Picture this. Steve Ballmer decides that he should change his name to Steve Er. With all of this year's hesitations and goofs he should drop the Ballm and stick with the ... er ... and maybe ad (funny pun and not a mistake) 'huh' to it. Cuz it makes just about as much sense as this memo.

Please don't forget to include in your image that Steve decides not to invest in his future, delays going into work, and rejects his present salary and any financial incentives that would go his way if Microsoft continues to be successful.

It may be difficult for us to picture Stevie making those cuts but heck - slash away at the advertising budget and where are the screams?

I just don't get it. It seems counter-intuitive and down right stupid.

Are there historical accounts which show any company being able to increase sales when their budget for advertising is cut? Isn't this a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Mr Ballmer did not spell out how the cost reductions would be achieved. However, he did suggest that Microsoft could save "hundreds of millions of dollars" by managing its advertising and marketing more effectively.

In the year to June 2003, the company's total operating expenses were $18.9bn. Revenues were $32.2bn.

Over the past year, it feels like I've been watching a sinking ship. Where are all the smart people? Did they leave Microsoft?

Isn't there anyone capable of arguing against these cuts? Do you really need to cut advertising?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but relative to many other successful companies, Microsoft's percentage of advertising expenses is very small.

Keep reading about Steve Ballmer's decisions and his wonderful memo.

__________________
Layne P. Heiny / Administrator for Tux Reports Network

Please do not send private messages requesting technical support. Place your request in the proper forum and hopefully someone can help you.

Computer Sites
Tablet PC Blogs | Technology Questions | Tablet PC Post | Windows Vista | What Is New

Prelaunch
Insane Politics