even more cash. This could allow for an increase in its dividend or potentially in the company's share buyback program.

Read Full Story >>
thestreet.com
Foehammer4136d ago (Edited 4135d ago )

Well MS is now the 2nd most valuable company on earth

recently passing Exxon Moble

http://www.foxbusiness.com/...

The Xbox is too intrenched in MS to go anywhere, Say hello Cortona

The Xbox division has been highly profitable since 2008 inclusive.

And the brand has just had it's best year ever

increasing marketshare by around 50% from the 360.

ppl buy other money making MS licensed products to go along with their new console:

-XBL
-second controller
-play and charge kit
-Kinect tv stand
-more games

4136d ago Replies(6)
BG115794136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

Wait wait... Only second???
But, weren't they number one when Bill Gates was in command? When did they lost the number one place? Because you're saying now "are now second". So they were third before that or something?

DOMination-4135d ago

They were never first. Oil companies such as Shell have always domimated the top 5 and now we see a lot of Chinese companies closing in. MS have done well to stay up there.

dazina4135d ago

@DOMination. Your wrong, Microsoft were first. in 1999 - There worth was 620 Billion. Infact if you take into account inflation it is arguable that no company has ever been worth more than microsft at it's peak (Including Apple).

BitbyDeath4136d ago

'The Xbox is too intrenched in MS to go anywhere'

Satya Nadella does not agree with you.

http://www.forbes.com/sites...

Naga4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

“Xbox isn’t that far from [the core]. We can do a few more things than the core. But the point is, you’ve got to have a culture to do it. I want us to be comfortable to be proud of Xbox, to give it the air cover of Microsoft, but at the same time not confuse it with our core.”
- Nadella, also from that article.

Satya Nadella may not view it as "core" per se, but he certainly doesn't view it as dispensable. It's obvious that Xbox isn't their "core", as it doesn't comprise the bulk of their corporate profit. However, it is creating a substantial profit. So, although it isn't untouchable in the broader scheme of things, it will continue to remain an essential asset of the company for the foreseeable future.

BitbyDeath4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

Not being core though means it is not intrenched in the business as FoeHammer put it.

XanderZane4136d ago

Nadella says this.
"“Xbox isn’t that far from [the core],” he told the publication. “We can do a few more things than the core. But the point is, you’ve got to have a culture to do it.

“I want us to be comfortable to be proud of Xbox, to give it the air cover of Microsoft, but at the same time not confuse it with our core.”

I don't think it's going anywhere. Obviously Windows and all their other major software app and tools are their 'CORE' business. The phones, tablets, etc.. aren't their 'core' business either. I doubt they would sell this brand with over 85 million gamers supporting it.

BitbyDeath4136d ago

I'm not saying it will sell, i'm just proving it is not intrenched.

I have no horse in this race.

IrishSt0ner4135d ago

This rearing it's head again. Nadella has refuted this continually since he's been CEO. Give up.

http://www.forbes.com/sites...

2v14135d ago

dsmn see this Quote

"leaves Xbox as something of an outsider. Thankfully it’s still a very popular, recognizable outsider."

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4135d ago
OrangePowerz4136d ago

Doesn't matter what marketshare the console has. If shareholders make more money by having Xbox spunoff compared to keeping it as is they will want to have it spunoff.

AKissFromDaddy4135d ago

That's nonfactual. Microsoft is valued on the market today, 1/15/2015, as of 4PM EST at 374.9B and Exxon is at 376.7B.

Chaos-Dad4135d ago

"The Xbox division has been highly profitable since 2008 inclusive. "

http://www.escapistmagazine...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4135d ago
BenqMagician4136d ago

Too be honest if it did happen that they did sell it everyone who has a X1 and is going too buy a X1 in the future would find it really hard too trust that company who buys it.

