Common is right in this regard. Adjusting for splits it was around those levels.
However the whole point is silly.
IBM outsourced DOS to Microsoft and handed them a monopoly.
Common argues that "things take time" and uses this time period as an example.
In 1986 Microsoft had $198M in revenue, it grew to $346M in 1997, $590M in 1988, and $803M in 1999. Profit went from $40M, to $72M, to $124M to $170M.
So Microsoft had a 257% total return from March 13 1986 to March 31, 1989.
Who cares? How does that have any bearing whatsoever on ANY that is drowning in debt, has shrinking sales, little revenue traction in its new products, and needs to wonder how it makes payroll through 2016.
IMHO