Feeds

MS breakup to cost $147bn, $507 a head, say crazies

Full moon again already? Grief...

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

"Anyone owning shares of Microsoft has become all-too-well aware of what happens when the risk associated with an investment suddenly increases. Until this year, Microsoft was one of the best stocks to own..." All very true of course, but it is hard to feel sorry for punters - apparently including the authors of a report entitled The real economic costs of the Microsoft decision - who have had years of warning that there could be a downside.

The report, published by the Lewisville, Texas-based Institute for Policy Innovation's Center for Technology Freedom, has appointed itself to sort out the challenges posed by technology and makes some claims about the cost of the Microsoft case to the US taxpayer that will probably make even Microsoft chuckle.

The authors, Gary and Aldona Robbins - formerly economists at the US treasury department - warn that the US GDP would be lower by $147.2 billion, and punishing Microsoft would cost every man, woman and child in the US $507. They also make several other startling claims, such as the loss of 44,900 jobs, $59.6 billion less in personal income, and so on. They make several fundamental mistakes in their partisan summary of the legal issues - the remedies were not proposed or recommended, for example - they were ordered by a federal judge.

The authors assumed that $60 billion of Microsoft's $210 billion fall in market capitalisation between January and June resulted from the effects of the antitrust case on the share price, and then plug this value into their "general equilibrium, neoclassical model" to see how the economy might be affected. It must be some model if it can produce forecasts to four significant digits. It is also rather a big leap to assume that a reduction in market capitalisation could have such effects on the economy, since if all such market cap reductions were added together, the result would be penury all round, which is not exactly what is happening in the US.

There's no information as to whether Microsoft is a contributor to the IPI, which says it accepts contributions from individuals, businesses and non-profit organisations - but not from government agencies. ®

Related Story

MS breakup could cost world $310bn - crazed new study

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Microsoft on the Threshold of a new name for Windows next week
Rebranded OS reportedly set to be flung open by Redmond
'In... 15 feet... you will be HIT BY A TRAIN' Google patents the SPLAT-NAV
Alert system tips oblivious phone junkies to oncoming traffic
Apple: SO sorry for the iOS 8.0.1 UPDATE BUNGLE HORROR
Apple kills 'upgrade'. Hey, Microsoft. You sure you want to be like these guys?
SMASH the Bash bug! Apple and Red Hat scramble for patch batches
'Applying multiple security updates is extremely difficult'
ARM gives Internet of Things a piece of its mind – the Cortex-M7
32-bit core packs some DSP for VIP IoT CPU LOL
Lotus Notes inventor Ozzie invents app to talk to people on your phone
Imagine that. Startup floats with voice collab app for Win iPhone
'Google is NOT the gatekeeper to the web, as some claim'
Plus: 'Pretty sure iOS 8.0.2 will just turn the iPhone into a fax machine'
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Intelligent flash storage arrays
Tegile Intelligent Storage Arrays with IntelliFlash helps IT boost storage utilization and effciency while delivering unmatched storage savings and performance.
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.