Re: Lowballing and bet hedging

["Erick Andrews" <eandrews@star.net>]

On Sun, 5 Apr 1998 01:12:22 -0500 (EST), John Bryan wrote:

>Doesn't it strike you as a little odd, a little
>curious, a little inconsistent with the pattern of
>past behavior and known temperament, for MS to be 
>low balling the ballyhoo of W98???
>
>I mean they spent as much money on the W95 marketing
>campaign as Apple did for NeXT Software, (ca. $400m).
>
>Doesn't it seem odd that since the main purpose of
>w98 is to tie IE with windows (so that they by default

<snip>

>Think about it, if they built up such a media storm
>as in times past, as it would seem they would be even
>more inclined to do now given what is at stake and
>the energy and resources they have put into this
>Internet thing, and then the DOJ nixed it, that they
>would then suffer more of a backlash from their hype?
>
>If they spent millions over months to hype it up,
>and then were made to not deliver it, it would be seen
>as that much more of a blow to their strength.  Whereas
>if they lowball it, this risk is minimized.  The gains
>may not be as gross or immediate, but their potential
>damage is decreased as well.
>
>Just a passing thought....
>
>-J

I think you make a good point and that this is a good
theory.

Further, I am not aware of there ever being a "recall" in
the software industry, like there has been in others, notably 
the automakers, but there could always be a first time.

Such thorns could cost millions.

Erick