Microsoft Bids $44.6 Billion For Yahoo 784
The news is everywhere this morning about Microsoft's $44.6B offer to buy Yahoo. The offer represents $31 a share, a 62% premium over Thursday's closing price; and Yahoo's stock price has been rising in after-hours trading. Microsoft has been making overtures to Yahoo since 2006, according to the CNet article, including a buyout offer last February that was rebuffed. Mediapost.com has some perspective on the deal from the point of view of ads and eyeballs. Such an acquisition, which would be Microsoft's largest by far — it bought Aquantive last year for $6 billion — would need approval by US and EU authorities. A European Commission spokesman declined to comment.
Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact just like about everything MS has ever done (eg SQL, IE, PowerPoint
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
Fate of Flickr? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Fate of Flickr? (Score:5, Insightful)
Flickr deletes anti-Microsoft threads (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Fate of Flickr? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fate of Flickr? (Score:5, Funny)
The real key would be to make it IE 7 only. That way people would only experience Flickr with a top notch browser, thus enhancing the Flickr brand!
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact just like about everything MS has ever done (eg SQL, IE, PowerPoint
I checked Live.com the day it was announced. When it bitched about not using IE (when I tried to login my passport account) , I never visited it back. That is what makes every MS attempt unsuccessful. They can't live with the fact that there is a thing called HTML standard, TCPIP standard and Internet is platform neutral from beginning. They use every opportunity to alienate other OS/Browser users.
I could never see Yahoo as a great search engine although it seems spammers/blackhats/SEO junk targets them less. For the record, Google has always been a spammer heaven for me too.
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
For the most part, yes, but the yahoo IM client differs significantly in capability and support from platform to platform.
If ms does get yahoo, they may find that their desktop monopoly won't help them leverage crap as it has for all the other products they've bought and downgraded. The Internet is turf foreign to their business model and corporate mindset, and buying yahoo won't change that. As if anything could. If this deal goes through, yahoo goes down.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft, OTOH, st
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft is smart. They did not get where they are by being idiots. If they think Yahoo is worth $46B to them, I'm inclined to believe it. On the other hand, it might be that Google has been mulling an investment in Yahoo and Mr Softy just wanted to prevent that scary thing from happening.
It make
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Insightful)
- Dell pretty much invented the large-scale direct sales built-to-order PC business.
- Compaq did invent the PC-compatible - different enough not to get sued out of existence, similar enough it runs the same software
- HP did invent a lot of stuff in the personal computer arena
- Apple did invent lots of stuff in the GUI arena. Have you seen Smalltalk 80 and how Lisa is different from that?
Microsoft did invent a lot too. It's unfair to judge the value of all company's contributions by its current delinquent behaviour (the one you call "smart").
Yahoo will fit in nicely (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, and the same can be accurately said for Dick Cheney.
There has to be a corollary to Godwin's Law here...
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
And then there were two (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two [hitwise.com] main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is that any different from there only being two [hitwise.com] main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor MSN at a paltry 5.33%?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
On purpose?
Yes and yes, considering it's the default on all Windows boxes. To regular people, a search box==a search box.
Re:And then there were two (Score:5, Funny)
This is when I will be impressed...
http://pics.nerdnirvana.org/d/1406-1/myhouse_google_com.jpg [nerdnirvana.org]
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators, yet they're willing to throw billions at it anyway. They must feel confident for some reason.
If they allowed Google and Doubleclick, they'll probably allow this too. This doesn't give anyone a monopoly or anything close to it, since Google's still #1 in search.
The question is, how long until MS feels compelled to screw up Yahoo like Hotmail?
Thankyou Microsoft (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
You can bet yahoo would go the same way, migrating to windows, spending a ridiculous amount on new hardware and suffering significant problems in the process.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Is this kind of merger a good argument for releasing server side software under the GNU [gnu.org] Affero GPL [wikipedia.org] ? If these services were using software licensed under something like the GNU Affero GPL, then a company like Microsoft wouldn't be able to go near them.
