Steve Ballmer dodges eggs at Hungarian University

We've already seen how quick on his feet Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer can be, and it looks like the big man finally had to put those fleet-footed skills to good use, as he was recently forced to duck for cover under a barrage of (three) eggs during a speech he was giving at a Hungarian University. Apparently, the disgruntled egg-tosser was angry with Ballmer for "stealing billions in Hungarian taxpayer money," which he demanded that Ballmer give back "right now." Head on past the break for a video of the thoroughly awkward encounter.

[Aguiluz @ May 19th 2008 3:52PM]

Egg-cellent!

[Mike @ May 19th 2008 3:57PM]

did you notice when the egg tosser was leaving some guy had to pick up his macbook to let the tosser through?

[Aguiluz @ May 19th 2008 4:01PM]

Hit the pause at 0:38.

I can see no lighted apple (or any apple for that matter), so it isn't a macbook. It could be just me or the video quality is crap.

[Olu O @ May 19th 2008 4:12PM]

@ Mike

and we care because?????

[Azayzel @ May 19th 2008 4:26PM]

Looked to me like an Eee PC or one of MSI, definitely not a Mac! Good try though.

[Seth @ May 19th 2008 4:35PM]

@Mike
The egg thrower wasn't Steve Jobs buddy. Microsoft bashing can be performed in your own head. Thanks.

[Toleio @ May 19th 2008 4:48PM]

JESUS
That video was hilariously awquard to watch, he just throws the eggs, talks some shit then awquardly shuffles out along the rows while everyone is trying to let him pass, watching him like "...."

Oh god, fail.

[rob @ May 19th 2008 5:04PM]

Actually, it IS a Macbook. The guy who owns the thing was probably just listening and not typing, so his laptop's display finally went to sleep. The logo and the display share the same light source, so if the display is off, the logo is not illuminated.

[Ben Willis @ May 19th 2008 5:18PM]

It most def was a macbook. You people don't even know what a macbook looks like. You think a college student would be using an eee pc? Sheesh!

[CUBSWILLWIN @ May 19th 2008 5:23PM]

I really don't care much, but since the bickering needs someresolution, it looks like a mac more than anything. more of a macbook but maybe an ibook.

[Stem $ell @ May 19th 2008 5:49PM]

Ballmer's feeling a bit *sheepish* 'bout now... but with those wimpy tosses, Hungarians can't claim "The yolk's on ewe!"

[LordFarkward @ May 19th 2008 9:22PM]

ballmer's gf does not look amused in that picture...

[Cory @ May 20th 2008 4:27AM]

Engadget needs to do something about people tagging irrelevant replies onto the first post so they can be on top.

[OneLove @ May 20th 2008 11:03AM]

@cory, does that include you too?

[Greg @ May 20th 2008 4:28PM]

They don't have Eee PCs in Hungary, yet, unless he ordered it from abroad, which is unlikely.

[skulldriveshaft @ May 20th 2008 9:25PM]

Is that the same CORVINUS from Underworld?

[Scott Equine @ May 21st 2008 7:24AM]

Eggs?!
Maybe the (egg-) tosser thought Ballmer was feeling "Hungry" ? :P

Best stick to holographic meetings in future, eh Steve.

[OnlyShawn @ May 19th 2008 3:52PM]

the university student should demand any money he paid for an economics class back from the university, as he doesn't have a damn clue about comparative advantage and division of labor.

[LC @ May 19th 2008 4:17PM]

He should also ask for his money back for any phys ed classes he had as well. They sure as hell never taught him to throw, unless it was a class on limp wristed tossing.

[WS @ May 19th 2008 10:44PM]

Just as you should demand a refund from your English teachers!

[Richard Lai @ May 19th 2008 10:47PM]

@LC: I think that man would be more than happy if he could get the money back for his three eggs.

[AJ in the East Bay @ May 19th 2008 3:53PM]

Omelets, omelets, omelets!!

Mah, that guy didn't even hit him. Shame...

[Aguiluz @ May 19th 2008 3:54PM]

But the facial expression is priceless...

[Aguiluz @ May 19th 2008 3:55PM]

(Referring to Steve Ballamer's facial expression)

[ethana2 @ May 19th 2008 10:31PM]

Hungarians! Hungarians! Hungarians!

[w00t @ May 19th 2008 3:55PM]

Should have thrown a chair at him!

[raiquan @ May 19th 2008 4:00PM]

Now that dude "Ballmer" seems cool under pressure, hell of a recovery.
I think I like Microsoft even more now.

[Fernando @ May 19th 2008 4:02PM]

He has to be cool, for every person that he would of touched on the way trying to get that dude that would of been like $10 million in lawsuits, not that he can't afford that.

[Quix @ May 19th 2008 6:20PM]

Cowering behind the desk is "cool under pressure???"

Cool under pressure would have been catching the eggs and throwing them back.

[Doug @ May 19th 2008 5:29PM]

No, He should have thrown that guys Macbook at him. It would have been excellent.

[derX @ May 19th 2008 6:23PM]

Doug, now that's poetic. You are soooo full of win.

[Michael @ May 20th 2008 12:36AM]

Abe Burnett is God

[marcin @ May 19th 2008 3:56PM]

i love how we only hear these extremist type stories when talking about microsoft. some people REALLY hate microsoft and its kinda funny and pathetic at the same time.

