Many Seattleites regretted that they didn't buy Microsoft stock back in the '80s and thus let the great prosperity train pass them by. Buying stock in Bill Gates was a slam dunk, and as the company matured, many have comes to regard it as a kind of blue chip investment. Who, after all, would ever want to bet against Bill Gates?

Doomsayers have predicted wreckage for the company for years, and we're seeing hints of mortality as Gates is gone and Redmond goes through its first major layoffs and new cutbacks. But it turns out the picture of what's going on may be even worse for investors.

Jeff Reifman, a former Microsoftie turned tech entrepreneur and activist, always has an interesting take on his former company. He did a series of eye-opening, in-depth pieces for Seattle Weekly about Microsoft's impact on the community, from tax dodges to the moral complexities of becoming a Microsoft millionaire. As a techie with business sense and a social conscience, he always has an interesting perspective. And as someone who became a Microsoft millionaire himself, he has a natural interest in the company's stock.

Reifman says Microsoft has been a lousy investment over the last decade, with a huge disconnect between profits and shareholder returns. According to his analysis:

Over the past ten years, Microsoft has posted revenue over $360 billion and profits over $107 billion. But, if you purchased Microsoft stock ten years ago on February 26, 1999 at the price of $31.18 per share, at its current price of $16.96 (and adjusting for $5.09 in dividends), your investment would have lost 29.3% or 2.9% annually vs. Microsoft's $10.7 billion in average annualized profit.

We often expect long term investors to do well over time, but in this case — despite some of the greatest corporate profits ever — Microsoft's long-term shareholder returns have been negative. This may be one of the most astounding examples of a disconnect between long term corporate profit and shareholder returns.

And the Gods help you if you bought Microsoft at its peak at the end of 1999. You'd be "down 62.2% on your ten year investment."

It's not just the current stock market dive that's hurt the numbers. Reifman says selling a year ago have only produced very tepid gains. He's not sure why the disparity between profits and values is so pronounced. Was Microsoft stock over-valued a decade ago? Do investors undervalue steady profits? Did Microsoft over-promise on a new generations of products? Reifman is curious and would love to hear your explanations and theories.