I know the argument against this form of license is that large players like IBM, Sun and Google would not want to use them, so the projects wo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe I'm stuck in the past, but I can't shake the feeling that MS is more interested in narrowing the competitive field than in acquiring Yahoo properties -- though search is something they could use Yahoo's help with.
Love vs. Hate (Score:5, Interesting)
Yahoo News itself is reporting this as a hostile takeover [yahoo.com], but seemingly with Microsoft willing to pay such a large premium, one that will be hard to resist. It's interesting that Microsoft is willing to use up almost all of it's cash reserves for this takeover, largely sacrificing it's flexibility to make strategic investments in the future. But from the perspective of Yahoo! users the more important question is whether a MS takeover will turn Yahoo! into tepid porridge? And will the long, slow decline of Microsoft now drag Yahoo! down too?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not much. I just avoid it where I can, that's all. Just like I don't like vanilla, so I tend to avoid vanilla foods & French vanilla coffee, etc. Neither has really affected me that much, and I definitely
Forget Search ...It's Services & Advertising (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Insightful)
M$ fails in the add market because they have single mindedly created a reputation of untrustworthiness. M$ is the last company you would want give information about future marketing campaigns, if they suddenly decide that you are a competitor they will use that information to their advantage. Reminds me of the Sony root kit debacle, the blogger who released the information about the root kit, his association with M$ and that M$ was fully aware of the root kit well before it's release and for some odd reason the release of the information about the root kit coincided with the launch of the PS3.
Dang it would suck to be a Yahoo or an MSN employee, if the buyout goes through, waiting for the axe to fall, as M$ works to reduced running costs and improve profit margins, especially as the yahoo owners would be crazy to take M$ stock rather than cash.
Of course the US Administration wont bat an eyelid they love monoplies (at least loyal ones) but the EU will most likely baulk at the idea.
The whole idea is crazy, M$ couldn't run MSN properly, so why would the same management team do any better with Yahoo, well at least the ex-Yahoo investors could always buy it back at a 75% discount in about 5 years.
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Insightful)
Now that GoogleOS for phones is out, and Google is looking toward WiMax apparently, why would it be impossible for MS to want to get into the DSL business since it's already had Windows Mobile on the market for years now. I realize the discussion about the 700MHz auction looks like Google doesn't actually want to offer WiMax on 700MHz, but rather to reap the benefits of an open network. My point is they are doing a dance where each copies the other shortly after the first does something. (or sometimes not so shortly, but follows suit).
It looks to me like two big superpowers doing what it takes for each to get into the others market.
And now for a way to get modded troll, or whatever: My prediction is that Google purchases AskJeeves! next... [ha!]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And this will certainly pass regulation, since even "do no evil" megacorporations like Google need competition from "do most evil" megacorporations like Microsoft.
Re:Very odd (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Arguments are weakened by false or inaccurate premises, writing M$ gives a perfect idea of the bias of the poster
Durr. Those two statements contradict each other. Yes, writing M$ DOES give a perfect idea of the bias of the poster...that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them.
Re:Pot, kettle, very black. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does it mean he's a blind Microsoft hater? He could very well be a knowledgeable Microsoft hater like the rest of us who have to suffer through the nightmare of Microsoft because they managed to get control of the market despite there being much better alternatives out there that the knowledgeable Microsoft haters have been using for years. The bias is likely for very good, supportable reasons.
Re:Pot, kettle, very black. (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, you have a few choices:
1) You can type Microsoft like a normal non-cretin
2) You can type the stock-ticker abbreviation, MSFT
3) You can type the accepted acronym, MS
All three of those options work. M$ isn't any of them.
Re:Pot, kettle, very black. (Score:5, Funny)
The only problem is that M$ actually makes money on OpenSource software and services, and it's founder is a bald and well shaved Robert Stalman, AKA M$ Bob.
Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not. (Score:3, Interesting)
In what way is "M$" perfectly legitimate?
Look, you have a few choices:
All three of those options work. M$ isn't any of them
No. "M$" is a perfectly cromulent disambiguation. Otherwise, we would have trouble distinguishing between
MS==Metric System
MS==Multiple Sclerosis
MS==Mississippi (the state)
MS==Manuscript
MS==Master of Science
And the list goes on and on...
