Nadella took the reins in 2014 and the stock has 10x’d since then. In the same timeframe, the sp500 has 2.5x’d. Sounds pretty successful to me?

▲

a_vanderbilt 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In theory, the market should be pricing in based on future potential. As it has become increasingly clear this past decade, the market is not rational.

▲

drob518 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In a bubble, everyone looks like they’re doing well. Don’t confuse that with an actual strategy.

	▲	gdhkgdhkvff 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		But I compared it to sp500. Even QQQ only 6x’d in that timeframe. Which bubble are you talking about? Even if you remove everything after January 1 2020, it’s still up 4x since nadella took over. And that follows a decade of stagnation under Balmer. What numbers do you know of that show that Microsoft hasn’t been successful since nadella took charge? Complain all you want about the products, but the stock under nadella has been a success.

▲

bigstrat2003 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Stock price going up is not the success criterion for a business. Making money is. And Microsoft's decisions are undermining their ability to make money in the future, which makes them bad decisions even if the stock price has gone up or if they make more money in the short term.

	▲	andsoitis 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Stock price going up is not the success criterion for a business. Making money is. Microsoft’s net income is up roughly 5.4x from ~$22B in 2014 to $119B today. Profit margin also expanded, from ~25% net margins in 2014 to over 36% today.