Also there chances who winning this gen would be very slim and they would loose millions or even billions in the long term trying too make a profit or even making there money back at all. Not many companies can take that chance like MS did.

bleedsoe9mm4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

selling and spinning off are not remotely the same thing , not that either is going to happen .

pompous4136d ago

You don't know that. It could happen either way. And the reason it could is there already has been talks of it in the investors meetings. That's how that truthfact rumor started. Xbox division has been making money but ultimately is still in the red for the entire division. 13yrs or so of a division in the red is not good no matter which way you spin it and the investors are getting sick of the LARGE sums of money the Xbox division needs and bleeds just to make a VEY VERY small return on investment. Spending billions to just make millions or to break even is not good enough for the money needed to get there.

bleedsoe9mm4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

spinning off is possible for both sony and microsoft , but they only do it to make more money , its done from a position of strength . selling brands that are so synonymous with the mother company makes no sense for them or the potential buyer .

jrshankill4135d ago

Faaaaaaaaanbooooooooooy comment number 2. You are on a role.

Seeing as Sony Corp. is in the red, you really can't talk about a single MS division.

OrangePowerz4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

True on the first thing that they are not the same. Spinning off would give a better view of how much money the division actually spends and how much profit it actually makes.

OpieWinston4136d ago

Xbox is a massive financial burden and selling that is highly unlikely.

They'd shut it down before they tried to spin it off.

OpieWinston4136d ago

You must be if you don't understand what the brand would cost and inherit.

How many Microsoft Studios attached to the brand?
How many IPs attached to the brand?
Research and Development?
Employee numbers

Selling it off would be a hard sell when not a lot of companies have the finances to BUY and support the brand.

N4G crowd are really slow when it comes to this topic aren't you?

Who would be the potential buyers with the money? Their competitors for the living room battle.

Google? Apple?

Show all comments (53)
70°

Microsoft Gaming Revenue Drops 7% Year-on-Year, Content and Services Down 5%, Xbox Hardware Down 33%

Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
Jin_Sakai13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.

dveio13d ago

To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.

Jingsing13d ago

The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.

Tanktopmaster9213d ago

Once they re-evaluate exclusive all will be fine….

S2Killinit13d ago

Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.

Jingsing13d ago

15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.

Tanktopmaster9213d ago

These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse

Show all comments (13)
70°

Xbox boss: Memory crisis could impact next-gen hardware pricing

Xbox boss Asha Sharma has discussed how component shortages will impact the company's plans for Project Helix.

Read Full Story >>
gamedeveloper.com
Eonjay15d ago

When does this end? Its killing everyone. Consoles and PC. And for what? AI? The benefits of AI are completely outweighed by the negatives. And the government should have never allowed one company to buy up all the RAM.

Lexreborn215d ago

This kind of proves this is an after thought product, most products like this are in r&d 5 years before they start mass producing. So they typically have the cost of components and things worked out long before assembly starts.

This is an assumption still, but I wouldn’t be surprised if project helix is similar to Scalebound,perfect dark and sod3. They had an idea but no actual execution other than concept stage. Being impacted by the ram shortage likely would also put this device 3-4 years out.

I’m not even sure MS has that endurance with Xbox yet

Fishy Fingers15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

I mean.... what?

We're at a point that Samsung wont even provide their own phone department ram because they can sell it at higher prices to 3rd parties (AI). Its more profitable to sell the ram than make their own devices with it.

You think because R&D starts 5 years ago the 3rd party component manufacturers will honour that price? They'll sell it to whomever is paying the most today, not some gentlemens agreement they made years ago. AI farms will buy more volume at higher prices than any console manufacturer will. It'll be the same for Playstation.

Lexreborn215d ago

Contractual agreements are not the same as “gentlemen” agreements. If you think that they work with their distributors a month before production then their entire business model is trash. They work with companies like nvidia constantly for building the graphics cards they need. They work with companies that build motherboards years in advance. This is what proper business planning does.

They are not buying components on a whim like a consumer. So again, considering the ram isn’t a singular module and is integrated into the motherboard I highly doubt they wouldn’t have a final schematic that they are supposed to be building around.

