[hihihihi1234]

Tangential: why not? Microsoft is a huge, enormously influential tech company that everyone has heard of, with a revenue of $160 billion (more than 10x that of Netflix) and nearly 200,000 employees (more than any FAANG except Amazon, if Wikipedia is to be believed.) Why isn't it included in the standard list of prominent tech companies?

[nostrademons]

Note also that the original FANGs (minus Amazon and Microsoft) are all Silicon Valley companies. Particularly when talking about local Silicon Valley issues (employment or housing or recruitment or whatever), it still sometimes makes sense to speak of them without adding in Microsoft and Amazon.

In purely financial/economic terms I'm still partial to MAGA, because Facebook and Netflix are a tier below in revenue, market cap, and diversity of their product portfolio.

[jpgvm]

Due to the history of the term (originating in financial markets) Microsoft was considered to be in decline/not appreciating in value as quickly as FAANG and was thus excluded. I would say these days it belongs there much more than say NFLX especially considering NFLX having nestled into a content creation/media company rather than a primarily tech play that was purchasing content.

[usui]

I feel like the last bit isn't exactly right. Their compensation is still more competitive compared to Microsoft. On the tech side, they are also innovating as a breakout new producer compared to the incumbents.

[bin_bash]

The term was coined by Jim Cramer who really doesn’t care about compensation or tech innovation