Goldman Sachs: Microsoft should split off 'unprofitable' Xbox dept
Analyst chastises firm's performance, offers fixes and claims focusing on business and consumer a mistake
Analyst Goldman Sachs has downgraded Microsoft share recommendations from 'buy' to 'neutral', and suggested that one way to resolve the firm's apparent difficulties is to split off its consumer entertainment division.
In a new report (as seen by TechFlash), Goldman Sachs claimed that "A break-up of the consumer businesses could potentially unlock hidden value, or more discipline on cost could turn the businesses into contributors to profitability and shareholder value.
"To date the company's comments suggest that management still sees significant value in combining the consumer and enterprise efforts, but we view a foot in both camps as preventing a successful focus on one strategy, a la Oracle in the enterprise or Apple for consumers.
Clarified Goldman's Sarah Friar, "The Xbox products could be an appealing stand-alone entity, given the historical success of the Xbox and the products' brand strength, and the business could show unlocked value with forced cost discipline compared to as a piece of Microsoft."
Goldman blamed an "elongated PC refresh cycle" and the rise of tablet devices for its 4 per cent lowering of Microsoft's earnings estimates.
To address this, the analyst claimed, Microsoft would need to increase dividends in order to lure more investors, to pursue market leadership in cloud technologies and, damningly, "a coherent consumer strategy that could involve paring back investments and/or divesting more peripheral assets such as gaming."
In Goldman's valuation of Microsoft's various divisions, Entertainment & Devices (which includes Xbox) came out the lowest, at $3.6 billion.
By contrast, Windows/Windows Live was pitched as $107 billion, the business division at $99 billion and servers and tools at $43 billion.
Of the Xbox division, the analyst claimed that "Kinect expands the addressable market and could be key to higher profitability" and "Xbox Live [is] one of the largest paid Cloud communities in existence, offering Microsoft a door into the highly sought after consumer living room."
However, "The division is yet to turn profitable, once corporate overhead is allocated."
While Microsoft has yet to respond to Goldman Sach's recommendations, industry figures have been vocal in their disagreement. " Pulling this off would be like Microsoft learning Geller-ian magic tricks, the equivalent of being able to bend spoons with its brain," said investor Paul Kedrosky.
Added analyst Matt Rosoff to ComputerWorld, "I think it's silly to spin off a profitable business. Xbox would lose more than it would gain by going it alone." Rosoff felt that the company would be better off carving its search business, due to the complexities of competing with Google.
Microsoft share price fell by 2 per cent following Goldman Sach's report.
I call for misleading title...
Legal costs are also massively reduced this way. You'd think it would take more than one establishment to come out and say something negative for a share price to take a dent like that...
It's true that the body of the article is ambiguous. Without MS's very deep pockets I think xbox would have disappeared long ago. A bold analyst that suggests it would do well as a stand-alone.
"Goldman blamed an "elongated PC refresh cycle" and the rise of tablet devices for its 4 per cent lowering of Microsoft's earnings estimates. " - This here seems to be why they lowered the estimation.
"Microsoft share price fell by 2 per cent following Goldman Sach's report." This was more or less inline with its peers on the 4th (report released on the 3rd), not just due to the report.
Also Credit Agricole, UBS and Jefferies have all published their own analyst reports over the last couple of days, all with Buy recommendations
The title is misleading, saying that Xbox is unprofitable, when in the actual report (I have a copy if anyone wants it, please pm me) it says nothing of that nature.
Quick glance at it (its 27 pages!), It points out that it sees the Windows and Office franchises unlikely to improve, its falling behind even more in the tablet wars, and is getting hammered in the mobile phone os wars.
It did say the E&D was unprofitable, but didnt solely point the finger at Xbox (E&D includes Windows Phone), the report does however suggest spinning off the Xbox into a stand alone entity due to its historical success (proving that Xbox is the gem in E&D)
This piece was however the funniest: "which suggests more upside in other Buy-rated
names in our coverage." ie Goldmans pushing its other names it holds shares in!
I have a feeling that a lot of these other products absorb a lot of losses from Xbox related activities.
ETA: If the Xbox was it's own company I doubt that it would be around long.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Justin Alderman on 6th October 2010 5:30pm
The actual report is fairly insightful, but E&D unprofitable comment is misleading and probably untrue. Microsoft announced E&D generated $679M last fiscal year. If Microsoft is spending $679M in corporate overhead just for E&D, that company has even more serious challenges than what Xbox faces.
Also, in my experience, analyst reports never move markets. That 2% fall will be due to some other factor (I'm not currently close enough to the markets to say what it was).
I can absolutely see GS's point: Xbox is a minnow in the context of Microsoft; if the company were independent, with independent management like, say, Nintendo, the improved focus, discipline and market visibility could easily unlock a lot of value.
As it is, Xbox is probably a rounding error on most investors' analysis of Microsoft's prospects, and more likely to be a risk than an opportunity.
As for whether it would survive, if it can only do so with a permanent subsidy from MS's profitable software divisions, but provides no benefits to them, them MS should close it down as a loss-making distraction. But I don't think that's the case. On its own it could attract new investments from investors and companies that normally compete with MS, while investors could choose whether to invest in the stodgy OS/application business or the new and dynamic games business.
also about goldmans comment,how is that a smart move?
wouldnt having the bigger team/network be better for working with compared to a smaller split team... i would think the more resources a company/department has would make them more effiecent...
Was referring to the Microsoft Kin and how well the Windows Phone 7 will do still needs to be seen.
It wouldn`t hurt MS to make the Xbox division more like what Sony did with the SCE division that is clearly it`s own part and not mixed up with the mobile phone or MP3 player division. The different parts of Sony still work together, but SCE has all the people and money they get only for the gaming stuff and don`t have to share people/budgets with something else. What might look liked less resources at the first glance could be the same amount of resources or even more when not shared with other parts of the division.
These guys reminds me street prophets, they both talk something which makes no sense, but makes them money or name.
Both never give a thing about validity of their "prophecy".
I wonder, why Gaming sites and magazines keep posting articles about IMHO of some individual self-proclaimed analysts, when nobody listening them?
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Kirill Yarovoy on 7th October 2010 5:18am
Maybe they could sell Xbox to Apple? Now, that would actually be something.
U see - Im uber analyst too, haha)
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Kirill Yarovoy on 14th October 2010 12:48am