Re: Lowballing and bet hedging

[Mitch Stone <mstone@vc.net>]

In reply to Paul Rickard's message sent 4/6/98 3:11 AM:

>        I think the lowball was planned to some extent before the DOJ
>problem
>came up. It just made it more necessary to underpromote the product.

Yes, it seems that even Microsoft is allergic to throwing money down a 
rat hole. If the informal polls are any guide, public interest in Win98 
is very low.

But lest we forget: unless the DOJ and the courts intercede, the OEMs 
will be compelled to bundle Win98 with all of the new clones rolling off 
the assembly lines, from day of release to whenever Microsoft pulls the 
next string. So, as always, Microsoft will garner instant market share 
for a product with essentially no consumer demand. Nice deal.

This may be a hint of things to come: in the future, Microsoft will be 
able to reduce advertising budgets in their core businesses to virtually 
nil, relying on the dependably locked-in OEMs to push the products. In 
turn, Microsoft can shift their advertising efforts to new strategic 
markets. How does a $400 million campaign pushing WebTV/WinCE sound? 
Nearly inevitable...

   Mitch Stone
   Editor, Boycott Microsoft
   http://www.vcnet.com/bms 
 +---
   The most dementing of all modern sins is the inability
   to distinguish excellence from success" --- David Hare