Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Microsoft's online sinkhole: $8.5 billion lost in 9 years

By | July 21, 2011, 2:37pm PDT

Summary: Few companies have the resources to lose $8.5 billion over nine years chasing an online dream.

Microsoft completed another fiscal year and to no one’s surprise the company threw a few more billion dollars down the sinkhole known as the Online Services Division.

The fiscal 2011 loss: $2.56 billion, a bit worse than the $2.33 billion dropped in 2010. For the second year in a row, Microsoft’s online operating losses were larger than the annual revenue brought in via Bing and the gang. Microsoft’s online unit brought in $2.53 billion in revenue for fiscal 2011 and $2.2 billion in fiscal 2010. Fortunately for Microsoft, the company has other cash cows to bring home the profits (statement, Techmeme).

Microsoft’s mission should be to actually mention operating profits in one of its quarterly Bing slides.

As noted when we tallied up Microsoft’s lost online years before, the software giant is persistent, but just can’t get this online thing right. Now Microsoft is struggling with search monetization. But it has struggled every year.

Here’s a tour on the way to losing $8.56 billion over nine years:

Fiscal 2011 and 2010 was about Google envy and investment in Azure, which may actually save the division via cloud services—someday.

Fiscal 2009 had an online operating loss of $1.65 billion on revenue of $2.12 billion.

In fiscal 2008, Microsoft lost $578 million on revenue of $2.2 billion.

In fiscal 2007, Microsoft’s online unit lost $732 million on revenue of $2.43 billion.

In fiscal 2006, Microsoft’s online unit reported a $5 million profit on revenue of $2.3 billion. (Note that profit figure is in the fiscal 2008 report. The fiscal 2007 report has 2006 at an operating profit of $74 million.)

In fiscal 2005, Microsoft’s online unit reported a profit of $402 million on revenue of $2.34 billion. The key point from the 10K, which may sound a bit familiar:

In fiscal year 2005, we launched a new version of our MSN Search engine, which is based on our own technology. This change will help provide the ability to innovate more quickly and the opportunity to develop a long-term competitive advantage in search. In addition to the launch of MSN Search, we introduced many new products and product enhancements in fiscal year 2005, including a new version of the MSN home page which provides a richer user experience, quicker load times, higher levels of end user customization, and fewer advertisements and links. MSN launched the clarity in advertising program in fiscal year 2005, which removed paid advertising from inclusion in search results and resulted in a reduced number of advertisements that are returned with search results.

In fiscal 2004, Microsoft’s online division—then classified as MSN—reported a profit of $121 million on revenue of $2.21 billion.

In fiscal 2003, Microsoft’s online unit (MSN) reported an operating loss of $567 million on revenue of $1.95 billion.

In fiscal 2002, Microsoft’s online unit (MSN) reported an operating loss of $909 million on revenue of $1.57 billion.

For previous years, Microsoft lumped its online assets into a consumer software, services and devices division so the results aren’t really comparable. Also note that some of the profit and loss figures in the SEC filings shifted from year to year, but not enough to move the needle too much.

The bottom line for Microsoft’s online effort is that it is very rarely ever in the green. The online unit is more like a bottomless money pit.

See also:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

100
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Microsoft's online sinkhole: $8.5 billion lost in 9 years
jaffa55 5th Nov
The various companies and governments sue Microsoft over this set of tactics, resulting in billions of dollars in rulings against the company. Microsoft claims that the original strategy is not anti competitive, but rather an exercise of its discretion to implement features it believes customers want. Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Paradise Valley Homes
Where is the thumbs down button for this article? Its not about losing $8.5billion, its about research & development for the online division, new ways of presenting data. You only see it in a monetary figure, but think of what that $8.5 billion got them. Instead of reporting a loss what you should have done was had ways to help them by putting links to their online services so people can click on them and see what they have to offer. If everyone went to a Microsoft site they'd be in the green then you can write an article about that.
0 Votes
+ -
huh?
Linux Geek 21st Jul
@LoverockDavidson
All other divisions will soon follow suit in the 'sea of red'. FOSS won!
@Linux Geek
what is FOSS, is it something that we use to floss our teeth? grin
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
@Linux Geek Nobody is gonna use that crap.
@Linux Geek I'm not sure there's any obvious sign of a change in the mix of open source and proprietary OSed computing devices we see out there. There've always been some systems on a somewhat open model (Server computers and farms, Android and Java phones) and some not (desktop computers, which almost exclusively run OSX and Windows, and iOS devices.)

Not sure there's any sign of any change in the mix.
@Linux Geek
So you think all developers should work for free? Aren't you quite the advocate!!
what distro do you use? To me LinuxMint is the best distro. I heard they're going away from Ubuntu and build it on Debian. Linux is a great os.
@Pug466 Linux is great OS for Geeks !!! For the rest of us who live in real world we use windows or osx !!!
If everyone went to a Microsoft site they'd be in the green then you can write an article about that. online degree
Degrees
bachelor's degree
Instead of reporting a loss what you should have done was had ways to help them by putting links to their online services so people can click on them and see what they have to offer. master degree
doctoral degree
0 Votes
+ -
Translation
John L. Ries 21st Jul
@LoverockDavidson
If only all of those anti-capitalist ingrates would dump Google in favor of Bing then Bing would be profitable.
But, as long as those habits are not part of the nature that one is born with, then those habits can be overcome. Google is something that people are very familiar with, and it's going to take time to displace them, but, it can be done.

