Ballmer: "Im Going to F**king Kill Google"

Source Title:
Microsoft, Google trade salvos over exec
Story Text:

It appears that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has just as big a temper problem as Google CEO Eric Schmidt. In the transcripts of one former MS employee's sworn statement, in the ongoing case over, Kai Fu Lee ballmer apparently threw a chair across the room when he learned of Mark Lucovsky's defection to GOOG.

"I'm going to f------ bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again," the declaration quotes Ballmer. "I'm going to f------ kill Google."

Ooooh, i can understand that - and frankly, i think it's a bit shitty of Mark to out Ballmer as being as human as the next guy. That was in a private meeting, and although im not certain, i'd imagine that Mark went further than the court required by giving that information.

Nobody likes a crybaby Mark.

Now, in the case of Schmidts now famous foot stomp over CNet, that's different - it's public, and stupid - no problem.

Still, damn funny eh?


Google paid Lee a $2.5

Google paid Lee a $2.5 million signing bonus and promised a $1.5 million bonus after one year, plus a $250,000 salary and options on 10,000 shares of Google stock, according to court documents. If he stays for four years, Lee also will receive another 20,000 Google shares, currently worth $5.8 million.

Although I would like somebody to be that nice to me, this still strikes me as totally irresponsible levels of compensation, and not knowing money's worth. They could feed a whole third world city for years on that amount.

And Mr Ballmer's recollection of the meeting..

In a statement Friday, Ballmer described Lucovsky's recollection as a "gross exaggeration. Mark's decision to leave was disappointing and I urged him strongly to change his mind. But his characterization of that meeting is not accurate."

on compensation

Irresponsible perhaps. But at least it rips away some dollars out of the grasp of Sergey B. and Larry P.

The problem with the cult of fame is that it concentrates money in the hands of a few. Right wingers love to talk about how lower taxes increase spending and help the economy. The problem when the money is too concentrated is that wealth is taken out of circulation and hoarded in unseen places. The super rich can never spend all that they have. My solution to this: increase taxes and let the government spend it, after all, as every right winger will tell you, there has never been a government that can resist spending every dime they can lay their hands on. And then they raise taxes some more. Could be a hell of a boom.

Am I the only one to notice that the only hurricane relief effort evident on the Google site is a little ribbon banner leading to the Amazon effort? I guess the newly minted gazillionaires want to fondle their money a bit longer. Even the NFL has an organised effort amongst the players to individually pledge a set target amount.

Couldn't the optioneers each dump ten shares and pledge the proceeds?

Although, not donating is not actually doing evil I suppose.

I'm suggesting that the much ballyhooed "do no evil" is about as meaningful as substituting "promise not to kill my spouse" for "love, honour and cherish". Kinda takes the magic out of the moment doesn't it?

On Google & Charity

To be fair, if you look at Matt Cutt's blog article on Hurricane Katrina.

Google got a link up on the main page to donate money, which is good. They’re also matching employee donations like they did with the tsunami, so my wife and I will do that.


Good for you Cornwall.

But for an organisation of their size, the strategy is not one of leadership.

Where is the kickoff donation? Or the base target? If someone donates ad space, will they match it?

The NFL players have a base figure of $1000 per player, with some wanting it set at $5000.

you don't know what people do

if you don't know what people do for charity it isn't fair to critisise them for doing nothing - for all we know Larry, Sergey et al could have personally donated $million to red cross or be sponsoring 20 villages in Mauritania

While it would certainly be appalling if people with that much money weren't helping people less fortunate than theirselves I don't see any need for them to disclose either how much they donate or what they donate too so we'll have to just assume that they are doing something :)

so we'll have to just assume that they are doing something

um, no thanks.

There is *nothing* in the *observable* culture over there that is trust inspiring. Sorry.

What you are saying is perfectly reasonable. I am just disagreeing with the presumption.

The point is: they have the power to lead by example. So far, I don't see that.

Oh ye of little faith

SEW had a story at the time of the Google IPO

Google charitable foundation as described in the Google's "owners manual" (aka the first portion of Google's IPO filing) is getting ready to launch. The foundation will give 1 percent of Google's equity and profits to charity.

There is more here on The Google Foundation

Personally I would be much more scepical of their motives if they took every opportunity to publicise their charity donations

What other companies do you police plumsauce ?

How do you choose which ones get your attention ? Is their a special list that get extra attention ? Do you call your neighbors and make sure they have met their required civic duty as well ?

Could you please let me know what my company is required to do and where I should report it so you'll know.

The charity culture in the

The charity culture in the US is very different to the UK and Europe. If for no better reason than the substantial tax breaks, I'm sure that all the Google millionaires donate considerable sums to charity.

As it's such a common thing to do, I guess they don't feel the need to talk about it that much. In any case, giving to charity is a choice. If they choose not to give, then that is their choice, not ours.

They may have the power to lead by example, but they have no compulsion, moral or legal to do so.

what comes around goes around

I'm sure Steve Jobs threw a few chairs when Gates took the GUI from the mac and launced windows.

I think it's good for the king of the hill to get rocked once or twice. It makes them produce a better product in the end.

the power to lead by example

but they have no compulsion, moral or legal to do so.

I beg to differ on the moral compulsion part. I offer the following quote, which I cannot attribute because I don't know the origin ...

"With great power comes great responsibility."

Maybe someone else knows the origin of the quote.


any one who has read more than a handful of my posts knows that i make a sport of trashing google. it is done because i like the sound of popping balloons. i think they've taken their eyes off the ball for far too long.

Nice saying

it is done because i like the sound of popping balloons.

I'm going to have to steal that one.

Please can I have a job, Eric

Seattle Times runs a copy of an email submitted to court by M$

Hi, Eric:

It's been over 10 years since we last met — hope you still remember me (we were discussing the Sun-Apple collaboration on Java+QuickTime). Congratulations on your success at Google.

I have heard that Google is starting an effort in China. I thought I'd let you know that if Google has great ambitions for China, I would be interested in having a discussion with you.

I am currently a Corporate VP at Microsoft, working on areas very related to Google.....

...Please let me know if you would like to have a chat.


Kai-Fu Lee

Remember to destroy your hard disk when you leave a company.

>>Remember to destroy your

>>Remember to destroy your hard disk when you leave a company.

remember never to put ANYTHING sensitive on a PC you don't OWN i'd say cw :)


He didn't send that (if indeed he did) from his MS email. He must have tried to at least be a bit sneaky.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.