But in contemporary global society, there is only one M$.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm confused... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Sony rootkit debacle began in October 2005. The PS3 was released in November 2006. How, exactly, did these two events coincide?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
On a scale spanning all of time, 13 months is but a whisper.
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Funny)
You've used Excel too?
Re:Very odd (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact of the matter is, Google started out with the cards stacked against them - miniscule funding, hard drive arrays built from lego, the inability to modify their own consumer operating system monopoly to point their bundled internet browser at their own search engines/portals - and yet within a few short years google was a household name, and is now the de facto synonym for "looking something up on the internet". It's the kind of success that Ballmer can only dream of - a vastly better product than anything else that was out at the time (fast and lean, IIRC an alien concept in search engines at the time), in the right place at the right moment to catch the new "internet boom" that MS had famously underestimated. If I was the CEO of (supposedly) the worlds' leading technology firm, such upstart behaviour would piss me off too.
As it is, I suspect the deal will be approved (the shareholders will love it and I can't see the ineffectual monpoly police battin gan eyelid over this "because MS isn't a monopoly on the internet") but I don't think it's going to do MS much good in the long run. Yet another brand run into the ground.
* Yes, I'm aware that the Y! purchase would net many other gains (such as the oft-mentioned decrease in FOSS contributions from Y!), but mindshare and search hits seem to be the biggest factor here.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I know MS is trying to buy Yahoo to compete with Google, but, I'm wondering...can they?
I mean, back in the day, I never used Yahoo to search...it was horrible compared with what was back in the day..I'd try AltaVista or what have you..but, Yahoo just didn't see to be a real 's
Implications for open source (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone who has deployed Zimbra knows that if you want the product to actually be useful you have to buy the closed-source "Network Edition." This is precisely what Microsoft would shut down. Microsoft is eager to kill Exchange competitors. They've done it before -- look at how they immediately shut down the now-defunct Hula project once they began pulling the strings at Novell.
If you want open source email and groupware, you should deploy open source email and groupware. The prime contender in this space right now is Citadel [citadel.org], which is 100 percent GPL. End to end. No exceptions, no tiers, no strings, no gimmicks. Similar in spirit to the Ubuntu Linux distribution, the project's very best work is made available to everyone on the same terms.
Re:Implications for open source (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Implications for open source (Score:4, Insightful)
They removed a perfectly running FreeBSD from Hotmail and installed (first fake than real) Windows instead. You have seen the results.
Microsoft is "innovating" again... (Score:5, Funny)
Judging by this blurb, I think the answer is going to be a big, fat yes.
Pirate Bay (Score:5, Funny)
Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board (Score:5, Informative)
January 31, 2008
Board of Directors
Yahoo! Inc.
701 First Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Attention: Roy Bostock, Chairman
Attention: Jerry Yang, Chief Executive Officer
Dear Members of the Board:
I am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of Microsoft to make a proposal for a business combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!. Under our proposal, Microsoft would acquire all of the outstanding shares of Yahoo! common stock for per share consideration of $31 based on Microsoft's closing share price on January 31, 2008, payable in the form of $31 in cash or 0.9509 of a share of Microsoft common stock. Microsoft would provide each Yahoo! shareholder with the ability to choose whether to receive the consideration in cash or Microsoft common stock, subject to pro-ration so that in the aggregate one-half of the Yahoo! common shares will be exchanged for shares of Microsoft common stock and one-half of the Yahoo! common shares will be converted into the right to receive cash. Our proposal is not subject to any financing condition.
Our proposal represents a 62% premium above the closing price of Yahoo! common stock of $19.18 on January 31, 2008. The implied premium for the operating assets of the company clearly is considerably greater when adjusted for the minority, non-controlled assets and cash. By whatever financial measure you use - EBITDA, free cash flow, operating cash flow, net income, or analyst target prices - this proposal represents a compelling value realization event for your shareholders.
