As dependent as the money on their table

Summary: An old exposé about Gartner and new observations about IDC

THE THING about 'analyst' group Gartner is that it is not independent at all. In fact, as we showed time after time, Gartner is corruptible. Based on this article from 2003, this so-called 'analyst' which claims to be independent was tied to VCs to the extent of a 38% stake. As someone said in response to one who brought it up in USENET:

Market "analysts" are not impartial reporters, they're paid advertisers.

"Gee, no wonder SCO's Linux extortion lawsuit had "merit" according to these bozos," added another poster yesterday. "Why would anyone take their word on anything?"

Gartner is also funded by a major investor called Bill Gates (indirectly), as we pointed out over 3 years ago. Well, here is an explanation from Information Week:

But it's the individuals who invest in Silver Lake, called limited partners, who might be of most interest to Gartner clients. According to Silver Lake, they include more than 150 "leading technology executives from the top technology firms." Some of the names you might recognize: Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, and Bill Gates.

About a week ago we also wrote about a Gartner competitor (see our wiki on IDC), which may have been gently bribed recently in order to produce this nonesense which even the 'Microsoft press' is not buying. As even a Microsoft booster points out, "With WP7's market share actually falling since Microsoft replaced the old Windows Mobile with Windows Phone, where on earth is such rapid growth -- at the expense of iOS, which is currently battling Android tooth and nail for top spot -- going to come from?"

In his article he points out:

But if there's one thing industry analysts undoubtedly are, it's conflicted (and we're not the first to notice this by any stretch). The very companies they comment on in the press and whose performances they routinely predict are the same companies that give them boatloads of money for advice and, well, analysis and predictions, we suppose. So, there's a conflict of interest built into every statement an industry analyst makes...

Remember that analysts are spending PR money, pretending to be unbiased when in fact their business model is that they are selling their bias to change perceptions. As an internal document from Microsoft [PDF] put it, “Analysts sell out - that’s their business model… But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.” Bill Gates has been 'buying' a lot of media companies in recent years. How does that relate to the money he provides to analysts such as Gartner (who feed the media)? ⬆