Atari and Sony gaming systems were deemed insurmountable at one time, but the people at MS kept up the good fight while losing large amount of money, but, XBox is now the number one game system in the world. Persistence and a good product can overcome the odds.
@LoverockDavidson

"If everyone went to a Microsoft site they'd be in the green then you can write an article about that."

If everyone gave me a dollar, I'd be rich. They haven't, and I'm not.
0 Votes
+ -
@msalzberg

+1
@LoverockDavidson

I don't think that Microsoft accounts for this as R&D. This is operating revenue - operating expenses.
@LoverockDavidson

I think Larry may not be familiar with a software development company, too much time spent with that advertising company or the marketing and packaging one. Research costs money.
@LoverockDavidson I agree with you for the most part.

But looking at the results, it certainly feels Microsoft is no longer focused. It is running like a conglomerate of several companies. This was not the case earlier(80s/90s) which rose them to these levels. It is like a tired horse at the moment. Numbers look good, but future is slightly hazy.

At the moment they are just there to compete. Just content to be in the race. It's not in it to WIN it. Ref : Windows Phone 7 strategy.
@cbrcoder You're not paying attention. Microsoft's divisions and product lines have never worked closer together and it's only getting better with time. There is synergy like never before. For an outward sign, look at the UX and movement toward the Metro style.
@Skippy99 - do you by chance work for Mike Cox? Have lunch at Yarrows over scones? Riding your MCSDs had?
@LoverockDavidson

The point of this article is to highlight Microsoft's lack of ROI from the online services division in recent years.

The author is not obligated to "help them" by directing readers to MS's site. There are plenty of other articles about MS's online services on ZDNet and other tech sites, let alone MS's own advertising, that allow users to be informed of their offerings. I don't think it's a lack of awareness that's the problem, and even if it is, one article on ZDNet isn't going to turn things around for MS online services.
0 Votes
+ -
oh dear
sportmac 22nd Jul
@LoverockDavidson
your post was SO unexpected! who would have thought?

now you're suggesting that reporters/bloggers help microsoft?

a company who's "plan" is to outspend the competition? xbox lost enough money to build another international space station before it started making a profit. they don't need bloggers to help them when they can afford to lose that kind of money to "compete".
@LoverockDavidson

LOL, yes it is about losing money..that is what a public company is created for to profit the shareholders!
@LoverockDavidson well said dude, someone has to invest in R&D to innovate and Bing looks fresh and its being used to power other voice based UIs the company has to offer like xbox avatar etc.Though I still use google most of the time but I like bing.
@LoverockDavidson Funny, I would bet that if Microsoft was replaced with Apple in this story you would be going on and on about what idiots they are. As far as linking to their offerings, I have not idea how good they are or are not because I have not tried them but they should be compelling enough to bring in their own traffic, not relying on a blogger to supply it for them.
0 Votes
+ -
FUD?
facebook@... 21st Jul
R&D dolllars are not a sinkhole. Microsoft has realized countless gains with their industry leading Azure and Office365 platforms. I detect a hint of bias here. I do not recall a similar assessment from the author after the billions Google plows into Google Labs and other ill-fated ventures.
@facebook@... Microsoft has an R&D division. No doubt they're hiding lots more losses for OSD there.

It's a set of websites. It's a set of websites that loses the owners two hundred and fifty million dollars a month. At the current rate of burn this set of websites costs $.25 per share per year.

There is no upside potential here. Paying people to incorporate these websites into their otherwise popular products makes the products less popular. Nobody wants a Binged phone.

It's just a mess. When they stop paying, their share goes to zero. The websites just don't have what it takes to drive organic growth.
@facebook@... This isn't R&D spending. There is a separate line for this. I went back 9 years in SEC filings to track these losses. That's as long as Microsoft has counted the online unit as a separate division. It's not R&D. Your point about Office 365 may be valid. That would be online revenue in the Business division. Re Google's ventures I've pointed that out too. Note Google is getting a lot more focused.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/googles-big-green-energy-goal-a-distraction/7149
At what point is 8.5 billion dollars NOT a sinkhole? We're not talking R&D for a stealth fighter here... MS is too big, too cumbersome and cannot seem to make decisions that matter. (One example: The Kin)
@klockheed Weak management always tries to do everything and chase every latest fad...this is to show that they are aggressive and motivated. After all, they have to "do something" to justify their position.

