[Am-info] Reuters: Microsoft: Asia Windows Rival Would Raise Concerns

[Gene Gaines]

On Gates philanthropy.

Stop a moment and imagine how the Bill Gates you know
would go about a philanthropic project.

I am not a philanthropy expert, and do not have broad
knowledge of the subject.  But, I have observed several
of his philanthropy project in action.

1. Gift / offer of huge gifts wo Cambridge University.
   Does anyone remember what he wanted in return, at
   least the technology that he was urging the school
   to develop, because they had special capabilities
   from their cryptographic and signal analysis days.

2. Gift / offer to "computerize" much of the collection
   of the Library of Congress.  Does anyone remember
   what he wanted in return?

3. I won't describe other worthy causes by name, but
   what had described to me by the participants was
   more like slash-and-burn than philanthropy.
   Seems the first thing his top people do is hiring
   the "best" or key people working on the project,
   then use them to begin to lead the project in
   directions not thought of before.  Stealing key
   people from a project you are funding has, of
   course, a catastrophic impact on the work being
   done.

But, these are just several anecdotal observations by
one person.  What I have seen also is the junior and
mid-level people pleased as heck with the lovely new
computer equipment and better budgets, but then I
see them have no sense of where the project is going
or strategically what is being accomplished.  i have
seen that just not be talked about anymore.  The
fire in the belly of the project seems to die, and
the project then settles into meandering.  And the
Gates people seem to drift away to find and kick-
start another one.

What I saw was more destructive than constructive.

I do not say all Melinda / Bill Gates foundation
activities are like that, just what I have seen.

Gene
gene.gaines@gainesgroup.com

On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, 6:08:43 PM, Erick wrote:

> On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:57:49 -0700, T. Guilbert wrote:

>>In a message dated 2003 September 08 (Monday), timestamp 10:23 PM, 
>>   on the topic Re: [Am-info] Reuters: Microsoft: Asia Windows Rival
>>Would Raise Concerns,
>>   "Erick Andrews" <eandrews@star.net> wrote:
>>
>>"|I recall some "bumper sticker" or pronouncement from the early
>>"|1970s: "He who has all the toys when he dies, wins", or some such. 
>>"|That's Gates. It's a game for him.  He has enough money and does
>>"|less patriotically or societally useful with it than all his
>>"|monopolistic predecessors.
>>
>>Give BG his due.  Compared to Carnegie and Rockefeller and Ford, he
>>started philanthropy at an early age, and his pace has been
>>accelerating.  One can despise his business practices and yet admire
>>his social conscience in all areas where Microsoft is not a player or
>>potential player. 

> Well, to be fair, I have never seen a side-by-side comparison of
> Gates v. other "good deed doers" for public investments in terms
> of their disposable income percentages.  (Or maybe "un" disposable,
> if yesteryear's tax laws could be fairly compared/interpreted).

> Maybe I can be proven wrong, but I somehow doubt that Gates' 
> percentage of personal Gigabucks in such noteworthy investments 
> is as philanthropically high compared to others.  Others?  I'll try 
> to make a reasonable guess:  others of the top 10% of wealthy 
> individuals, then and now.



--