back to article Microsoft staff brace for next round of layoffs – expected Thursday

The coffee machines at Microsoft will be taking a hammering from nervous workers after a report that the company will lay off another tranche of staff on Thursday. Back in July Microsoft announced it will lay off 18,000 employees in a reorganization lasting six months; 12,500 have since been shown the door, with the vast …

  1. Shannon Jacobs

    Silly thought experiment

    Let's imagine that instead of cutting off a chunk of Microsoft people, we just cut Microsoft into 3 (or even 5) equal pieces. Each new baby Microsoft would get a copy of all of the source code, and they could have a draft to divvy up the staff and the facilities. Shareholders would get new shares in the baby companies.

    Now each baby Microsoft competes against the others. One baby might decide to go back to XP, and I might well switch my loyalties to that brand of Microsoft. Two of the others might stick with Windows 7 and 8 for a while, but one might focus on fixing the security problems at a slightly higher market price. Meanwhile, the last two might put their priorities on flavors of Windows 9.

    The bottom line is that we would get some real choice (AKA freedom), and I bet the OSes would actually evolve much faster. Some employees would still get burned, but that's happening anyway.

    Even the shareholders would benefit from the overall acceleration of the software industry. Yeah, one or two of the babies may do less well, but the whole pie of all the babies will be growing bigger. The only way for a shareholder to lose would be to sell the buy and sell the wrong shares, exactly like now.

    Ditto Google and Apple, if you ask me. Any company that starts restricting choice too much should be rewarded by strongly encouraged reproduction, not penalized by temporary cancerous growth.

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      The difficulty with that sort of artificially-created competition is that there are always unexpected consequences. In this case the big problem I forsee is that most copies of Windows are sold pre-installed on OEM systems. It would be nice to think that people would make an informed choice about which one they want, but we know that the majority of PC buyers haven't a clue what an OS is, let alone which version they're running. They can just about tell the difference between "Windows" and "Apple".

      Build-to-order OEMs like Dell might offer a choice, but most would simply go for whichever charged them the lowest licence fee, and so made the end product cheapest. The resulting race to the bottom wouldn't make shareholders very happy, nor provide income for R&D. Eventually all but 1 or 2 of the Babysofts would go bust, and we'd be back where we started with one company, but a smaller and more financially strapped one.

    2. Michael Habel Silver badge

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      @Shannon Jacobs

      Now each baby Microsoft competes against the others. One baby might decide to go back to XP, and I might well switch my loyalties to that brand of Microsoft. Two of the others might stick with Windows 7 and 8 for a while, but one might focus on fixing the security problems at a slightly higher market price. Meanwhile, the last two might put their priorities on flavors of Windows 9.

      Sounds good on ePapaer but, that would eventually break the "One OS to rule them all!" credo.... So its never gonna happen.

      @ Phil O'Sophical

      Build-to-order OEMs like Dell might offer a choice, but most would simply go for whichever charged them the lowest licence fee, and so made the end product cheapest. The resulting race to the bottom wouldn't make shareholders very happy, nor provide income for R&D. Eventually all but 1 or 2 of the Babysofts would go bust, and we'd be back where we started with one company, but a smaller and more financially strapped one.

      So why not Linux.... I doubt you can be cheaper then free....

      1. monkeyfish

        Re: Silly thought experiment

        That smells like the artificially induced inner competition that killed Nokia. No one Nokia had all the best features when the iphone came and kicked them in nads.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      And just how long would company A's Windows stay compatible with company B's?

      "Yes sir/madam our software works with windows! Which versions? oh:

      Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8.1 from MSCorp

      Windows 7 and 8 from MSCorporation

      Windows 8.1 from WinCorp

      ....

      Which version do you have sir? Oh the one with with the blue button..."

    4. midcapwarrior

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      That was part of the problem under Ballmer and Sinofsky.

      Windows group and Office groups protected turf and stopped innovations from being releases (i.e. Courier, cloud etc.).

      Interestingly the biggest issue with the change in the Redmond community is not the cuts to FTEs but the contractor cuts and rule changes.