[Andir3.0 @ May 19th 2008 8:43PM]

Kind of like hating Carnegie, for anti-competitive practices leading to the forced work housing and near slave labor conditions when they owned practically every steal company in the US?

How about the AT&T monopoly on communications that had to be broken up by the government? Price gouging, outdated technology, new technology being bought out before it could compete...

Did you even study history, economics, or anything when you went to school?

Monopolies are bad. Monopolistic business practices are worse when you own 90% of the market. Microsoft should be forced to follow standards, publish them and release all rights to open standards. No: "I promise not to sue" doesn't count.

[Abe Burnett @ May 19th 2008 10:21PM]

Actually, Andir, to say that monopolies are bad and that we should force them to release all rights to open standards is ridiculous. I'm an A student in a top rated economics program (by way of qualifying my disagreement with you).

For one thing, saying that monopolies are bad is nearly a normative statement--rather than the positive statement economics upholds.

Instead, what you should've said is that monopolies are inefficient: they deliberately produce less than society would optimally like them too. This leads to deadweight loss, and a social welfare problem.

As you pointed out, there are various methods of increasing total surplus--and thus increasing, in this case, consumers surplus (i.e., satisfaction/happiness). This relies upon the assumption that consumers are happier when they can have more of what they want: which, optimally, occurs in a perfectly competitive environment where the market naturally is driven to produce a zero economic profit in the long-run. This is the point, too, where consumers marginal benefit equals the producers marginal cost.

With monopolies, a producer deliberately produces less than society wants, at a higher price. They do this to maximize their profit.

You can try to overcome monopolistic problems through policy, taxes, and subsidies.

THE KEY HERE, is that all those solutions themselves incur deadweight loss, and thus are inefficient, and thus, according to your wording, are bad.

The punchline to the story I'm telling is that it IS possible to increase social welfare (total social surplus) by, for example, subsidizing monopolies (as we see, perhaps, with oil and gas companies--encouraging them to produce more, making people happier), but any solution oriented behavior just incurs financial losses.

So you can see that attempting to defeat monopolies can be a zero sum game. What you gain in total surplus (how happy your consumers are), you may lose in real dollar inefficiency.

Monopolies aren't "bad," they are inefficient for society. They exist as a natural phenomena of a well functioning marketplace--one with strict property rights, consistent public institutions, reliable rule of law, etc. What you seem to be recommending would, almost certainly, result in LESS PRODUCTION by Microsoft, and thus, in the long-run less social welfare for the 90% of the world which uses their products--as they cease to innovate because it has become less profitable for them.

[Quikboy @ May 19th 2008 10:46PM]

@Andir3.0 : Yes, Microsoft is really such a tyrant "monopoly". I guess nobody is allowed to have Macs running OS X or an EEE PC with Linux.

What a monopoly!

[Quix @ May 20th 2008 12:56AM]

@ Andir:

Abe is correct: monopolies are usually undesirable, but not necessarily "bad."

"Abusive monopolies," on the other hand, are bad.

Microsoft was an abusive monopoly.

Microsoft is simply reaping the scorn it has sewn all these years.

[giuliop @ May 20th 2008 12:27PM]

@Abe

What a load of pseudo-academic BS. The best is at the end, when you say that they are not bad by explaning why they are bad.

[N30 G30 @ Jun 6th 2008 1:25PM]

giuliop,

What were you reading?

What Andir3.0 wrote explained both sides to the argument. Him explaining just one good point of any kind of monopoly rejects the statement that monopolies are "bad". He even went as far as to explaining the difference of bad and inefficient.

It was well written.

[Rohit Kapur @ May 19th 2008 3:57PM]

Three throws: Zero hits.

Fail.

Still, nice to see that he walked out without incident. Better than something like "don't tase me, bro!"

[andy @ May 19th 2008 4:51PM]

I disagree.

"Don't tase me bro!" is like 5 minutes of some of the greatest comedy ever recorded.

[CraigJ @ May 19th 2008 6:13PM]

Would have been really cool if he had yelled out "Don't egg me Bro". Would have upped his (nonexistent) cool factor by +1

I'm not a fan of Ballmer, but that was just uncalled for.

[heffeque @ May 19th 2008 6:13PM]

"Don't tase me, bro" was in the States. I'm sure that Hungary's government isn't as repressive as the US's.

[joe @ May 20th 2008 1:45AM]

Food products, for some unexplainable reason, have no effect on Microsoft and associates. HMMM.....

[gojeda @ May 20th 2008 9:54AM]

""Don't tase me, bro" was in the States. I'm sure that Hungary's government isn't as repressive as the US's."

Or, just maybe, we believe that throwing a projectile at a person is generally not a good thing, and a person's personal security, is something that should be protected?

Silly me..I know...

[giuliop @ May 20th 2008 12:22PM]

@andy

I'd like to tase you for 10 minutes and make the even greatest comedy ever.

[Capitalistically Challenged @ Feb 26th 2009 12:34PM]

@gojeda
Personal security and personal pride are different things. One deserves being tased while the other deserves a quiet walk out.

[Omar @ May 19th 2008 3:58PM]

Eggs he should have thrown Vista at him

[Ed @ May 19th 2008 4:25PM]

Eggs: Nutritional Value.
Vista: No Value.

[Mam00th @ May 19th 2008 6:42PM]

OMG bashing vista makes you so cool!!!