<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>HipMojo.com</title>
	<link>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog</link>
	<description>Covering Online Video, Web, Search, Investing, Technology, Strategy, Investing, M&#038;A, Financing, VCs</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:53:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>What Time Warner Should Do With AOL</title>
		<link>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/02/07/what-time-warner-should-do-with-aol/</link>
		<comments>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/02/07/what-time-warner-should-do-with-aol/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ashkan Karbasfrooshan</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Internet &#038; Web]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[M&#038;A]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Management]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[TV Networks]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[TW AOL]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Online Advertising]]></category>
<category>Internet &amp;#038; Web</category><category>M&amp;#038;A</category><category>Management</category><category>Online Advertising</category><category>TV Networks</category><category>TW AOL</category><category>Uncategorized</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/02/07/what-time-warner-should-do-with-aol/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Raise your hand if something got lost during the Time Warner AOL conference call (right, they dropped the AOL brand from the corporate namesake).
I respect Time Warner as a company and they have some very smart people, but I don&#8217;t get a sense that they know what they are doing.  Actually, I don&#8217;t think [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Raise your hand if something got lost during the Time Warner AOL conference call (right, they dropped the AOL brand from the corporate namesake).</p>
<p>I respect Time Warner as a company and they have some very smart people, but I don&#8217;t get a sense that they know what they are doing.  Actually, I don&#8217;t think they know what they want to do.</p>
<p>Time Warner Chairman and CEO Jeff Bewkes <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120229791411547609.html?mod=yahoo_hs&amp;ru=yahoo" target="_blank">said</a> AOL is &#8220;open to any strategic moves that make sense&#8221; but he feels confident about AOL&#8217;s ability to compete.</p>
<p>According to WSJ: in 2007, AOL generated $1.251B in revenues (a <em>drop </em>of 32%!) and $381M in profits.</p>
<p>According to Forbes: AOL remains highly profitable, having posted $1.84 billion in adjusted operating income before depreciation and amortization in 2007, up from $1.77 billion in 2006.</p>
<p>Either way&#8230;</p>
<p>The stock is at $15.50, or a market cap of $55B.  The 52-week high is $21.  Let&#8217;s not even mention its all-time high.</p>
<p>The many choices these days include:</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/06/internet-aol-bewkes-biz-media-cx_lh_0206aol.html?partner=yahootix" target="_blank">selling</a> AOL - but to whom?;<br />
- selling or spinning off the Platform A (the network that encompasses Advertising.com, Third Screen Media, Quigo, etc.);<br />
- getting out of the access business (subscription for web access).</p>
<p>Bear in mind, this is all coming ten years after the disastrous AOL acquisition of Time Warner.  That&#8217;s right, AOL acquired Time Warner in January 2000 and since then, the merged entity has been one big pile of disarray soup.</p>
<p>In the past, I argued against a Yahoo!/AOL merger because, for lack of a better term, Google <a href="http://www.watchmojo.com/web/blog/?p=647" target="_blank">could cock-block it</a>. Google had invested $1B for 5%, valuing AOL at $20B. My argument was simple: any time Yahoo! and AOL got talks going, Google would butt in, show interest, get a price war going and then Yahoo! would back off, as would Google.  I apologize for the &#8220;cock-block&#8221; term here, but I was scratching my head thinking of a better way to coin it.</p>
<p>I think the AOL/GOOG deal <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/02/01/googles-investment-in-aol-set-stage-for-msftyahoo-mergeracquisition/" target="_blank">set the stage</a> for MSFT to acquire Yahoo! and doomed any shot AOL had of reclaiming its glory of days gone by.  If you disagree, I welcome your suggestions.</p>
<p>Incidentally, I recently suggested (before Microsoft&#8217;s unsolicited offer for Yahoo!) that <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/01/01/yahoo-should-spin-off-its-network-business-raise-proceeds/" target="_blank">Yahoo! should bundle its ad networks and spin them off</a>, to raise $1-4B and unleash shareholder value. Anyway, now that Microsoft has set its sights on Yahoo!, Google feels threatened, Yahoo! feels like it&#8217;s on borrowed life, and Time Warner wants to burn any vestiges of its AOL days away.</p>
<p>Time Warner&#8217;s main concern, frankly, is its debt level.  The company has $37B in debt.  That&#8217;s a lot of debt to finance.  Its cash hoard is less than $2B.  In other words, any deal or solution would have to entail a sizable injection of cash.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s hard to come up with a strategy for AOL when parent Time Warner itself does not know what to do with the Web going forward.  It has bought a lot of business, but I think the answer comes from looking at Time Warner.</p>
<p>Time Warner is a media company.  Yes, it owns AOL and Netscape, along with numerous ad networks, but at its core, it is in the content and media business.  So here&#8217;s what I think Time Warner should do:</p>
<p><strong>Step 1 - Get out of the Access Business</strong></p>
<p>One company that has come up is Earthlink.  I don&#8217;t think Earthlink makes sense.  Earthlink has a $800M market cap.  AOL&#8217;s access business can fetch $3-5B.  I think AT&amp;T or Verizon would make a nice home and they can afford it.  AT&amp;T and Verizon are gatekeepers to the digital world, they would know what to do with AOL&#8217;s access business.  They can also afford it.  A cash deal of $3-6B could help pay down some of Time Warner&#8217;s debt.</p>
<p>The main reason Time Warner should get out of this business is that it is a slow-growth cash cow that makes it embracing the free, ad-supported content business hard.  Why would anyone accelerate the cannibalization of a billion-dollar revenue stream?</p>
<p>Advertising, that is why.  Time Warner&#8217;s clients are essentially advertisers.  If you work with GM for CNN or Time magazine, it is important to be able to offer them reach online.  That&#8217;s the holy grail for Time Warner, not charging someone $25/month for Web access.  The person looking for Web access will look for cheaper and faster access&#8230; advertisers remain with publishers.</p>
<p><strong>2 - Focus on Free, Ad-Supported Content and Media Businesses</strong></p>
<p>AOL, Weblogs Inc., TMZ, Fool.com, and all of Time Warner&#8217;s online assets (Time, CNN, etc.) is where the money will be at in the years to come.  I understand the focus in 2007 was ad networks, I also realize that Advertising.com (whom AOL <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2006/11/24/top-10-best-internet-acquisitions-of-all-time/" target="_blank">bought for $435M in 2004</a>) generates the lion&#8217;s share of ad revenues at AOL, but long term, holding onto and developing the content businesses will allow the most incremental upside.</p>
<p><strong>3 - Spin off Platform A</strong></p>
<p>I would not sell Platform A to neither MSFT, Google etc.  MSFT has aQuantive.  Google will ultimately own Doubleclick.  There are many other independent networks and what not.  But Time Warner can raise $1-5B in cash by spinning off Platform A (and keeping a portion to sell over time as it grows in value).</p>
<p>Ultimately, despite AOL and Netscape, Time Warner is not a technology company and I doubt TWX&#8217;s board will have the appetite and risk profile to invest what is required to compete with technology companies in the ad network space.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion: </strong></p>
<p>By unloading the access and network businesses, Time Warner can raise $5-10B in cash, reduce debt and focus on pleasing advertisers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/02/07/what-time-warner-should-do-with-aol/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