      Previous cuts were a revolving door where head count cuts morphed into contractor increases.

      It was possible to make more after a cut and stay in the same role.

      New rule on how long a contractor can stay followed by mandatory 6 month off periods mean the cuts are cuts.

    5. Version 1.0 Silver badge

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      Didn't we already try this with Ma Bell?

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      "Let's imagine that instead of cutting off a chunk of Microsoft people, we just cut Microsoft into 3 (or even 5) equal pieces."

      Why not into a few hundred and put them in the same forked mess that Linux distributions are in?

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Silly thought experiment

      The better solution; split Microsoft up, the OS should be separate from Office. Then you have the Office side willing to put it on more OS's and that forces the OS business to "convince" consumers that their OS is better than the rest. The problem right now is that they control the desktop OS market, which means they have a foot in the server rooms and then they have the Office Suite locked in as well.

      1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

        Re: Silly thought experiment

        Actually, I believe that what was just described here is a South Korean Chaebol. Samsung, for example, though in Chaebols there wouldn't so much be "4 versions of Windows for the desktop" so much as "desktops would be built by company A, mobiles by company B, cloud strategy by company C, servers by company D".

        They're a spectacularly effective means of organizing business and equally as effective at annihilating their competition. Be very careful what you wish for. American equivalents to Chaebols in tech could be considered to be GE, Intel, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and certainly in an emerging capacity, Google*.

        Microsoft is a software company. Their forays into hardware are small and insignificant. You'd damned well better pray they don't start making self-driving cars or we are all fucked.

        *Replete with killer robots and drones!

  2. Khaptain Silver badge

    Not expecting much from W9 then

    For a company the size of MS to lay of 18000 people is by no means a simple choice. Obviously something is going on behind the scenes that we are probably not aware of. First and foremost there will be the obvious financial reasons, secondly the workforce has probably become bloated and needs trimming like the OSs and third, Gates and Balmer are increasingly becoming historical figures, their influence must be waning.

    If it means that new teams will arise and new ideas, then why not, it would probably be a good thing. They appear to be struggling on many fronts; innovation has become a waning moon. Xbox , meehhhh, (PS4 suffers the same though), W8 + W9, well they are basically revamps and fat cutting of W7. Office 365, no thanks. W2012, Ok and that’s about it.... Bing, let’s not even get into the subject.

    C’mon MS, do us all a favour, renew your teams, push Nadella out into early retirement and bring in some fresh ideas and sparkle. ( Apple could probably do with a bit of the same)....

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: Not expecting much from W9 then

      "For a company the size of MS to lay of 18000 people is by no means a simple choice. Obviously something is going on behind the scenes"

      They made a shitty purchase that provided them virtually nothing and brought along with it tens of thousands of workers they absolutely do not need. Nokia was overstaffed to start with and the replication of function between the two companies was enormous.

      There's no need to look for "secret behind the scenes" anything. Microsoft is trimming the very obvious fat and trying to keep margins up in the face of lackluster Windows sales that stubbornly refuse to grow year over year nearly as much as Microsoft's publicly activist shareholders would like.

      If you want innovation at Microsoft turn to Microsoft research. They innovate quite a bit.

      If you want Microsoft to have a hope in hell of bringing that innovation to market, pray for Nadella's retention. The alternative is an activist investor lackey that will strip the company's assets in short order and sell the carcass off piecemeal.

      You'd better hope Nadella is in it for the long haul because the alternative is far worse. If you really want Nadella to start bringing some change to the company then start dreaming up ways to get him the political capital he needs to drive that change.

      Currently, the CEO is embroiled in so much bloodthirsty board-level and executive level politics that he simply doesn't have the political capital to clean house. He can only make changes incrementally, and he doesn't have visibility beyond the top few layers so he can't go digging too deep into the trenches and muddle directly.

      The ranks have closed against him from the bottom up as middle management and executives fear for their jobs...but more than that, they fear the finger of blame will be pointed at them publicly, and this will affect their career options.

      The board is fighting him every step of the way on every decision because they are themselves deeply divided on how things should be done. What's more, Nadella is a nerd. He has his own ideas about what needs doing and they aren't the same as any of the other major power players.

