1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Microsoft to cut up to 5,000 jobs

Discussion in 'News' started by wagnerk, Jan 22, 2009.

  1. wagnerk
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    wagnerk aka kitkatninja Moderator


    Microsoft to cut up to 5,000 jobs

    Microsoft has said it will cut up to 5,000 jobs over the next 18 months, including 1,400 immediately.

    The firm also reported a net profit of $4.17bn (£3bn) for the three months to 31 December, down 11% on last year and less than analysts' expectations.

    Microsoft added it was "no longer able" to give a profit and revenue outlook for the fiscal year amid current volatile market conditions.

    Shares in Microsoft fell 7.9%, dragging Wall Street lower.

    ...Microsoft said the announced job cuts would take place in research and development, marketing, sales, finance, legal, human resources and information technology...

    Read the whole article here.

    This is following rumours from early January, see the late news post here. Not quite the 15,000, but 5000 is bad enough...

    Compliement to GiddyG for the find :)

    Certifications: CITP, PGDip, BSc, HNC, LCGI, PTLLS, MCT, MCITP, MCTS, MCSE, MCSA:M, MCSA, MCDST, MCP, MTA, MCAS, MOS (Master), A+, N+, S+, ACA, VCA, etc... & 2nd Degree Black Belt
    WIP: MSc in Tech Management


    1. BosonMichael
      Ya think? A company like Microsoft? Considering it's an information technology company, is the fact that they're cutting IT jobs REALLY surprising? :rolleyes:

      Brilliance in journalism FTW.
    2. GiddyG
      I think the more telling comment to be fair was the

      'Microsoft added it was "no longer able" to give a profit and revenue outlook for the fiscal year amid current volatile market conditions.'

      To me that sounds like the 5,000 really is just the tip of the iceberg.

      I wonder how that will impact on the likes of Windows 7 and any other releases coming along? Will they batten down the hatches and wait for things to pick up, or roll on regardless? If people aren't buying, any OS release could quite literally dive.
    3. zebulebu
      I think the most telling sentence was this one:

      "The firm also reported a net profit of $4.17bn (£3bn) for the three months to 31 December"

      Absolute f***ing disgrace that companies are allowed to get away with this in a recession. The endgame of rampant, unchecked capitalism is 0.001% of the world living in gated, high-security castles with the other 99.999% scrambling around for scraps.

      Of course, since only about fifty people actually work for Microsoft any more you can bet your arse that the poor sods fired will be the permatemps.
    4. BosonJosh
      What?!? Are you saying that Microsoft should be forced to give their profits to "needy" companies? That every company that does well while others don't do so well should be punished?

      Microsoft employees approximately 70,000 people worldwide (quite a bit more than 50 people). This 5,000 layoffs don't even amount to 10% of their workforce.

      Other than claiming that Microsoft should be forced to operate in a Socialist society, I'm not sure what the point of your post was.
    5. BosonMichael
      Yeah, it's absolutely horrible that they're able to make money. Perhaps they should just tell people to not buy their products? :rolleyes:
    6. Sparky
      I don't think there will be much of an impact on Windows 7 as Vista was a flop (lets face facts here!) then they will be keen to push the new OS, especially with the hype over the beta.
    7. zebulebu
      You two (Mike and Josh) are missing the point. They made $4billion in profit, yet are laying off staff at a time when the employment picture couldn't be much worse. Lets face it, these are not going to be the best and brightest - they'll be mailroom clerks, assembly line workers, support guys and other poor saps who are going to have difficulty finding a job when the merry go round stops.

      I'm not saying that company should be prevented from redundancies when there's no option - but lets face it - a company that has made $4.1 BILLION profit the previous year hardly qualifies as a 'struggling' company, does it? There should be laws against companies making obscene profits then laying off staff because they idiotically made even HIGHER forecasts to their shareholders. Its s*** like this that makes the free market system such a failure in so many people's eyes.
    8. BosonMichael
      I'm not missing the point at all... I just don't agree that there's a problem. If I ran Microsoft, I'd reduce staff too, particularly when sales of new computers are likely to slow down during tough economic times. They might not be struggling now... but they very well could be struggling if they aren't responsible with their expenses. Employees are one of those expenses.

      It's not Microsoft's responsibility to keep people employed. Microsoft is a publicly traded company... so my first responsibility is to those shareholders. If it's in the shareholders' best interests to hire more staff to "make more widgets", then that's what should be done. But if it's in the shareholders' best interests to "trim the fat", then that's what should be done. They shouldn't be forced or coerced to keep the bottom 5% of employees just because the company makes $X, some arbitary number that YOU feel is too high.
    9. Alex Wright
      Alex Wright
      I think Zeb has made a perfectly valid point, and is the sarcasm really necessary? :rolleyes:

      It's outrageous that any company makes £3bn worth of profit and lays off members of its workforce. ESPECIALLY with the current economic climate. Then again, we are talking about M$ here; nothing - and I do mean nothing - surprises me where they're concerned.
    10. BosonJosh
      I disagree that Zeb has made a "perfectly valid point". Microsoft has no obligation to anyone other than it's shareholders. I've been as critical of Microsoft as anyone, but they are responsible for maximizing the value they provide to shareholders. My personal opinion on how to do that may differ from Microsoft's, but if they see a downturn coming or see some fat that should be trimmed, they are obligated to do so. It is not the responsibility of any company in America to keep people employed. Furthermore, laying off 5000 people now may prevent them from having to lay off twice that amount in the future. Remember, this is less than 10% of their workforce. We can agree that it sucks that 5000 people lost their jobs, but you lost me when you say that Microsoft should have to keep these people employed.
    11. BosonMichael
      Yes, it is, because it sounds like that's what he's suggesting. It's ridiculous to say that a company shouldn't make money - and save money - wherever possible. If Microsoft were making an amount of money arbitrarily set in Zeb's own mind, then Zeb wouldn't have a problem with it. So how should they go about not making that money in order to satisfy his conditions?

      Again, Microsoft isn't in business to keep people employed; they are in business to make money. Period.

      I don't tell you how to write posts; please provide me the same respect, okay?
    12. GiddyG
      I know what you mean, but if PCs aren't selling then they might just decide to hold off, do a bit of extra work on Windows 7 to put the finishing touches to it.

      Let's face it, they're allowing XP to 'live' a while longer, and they can rightly claim that, given the downturn, now is not the time to hit business and home consumers (or OEMs) with another OS.

      Come the 'green shoots', they can unwrap a new even better Windows 7 and we'll bask in its glow.

      Given my track record for getting things wrong, expect the release date to move forward... :blink:D

    Share This Page