zlacker

>>staran+(OP)
From a business sense, Satya was excellent.

He made the right calls, fast, with limited information.

Things further shifted from plan a to b to… whatever this is.

Despite that, MSFT still came out on top.

Consider if Satya didn’t say anything. Suppose MSFT stood back and let things play out.

That’s a gap for google or some competitor to make a move. To showcase their stability and long term business friendly vision.

Instead by moving fast, doing the “right” thing, this opportunity was denied and used to MSFTs benefit.

If the board folded, it would return to the stays quo. If the board held, MSFT would have secured OpenAI, for essentially nothing.

Edit: changed board folded x2 to board folded + board held, last para.

>>intend+y9
I am not sure why people keep pushing this narrative. It's not obviously false, but there doesn't seem to be much evidence of it.

From where I sit Satya possibly messed up big. He clearly wanted Sam and the Open AI team to join microsoft and they won't now, likely ever.

By offering a standing offer to join MS publicly he gave Sam and OpenAI employees huge leverage to force the board's hand. If he had waited then maybe there would have been an actual fallout that would have lead to people actually joining microsoft.

>>zug_zu+H81
I don't think that's quite right, Microsoft's main game was keeping the money train going by any means necessary, they have staked so much on copilots and Enterprise/Azure Open AI. So much has been invested into that strategic direction and seeing Google swoop in and out-innovate Microsoft would be a huge loss.

Either by keeping OpenAI as-is, or the alternative being moving everyone to Microsoft in an attempt to keep things going would work for Satya.