      If Nadella had the political capital to really drive change to match his vision, I honestly think that the end result would be an amazing Microsoft, one we'd all be proud to use products and services from. But the reality of it is that the illness inside Microsoft is advanced he needs to fight cancer before he can start adding cybernetic augmentations.

  3. Malagabay
    Coffee/keyboard

    Embrace – Extend – Extinguish

    Having blown another load… this time on Minecraft… the HR spreadsheet has been updated with the $2.5bn purchase price [plus a couple of bucks for the clean-up tissues]… and the computer says: PINK SLIPS.

    The strange world of Redmond seems to be retreating into fantasyland.

    They acquire NOKIA and then pay for the company again by issuing pink slips to NOK-HERE anymore employees…

    No doubt we can look forward to some PINK LEGO-BRICKS this time next year as the latest saviour becomes the latest embarrassment and is deemed NOT-MINE-CRUFF…

    Then there is the latest preview of BSOD Version 9 which simply confirms they are extinguishing the Windows desktop by making it indistinguishable from freeware…

    So we can look forward to:

    SKYPE being re-branded SCARPERED

    BING being re-branded GOING-GOING-GONG

    WIN-PHONE being re-branded PHONED-HOME-AND-WENT HOME

    WIN-RT being re-branded THROWN-UNDER-AR-TIC-ULATED-LORRY

    And millions more being “invested” in the share buyback scheme to give the illusion that fantasyland is fantastic as the CLOUD starts to RAIN-ON-THE-RICHMOND-PARADE…

    Will FISHER-PRICE be the next acquisition?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Embrace – Extend – Extinguish

      BING should be rebranded BING-GONE :-)

    2. deadlockvictim Silver badge

      All-Caps are annoying

      Hi Malagabay,

      I have a favour to ask of you: Would you please cut down on the use of all-caps please?

      Apart from the fact that it is very annoying to read, it also has the unpleasant effect of giving one the impression that you are mentally unbalanced.

      Kind regards

    3. returnmyjedi

      Re: Embrace – Extend – Extinguish

      Wordplay worthy of Wilde (Kim not Oscar).

    4. cambsukguy

      Re: Embrace – Extend – Extinguish

      Don't give up your day job.

    5. Hans 1 Silver badge

      Re: Embrace – Extend – Extinguish

      > Then there is the latest preview of BSOD Version 9

      EPIC

  4. Bob Vistakin
    Facepalm

    They just bought minecraft

    It's Nokia 2.0 - buy then sack. Except this time its users making an exit.

    1. cambsukguy

      Re: They just bought minecraft

      I think Mojang have maybe 50 people, not really comparable to the 1000s they got via the Nokia acquisition.

      Most of the lay-offs (and I knew a lot of the actual people) were those that worked on the no-longer-required OSs (you know Maemo/Meego, etc.). Developing OSs can use up a lot of people.

      Lots went over to Accenture and various Finnish outfits (Angry Birds, F-Secure, Tata) have more choice in engineers, some went home (lots went home). And new startup companies appeared all over the place. The Finns are nothing if not industrious.

      18000 seems like a lot (15% of the entire staff perhaps) but perhaps 12000 of those were never MS employees in the sense that they had actually worked for MS for any length of time.

      It is probably best viewed as a 5% cull to trim waste and pare back some excess from developing an OS that is quite different from its predecessor and porting the kernel to work on PCs as well as phones.

  5. ratfox Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    I don't get it

    There is a company that is about the same size as Microsoft with only half the income. That company is Google, and it is hiring like crazy.

    So why is Microsoft firing so many people, when it makes way more money?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @ratfox

      "So why is Microsoft firing so many people, when it makes way more money?"

      Keep in mind that revenue isn't necessarily profit. So while they may be dealing with a lot more money it doesn't mean they get to keep all of it. And that can be an important factor into decisions like these.

      1. ratfox Silver badge

        Re: @ratfox

        When I said income, I meant profit. Microsoft has a market cap slightly below Google, and a price to earnings ratio about half.