The result: Chaos and confusion and a total lack of focus. This is why MS has stumbled and wasted time on so many side projects.
0 Votes
+ -
Not anymore.
MSFTWorshipper 21st Jul
@otaddy SteveB recently declared an end to side-projects and total focus on core businesses.
@otaddy
So it looks like MS spurred something here.
@klockheed When the Lockheed-Loverock-Martin BallmerBird stealth jet finally gets unveiled by President Obama, you're going to be eating those words.
The bing technology share gains thats gotten them are far more valuable than the investment made so far. why do you think theyve been taking share hand over fist from google and googles been busily trying to copy everything bings done?
@Johnny Vegas But it sure is funny to see Google racing to copy everything Bing does.
@otaddy
Not sure what you are talking about. On the other hand, it seems bing was invented for the purposes of copying Google (kind of like the Zune was for copying the iPod). It's even been proven that Bing uses Google's click stream data using IE default settings.
@anono I wouldn't touch iPod with a 10 feet pole. Zune HD on the other hand is a nice little gem.
@Earthling2
You are entitled to your opinion as to which is better (clearly the majority of people think it's the iPod touch), but I think is an obvious fact that MS's Zune was a response to Apple's iPod.
0 Votes
+ -
@anono
Yes, but as someone who's used both, Zune was and is still the better product. The hardware and the software are both much better. Boy bands for a while dominated the market in sales but it didn't change the fact that their mass market appeal doesn't necessarily mean that they were the better artists. The better products don't always win unfortunately. Popular perception can win against fact.
@Silverback1138
There is no way to objectively state that one product is better than another. Again, I am simply stating a known fact; that is most people purchase iPod touches despite them being a tad more expensive thus most people think iPod touches are better than Zunes.
Mac OSX Snow leopard $29 upgrade
Mac OSX Lion $29 upgrade

what is the lowest priced HOME edition Windows?
Mac OSX can be used by pros. How much do Windows Pro editions cost?

and apple haters keep talking that Apple stuff is always overpriced.
For YEARS Msft has shafted it's loyal fans using obscene Windows profits (profit margins into the 80% range or more) to subsidize it's billion dollar losing programs: Online, Entertainment division (zune, PlayforSure etc), even the Xbox lost tons of money for years. (the CASH COWS papering over management incompetence)

But bizarre enough Msft fans keep criticizing Apple for 'overpriced' products while happily paying up to Msft! and they say apple fans live in a 'reality distortion field' .
@Davewrite I don't think anyone has ever criticised Apple for overcharging for their software - the main beef is that they have no entry level or self build products - it is the hardware cost and their restrictive practices that attract criticism. Microsoft do not sell PC's so there is no hardware profit to support the OS development. I am not saying that either model is wrong - they are just completely different.
@cymru999
I have seen everything Apple makes criticized on ZDNet, even when the criticism is not warranted.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
I concur, Rick_K
Mister Spock 21st Jul
@Rick_K
I have seen everything Microsoft makes criticized on ZDNet, even when the criticism is not warranted

plain
  • Flagged
@Mister Spock
I have seen Microsoft being given a pass on quite a few things that Apple was slammed on. For example the Location-gate F.U.D. What was not mentioned is that Microsoft tracks the phones, and stores the info on a Remote server. Apple got flack for bricking ?Jailbroken iPhones, yet Microsoft got a pass when their update bricked factory fresh phones. I believe the criticism was directed at Samsung, the phone maker, not the OS maker.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
@Rick_K

Apple recieved criticism for their iOS4 update to their iPhone 3G which severely crippled many of those phones.
Given the facts that Apple created both the OS, and the phone itself, logic would indicate that no outside influence was a factor, the blame entirely on Apple.

Now, given the facts that the WP7 update had no adverse effects on phones from other manufactures other then Samsung's newest additions, it is safe to conclude that the issue most likely lies with Samsung, and not Mcrosoft, as were it a problem with the WP7 upgrade itself, probability would have allowed for other phones from various manufacturers to succumb to the same issues, which they did not.

plain
  • Flagged
@Mister Spock
Apple got flack for the update and upgrades when they caused issues with Jailbroken phones. The iOS 4 upgrade was fixed by Apple. On the other hand The Pre-NoDo update bricked phones. There is an actual difference between causing the phone to slow down and bricking it all together.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Why would you flag me, Rick_K?
Mister Spock 24th Jul
@Rick_K
My post was nothing offensive, I was just pointing out the flaw in your logic.

Nothing I said was insulting, or false.
plain
@cymru999 Hardware cost and their "restrictive" practices might be used as a justification for many to hate Apple but for a LOT of them they simply hate because it's not what they use.
@Mister Spock What proof do you have that Rick_K flagged your post especially since his were flagged as well. Oh I see, your usual tactic of spreading FUD when you have nothing to back it up.
@Davewrite

WoW that's pretty good, they got you to pay for FreeBSD wink

Lipstick on a pig apparently does fool some people wink
The various companies and governments sue Microsoft over this set of tactics, resulting in billions of dollars in rulings against the company. Microsoft claims that the original strategy is not anti competitive, but rather an exercise of its discretion to implement features it believes customers want. Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Paradise Valley Homes

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix