Microsoft offered $44.6B to acquire all of Yahoo! in early February.
Yahoo! Chief Yahoo spent 4 months trying to make that go away… today he settled for $800M in top line incremental revenue.
That means in some 50+ years (44.6B/$800M), investors will be indifferent. So net-net, “Jer”gets what he wants today, investors can go pound sand and come back in 2024.
Way to go, Jer.
Note: unloaded my YHOO shares at $30 (75%), $29 (20%) and then $28 (last 5%)…
Digg this Blog
Share on Facebook
WatchMojo on Twitter
WatchMojo on YouTube
Add to Favorites
WatchMojo NewsletterFrom Business Week:
Charles Di Bona, a senior analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein and a noted bull on Microsoft, said in a June 10 report that “dampening” adoption of Vista by corporate customers will shave $395 million in revenues and 2¢ a share in earnings from the company’s financial results for the 2009 fiscal year, which begins July 1. According to a Bernstein Web survey of 372 information technology professionals fielded in May, companies expect just 26% of their PCs to be running Vista by the beginning of 2011, down from an estimate of nearly 68% of computers by respondents to a similar survey a year ago.
Wow.
My countryman and business architect of Google, Omid Kordestani, pre-emptively answers some of the questions and addresses some of the potential criticism the Google/Yahoo non-exclusive deal might garner.
The scale tipped in Google’s favor when Yahoo! began to feature Google back in the early 2000s… it broke today. It’s game over…
My man is right:
This is not a merger. Rather, we are merely providing access to our advertising technology to Yahoo! through our AdSense program.
This does not remove a competitor from the playing field. Yahoo! will remain in the business of search and content advertising, which gives the company a continued incentive to keep improving and innovating. Even during this agreement, Yahoo! can use our technology as much or as little as it chooses.
This does not prevent Yahoo! from making similar arrangements with others. This arrangement is not exclusive, meaning that Yahoo! could enter into similar arrangements with other companies.
This does not increase Google’s share of search traffic. Yahoo! will continue to run its own search engine and advertising programs, and the agreement will not increase Google’s share of search traffic.
This does not let Google raise prices for advertisers. Google does not set the prices manually for ads; rather, advertisers themselves determine prices through an ongoing competitive auction.
But this does not change the fact: search is officially game over. Google is a monopoly and I agree to some extent with Google’s official position here: this may not be a bad thing at all, given how horribly Yahoo!, MSN.com, Ask.com and AOL.com have fared in this one-sided beatdown. Google will probably be able to leverage this deal to find growth and manage to eventually become more valuable than Microsoft.
Make no mistake about it: every time Google strikes a deal with someone to provide it with its “ad technology” they end up getting stronger and the expense of the partner (think AOL, Ask.com). In a few years, it will suck any remaining mojo out of Yahoo! and no one will want anything to do with Yahoo!, which will be sold off in pieces…
Of course, you are wondering, can Google buy Yahoo!? I’ve addressed it here… but with this deal, why bother?
Hats off to Google: you won the search game today…
Nothing new or shocking here. I’ve always thought HDTV on the Web is one of the most useless and hyped things ever.
Something I’ve been saying for a while: “Mags Mull State of their Web Video Efforts“. Of note:
Some magazines have begun to move beyond the experimental phase in online video, many of them claiming online traffic growth coming from short, how-to clips on everything from picking stocks to diapering babies.
But they’re still struggling when it comes to pulling in the big audiences needed to attract ad dollars. And without much money coming in to support online video, magazines have been reluctant to invest a great deal in staffing.
Those were among the observations by participants June 10 at a Magazine Publishers of America conference on online video, the MPA’s first devoted to the topic.
And if the opening remarks by Time Inc. Studios president Paul Speaker were any indication, magazines still need plenty of hand-holding when it comes to the medium. As Speaker suggested to his audience, the question is not whether to create online video, but how.
I won’t necessarily name any names, but a lot of print media companies we talk to on partnerships are precisely in this mode.
Related:
- Can Magazines Effectively Create Online Video?
- Why Print Companies Make More Video Revenue that TV Firms Online
Last week I sold the last 5% of the stock I was holding in YHOO… because by then I’d lost all faith in YHOO management and their board.
Today officially marks the death of Yahoo!
MSFT officially walks away from YHOO. YHOO is about to announce a deal with GOOG. GOOG first got the upper hand when YHOO struck the search deal with GOOG back in the early 2000s, and this deal will hammer in the final nail in the YHOO coffin.
Who knew that a company with so many assets and traction online could find itself in such a precarious situation.
This will rank up there with the most disastrous management case studies ever: not quite Enron or Arthur Andersen… but not far from those, either.
YHOO stock is flat today… odd, if I was an arb trader, judging by the slate of resignations… I’d bet that YHOO was about to become MSFT’s latest subsidiary.
Read the latest flight from the YHOO campus here.
PLAY