    2. LDS Silver badge

      Re: I don't get it

      You need a lot of people to look into so many peepholes...

      Jokes aside, MS is a much older company than Google and a much larger product line - products that must be sold themselves, not subsidized by large revenues from gathering and reselling user data and showing you ads.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I don't get it

        reselling user data

        Oh I thought they kept it for themselves (since it's more valuable to them). Who are they re-selling data to?

        (apart from their government, which they are legally obliged to, and should do it at cost price)

        1. LDS Silver badge

          Re: I don't get it

          Do you really believe data-gathering companies keep them for themselves? There are a lot of business out there interested in those data for many different analysis - how do you believe Google makes money, only selling ads?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I don't get it

            Why would google sell data when it's more of an advantage to use it themselves?

            I'll dumb it down: It's like Coca-colla selling their recipe. I'm sure there are plenty of companies who'd pay good money for it - but then what would Coke's USP be? They'd have no advantage.

    3. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: I don't get it

      Microsoft keeps trying to play catch up instead of innovating.

      Why try to get into the tablet market with Surface when tablets are pouring out of China as commodity tat?

      Why try to make a dent in the mobile phone market when Apple and Google/Android are so entrenched?

      Bing? Good grief!

      Instead, maybe M$ needs to build a non-Fisher Price looking OS. An office suite that is slimmer and snappier instead of bloated with "features" that seem custom crafted for script kiddies. A secure Skype like application that isn't back-doored to the NSA/GCHQ for a reasonable monthly fee.

      I know that M$'s server software has more features than Apple's, but for SOHO installations, the ease of use of Apple Server is hard to beat. Why doesn't M$ put more development into usability? Are they scared that if it's too easy, people won't take it seriously?

  6. Malagabay
    Facepalm

    So why is Microsoft firing so many people?

    Remember GIGO....

    The old-guard hired lots of yes-men...

    That's called the PEOPLE-LIKE-US recruitment model

    And they produced TOYS-ARE-US software...

    So [obviously] its all the fault of the "acquired" employees who weren't hired via the PEOPLE-LIKE-US process... plus there are always the "mistakes" who got through the PEOPLE-LIKE-US process... and don't forget that retired products means "retired" personnel.

    REMEMBER: Your career is safe until it isn't.

    WARNING: Staff number may increase or decrease to reflect stock market valuation.

    1. AceRimmer

      MalagaBay

      Hi Eadon

      *waves*

    2. Lamont Cranston
      Stop

      Re: So why is Microsoft firing so many people?

      No, REALLY, writing your posts in OCCASSIONAL caps makes you look like a MENTAL.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: So why is Microsoft firing so many people?

        In a similar way to what you just did?

    3. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Re: So why is Microsoft firing so many people?

      Dear MalagaBay:

      UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED, ESPECIALLY to COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARDS

  7. billat29

    Not firing enough people

    Microsoft is a legacy IT company.

    It's at the point where it needs a cold, hard look at where it will actually make money in the future and not where it has made money in the past. Nothing should be sacred,

    It then needs to sell or dump the other businesses and lay off all those middle and senior managers, head office bureaucrats,strategists, marketing coordinators, bean counters and HR reps that they can get along quite nicely without.

    The alternative? It will bumble along for a while and then surprise us all by posting big (and I mean big) losses one day.

    1. Malagabay

      Re: Not firing enough people

      I doubt they will cull their hairdressers, tired TV producers, insurance salesmen, personnel officers, security guards, management consultants and telephone sanitizers… that’s mainly because Redmond is where the B-Ark landed.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not firing enough people

      Microsoft is a legacy IT company.

      Definitely!

      Q: Why are you still on Windows?

      A: Sigh.. to support legacy software.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not firing enough people

      "Microsoft is a legacy IT company."

      Nah - they already ditched Xenix...

      Not to mention that they are about to overtake Amazon in cloud!

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @billat29

    "Microsoft is a legacy IT company."

    Well, that maybe true but I think the biggest problem with Microsoft is that they don't act like one. Instead of actually trying to be competitive they still seem to believe that people (their customer base) will "simply" buy the next Windows "because".. Because what; that is everyone's guess.