If they are delaying production another 3 years then it’s obvious again this is an after though project and is just trying to be responsive to their bad execution they had the last 14 years.

It also isn’t far fetched to use their failure to produce first party titles the last 7 years including the highly anticipated games I mentioned all being cancelled. That they would continue to you know… lie

Sitdown15d ago

You don't really know how this works huh?

Profchaos15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

Helix is going to be stupidly expensive

Instead of leaning into smarter upscaling techniques they're brute forcing hardware that will cost them dearly and it remains to be seen if it's genuinely going to provide a meaningful differential

I know in the oc.doace people like to brag about not using frame gen or dlss to get to high on a game but for the majority of players they happily use those technologies without a second thought

That's going to be ps6 vs Helix

Eonjay15d ago

Yeah with FSR 5 they should be able to offer a much cheaper version of Helix.

Eonjay15d ago

While this does seem to be the case, I am encouraged by the statement from Microsoft about wanting to provide affordable options. If this means a Series S style Helix, at least there will be something affordable being offered.

XBManiac14d ago

Series S is what has killed Xbox Series so... Will they dare?

blacktiger15d ago

It's called systematic inflationary. Yes we get it Microsoft, keep raising in the name ofall kinds of stuffs

pwnmaster300015d ago

Honestly if there was thing I learned from this generation is that new consoles arnt day one anymore.
I can wait 1-3 years.

DarXyde15d ago

Another important lesson from this generation: while Nintendo showed us that prices don't necessarily need to ever drop, we've now learned that waiting 1-3 years does carry some risk that prices increase. This generation is just bizarre in all the wrong ways.

LucasRuinedChildhood15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

The factors are largely external. Covid and Russia-Ukraine war causing inflation led to the first price increase in 2022.

Then we get Trump's tariffs increasing hardware prices, AI boom causing a RAM crisis, war on Iran causing a worldwide fuel crisis which impacts the cost of everything.

Gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum. The last few years have been a shitshow and lot of it was definitely avoidable.

DarXyde15d ago

LucasRuinedChildhood,

For sure. No disagreement on the external factors doing a lot of this. Where I have to gently push back however is on two fronts:

1. The pandemic definitely caused some issues: asynchronous development was a big issue and really complicated timelines and affected game quality. At the same time, when it comes to price hikes, it's really difficult to know what was genuine necessity and what was taking consumers for a ride. The pandemic brought about "stag-flation" which was increasing prices and stagnant wages, which was a problem caused by supply chain constraints. There was also "Greed-flation", where companies that were slightly affected or had no issues took advantage of the situation and squeezed everyone citing supply chain issues when there were none.

2. It's definitely true that the tariffs, AI boom, and RAM crisis were all things enabled by tech broligarchs throwing money at this caricature of a world leader, one of them being Satya Nadella. I don't think Sony and Nintendo have contributed much to this problem if at all, but Microsoft's Nadella I feel was instrumental in causing every one of those issues. Microsoft as a company contributed to both candidates (though they gave Harris 4x as much if I recall), but Nadella was all in on letting AI run wild. He paid for unregulated AI, and got a war that's not a war (even though Trump called it that at least five times on television) that screwed up helium access. So for me, I feel that one of the players in the gaming industry is a key architect of these issues, and for that reason I struggle a bit to think of it as "external".

Show all comments (28)
50°

'The big things that we're thinking about'

In an exclusive interview with Game File, new(ish) Xbox boss Asha Sharma and Xbox chief content officer Matt Booty explain their vision for Microsoft’s gaming division

Read Full Story >>
gamefile.news
Agent7516d ago

A good start would be to release games to go with the console. My Xbox Series X has gathered dust virtually from launch. My advice would be to ditch a next console and release games on PC, PlayStation and Switch. Another idea would be a hybrid console based on Xbox Series X tech and go the same route as Nintendo. Another idea would be to pull out of gaming altogether. Plenty of options there.

Reaper22_14d ago

Why would they pull out? They have the momentum. Sony has been getting nothing but bad news lately.