

Microsoft surpasses Exxon as second most valuable company - andrewfong
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/microsoft-passes-exxon-as-2nd-most-valuable-co/2014/11/14/302a53cc-6c29-11e4-bafd-6598192a448d_story.html

======
fivedogit
I used to follow stocks more in college and had a pretty good idea of market
caps of the Dow components. I remember that MS was always near the top.

Then I tuned out for 12 years. (I came to believe the stock market was a
rigged insider's game, but that's another story.) Given how badly they've been
managed during that time and the explosion of mobile, I _assumed_ Microsoft
had dropped not only out of the top spot but out of the top ten, probably
worse.

Nope. Never dropped below 6th _worldwide_.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_public_corporations_by_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_public_corporations_by_market_capitalization)

That's just astounding to me. Google has done almost everything right since
its founding, dominating the Internet wave (and a massive portion of online
advertising), grabbing a huge chunk of the mobile revolution and getting its
tentacles in almost every area of disruption... and yet for all of the success
and raw brainpower, batting as close to 1000 as a company possibly can for 15
years, they _still_ haven't eclipsed Microsoft, which bumbled its way through
the 2000s in embarrassing fashion. Very hard to comprehend.

~~~
noblethrasher
From a business perspective, Microsoft also did almost everything right[1] for
15 - 20 years, and for as much bumbling they did during the 2000's, they still
maintained a few strategic advantages:

1\. SQL Server

2\. Sharepoint

3\. XBox/Live

4\. Exchange (one of the earliest demands by corporate iPhone users was
ActiveSync)

5\. Live/Bing

6\. Office (mostly Excel)

7\. Lots of cash

[1] Or their competitors screwed up.

~~~
fivedogit
I mostly agree with this with some additions/deletions:

0\. Windows. Everything else flows from the monopoly, including Office/Excel.

Remove #3, Xbox is not a big money maker for them, IIRC. Remove #5, Live/Bing
are a joke, unless I'm misunderstanding what Live is.

Funny, neither one of us mentioned IE, which was dominant for a long time.

~~~
noblethrasher
I elided Windows because it required too much exposition. As a platform, it
also entails a bunch of strategic liabilities, and I'm not sure how everything
cancels. At least Office/Excel, Exchange, Sharepoint, SQL Server, et. al. can
be ported to other platforms.

XBox is not a big money maker, but neither was Amazon for a long time.
Investors also care about potential.

Bing will probably turn out to be a strategic advantage: If Google creates or
dominates new markets, it's going to have competitors who will not want to use
its search engine and other online services, case in point: Apple.