    My take on that would be: "...because everyone always does.". But welcome to the modern times where some people can actually use other options than Windows as a full substitute for their day to day activities.

    "Auch"

    1. LDS Silver badge

      Re: @billat29

      Actually the problem is not Windows market share (on PCs) - the problem is Windows upgrades. On PCs people are not switching from Windows to other OS - they just keep on using older version of Windows. Same is often true for Office and other software.

      We may say that actual sofware is "good enough" - and often even "too good", for the average user who doesn't feel any reason to upgrade (especially if you support your software for 13 years...)

      Sure, some revenues has been eroded by different devices, but it happened mostly in the customer space, not in the business one where tablets and smartphones can't really do what a PC can (they are used, sure, but *together* a PC).

      The real issue is that software rarely offers compelling reason to upgrade today. And that's something that is not impacting Microsoft alone, but many other software companies (i.e. Adobe).

      Why are they swtiching to a subscription model? Exactly to avoid the lack of revenue streams because of far longer upgrade cycles.

      Actually, the reason to upgrade an OS is more the need to support newer hardware/standards/protocols unsupported or partiallly supported by the older OS, than new compelling user features in the newer OS. And still, you can run most of your old applications on the new OS.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: @billat29

        the problem is Windows upgrades.

        Or more precisely the fact that you can't simply upgrade Windows as upgrades are understood in the rest of the professional computer world. A new version of Windows is always a reformat-and-start-again forklift upgrade.

        If I could buy W7 at a reasonable price, say $100-$150, and install it on my XP system without losing anything, and without having to find and re-install all those convenient programs that I've accumulated over the past 6 years, I would seriously consider it.

        As it is, my XP system works just fine, and when it finally dies or I find something that it just can't do I'll buy a whole new box. But not until then.

        1. Fihart

          Re: @billat29

          "If I could buy W7 at a reasonable price, say $100-$150, and install it on my XP system without losing anything, and without having to find and re-install all those convenient programs that I've accumulated over the past 6 years, I would seriously consider it."

          One problem with this idea as applied to Windows is that your existing install is already so corrupted or stuffed with cruft that a reformat and reinstall is the best upgrade you can make (even if you only reinstall the existing version of Windows).

          1. Cipher

            Re: @billat29

            @fihart

            Assumes facts not in evidence. billat29 may clean cruft as a part of a daily routine, his file corruption may approach zero for all we know...

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @billat29

            Upgrade due to winrot?

            But we shouldn't have to do that, why can't the system just stay ok over the years?

        2. Paul Crawford Silver badge

          Re: @Phil O'Sophical

          What you can often do is convert your running XP box in to a VM, and then run that fairly painlessly under another more modern OS.

          There are catches, of course, like if you have special hardware that needs an old driver, or use it for demanding games, etc, but you can get the best of both worlds:

          1) All old software still working as you had it.

          2) Support for new hardware and better basic security (assuming you stop email/web in the VM).

          The choice of new OS is yours, could be Win7/8 or Linux, depends on what suits you best. At least Linux is free-as-in-speech to try! Whatever you do, get a new HDD to make a copy to play with, and may sure you have at least 2GB of RAM, ideally 4+, before you even consider VMs.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @Phil O'Sophical

            What you can often do is convert your running XP box in to a VM

            What's the point in that? buying a new machine + OS just to run the old one? Why not just keep the old one and save money?

            1. LDS Silver badge

              Re: @Phil O'Sophical

              Maybe because the old one is now unsupported and thereby dangerous to run unless your protect it properly - and really properly?

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: @Phil O'Sophical

                Maybe because the old one is now unsupported and thereby dangerous to run unless your protect it properly - and really properly?

                Putting it in a VM isn't protecting it properly. It's still unsupported even if the host OS is.

                Anyone can move away from XP if they both wanted to and tried to. "lagacy support" is something Microsoft has made up to make you think you're locked-in to them. You're not.

          2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: @Phil O'Sophical

            What you can often do is convert your running XP box in to a VM, and then run that fairly painlessly under another more modern OS.

            I could, that's what I do in work, running XP and Linux VM guests under Solaris (and Linux and Solaris VMs under W7 on a laptop) but a home system needs to be painless for general work. My wife is comfortable with Linux and Solaris, but she still doesn't want to mess about with booting VMs and coping with their quirks if she doesn't have to. Neither do I, to be honest.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @billat29

          "Or more precisely the fact that you can't simply upgrade Windows as upgrades are understood in the rest of the professional computer world. A new version of Windows is always a reformat-and-start-again forklift upgrade."

          Yes you can 'simply upgrade' - online based Windows upgrades have been around for a long time now. For instance http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows-8/upgrade-from-windows-7-tutorial

          And a next version Windows upgrade has never required a reformat - even as far back as Windows

          NT!

          Unlike say CENTOS - which does always require a reformat for major version updates.

        4. LDS Silver badge

          Re: @billat29

          You can do an in-place upgrade of Windows - from a supported version that may usually be only the previous one. But often a clean reinstall may be better (especially if the machine was not kept "clean" enough"), and some improvements may not be available without reformatting the disk (i.e. newer file system structures).

          Some versions in the past had introduced changes important enough (i.e. the new directory structure) that could create havoc migrating settings for applications that don't use the proper APIs to obtain special folder paths, but hardcode them in some way, for example.

          Also, because many applications often don't clean up their mess when uninstalled (especially those not using Windows Installer), sometimes a full reinstall is a good opportunity to clean up all those "convenient" program that after all weren't that much...

    2. billat29

      Re: @billat29

      Because, historically, Microsoft has had a monopoly on the desktop and for office. We take what we are given because the monopoly supplier says so and we are duly grateful.

      Monopoly is bad not just for us, the customer, but for the supplier itself. It will be stacked full of management who only know how to work in that environment and the thought of actually listening to what the customer wants is alien to them. (I worked in another monopoly once).

      Their business model is broke. We're not buying new hardware and bundled licence every three years and we don't find enough difference in their newest shiney to go through the cost and pain of paying for upgrade.

      Subscription is part of the solution. Perhaps part of the unthinkable is to put Windows desktop into maintenance mode. It will be supported, if you pay a subscription, and it will evolve with new functionality that has value to corporate customers but no new gui or functionality that is just there because they want it to be "new". Oh and lay off many windows developers that are building stuff that noone wants.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: @billat29

        "Their business model is broke"

        Clearly Microsoft's business model is nowhere near running out of money.

        Or perhaps you are poorly educated and meant 'broken'?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: @billat29

      Possibly because MSFT do not give a damn about the customer. As it has been said above, their sales are mostly OEM supply so who cares? Let Dell/HP/Lenovo worry about that and just ship Windows out of the door. If MSFT need to worry at all about their product they put on rose-tinted specs and go and read http://www.zdnet.com ... home of the MSFT fanclub, where "Linux isn't an operating system cos the US Military use Windows so Windows is the only OS".

      1. LDS Silver badge

        Re: @billat29

        Are you sure their sales are mostly OEM? Enterprise licensing brings a lot of revenues to MS - large companies (and even many smaller ones) do buy PCs without an OEM license attached to it.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Entertainment and devices

    Windows phone and xbox hardware. Microsoft to focus on software in the future.

  10. dz-015

    "The coffee machines at Microsoft will be taking a hammering from nervous workers"

    Really? Since nervousness increases adrenalin production, and since caffeine also increases adrenalin production, wouldn't nervous workers want to reduce the unpleasant effects of too much adrenalin by drinking _less_ coffee rather than more?

  11. Robert Grant

    Step 1: buy stake in Facebook, all of Skype and Nokia Devices at vast valuations

    Step 2: fire lots of people because there's no money left.

    Step 3: ???

    Step 4: profit.

  12. Mikel

    Mojang is not cheap

    Gotta cut back somewhere. No, just kidding. This is the old Stack & Sack routine with a new name.

  13. Inachu

    MICROSOFT- We are unable to find talented people to work for us because we fired all of them!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019