We believe that Microsoft common stock represents a very attractive investment opportunity for Yahoo!'s shareholders. Microsoft has generated revenue growth of 15%, earnings growth of 26%, and a return on equity of 35% on average for the last three years. Microsoft's share price has generated shareholder returns of 8% during the last one year period and 28% during the last three year period, significantly outperforming the S&P 500. It is our view that Microsoft has significant potential upside given the continued solid growth in our core businesses, the recent launch of Windows Vista, and other strategic initiatives.
Microsoft's consistent belief has been that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! clearly represents the best way to deliver maximum value to our respective shareholders, as well as create a more efficient and competitive company that would provide greater value and service to our customers. In late 2006 and early 2007, we jointly explored a broad range of ways in which our two companies might work together. These discussions were based on a vision that the online businesses of Microsoft and Yahoo! should be aligned in some way to create a more effective competitor in the online marketplace. We discussed a number of alternatives ranging from commercial partnerships to a merger proposal, which you rejected. While a commercial partnership may have made sense at one time, Microsoft believes that the only alternative now is the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! that we are proposing.
In February 2007, I received a letter from your Chairman indicating the view of the Yahoo! Board that "now is not the right time from the perspective of our shareholders to enter into discus
Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board (Score:5, Funny)
Eliminating unnecessary, extraneous keystrokes on a corporate scale represents a compelling efficiency realization event for your shareholders.
So there.
Says what he means (Score:3, Insightful)
...Instead of using buzzwords like "this proposal represents a compelling value realization event for your shareholders", you could say something like "this is a good deal for your shareholders."
These MBA types may be all fat and bluster, but often let the truth slip out anyway. Don't read more into his statement than is there. Sure, if you were in charge, you'd be working on deals that would be good for your shareholders.
But that's not what he's about and that's not what this deal is about. "Value realization" is an obfuscated way of saying "extending our desktop monopoly to web searches" and "locking web users into our proprietary protocols and technologies".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Depending on the nature of your response, Microsoft reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo!'s shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.
In other words, Microsoft is putting them on notice that they intend to take Yahoo over, and if the board does not agree then it will be a hostile takeover. In other words, if you don't agree, your job is toast :)
No bad thing: Yahoo has been floundering badly for some time (well, ever since Google arrived, if we're honest) and needs some serious work before it has any chance of being an effective competitor to Google.
Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Microsoft is indicating that they are challenging Google "Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition. ". However, This statement should apply to Microsoft. Microsoft is the 800lb gorilla yet they are making it sound like they are a bit player and Google is the gorilla - more management doublespeak.
2) Microsoft is indicating they would replace all non-Microsoft at Yahoo with Microsoft technology with phrases like "combination enables synergies related to scale economics". This is great market speak for lay off all that oppose the Microsoft initiatives and move to a common, Microsoft-centric platform.
3) Microsoft wants their search as, I guess, MSN has not been effective: "single search index".
4) Phrases like "eliminating redundant infrastructure and duplicative operating costs" are management speak for layoffs, firing middle management at Yahoo, moving to Microsoft's management and benefit structure, and similar. In my experience through many corporate buyouts, all are very negative to the employees at the company being purchases - Yahoo. However, Microsoft attempts to temper this with "offer significant retention packages to your engineers, key leaders and employees", which is more corporate double-speak.
5) The "exceptional display and search advertising capabilities" sounds like a tighter integration with Microsoft's technology, i.e., Windows and MSIE. Maybe they want to have tighter integration between Vista and their ad revenue stream. Could "new advertising platform capabilities" indicate ad-supported Vista (get a free ad when you log in, when you fire up Office, etc.)?
Overall, it sounds like Microsoft is saying that Yahoo should sell to them because Yahoo didn't meet their goals, the combined company can better challenge Google, and Yahoo has tech that Microsoft needs.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So This Means... (Score:5, Insightful)
Theoretically Microsoft could buy up anything good about the internet so we can all shut our computers down and settle in w/a trip to the library and a good book.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So this means people will begin avoiding Yahoo with the same impunity they avoid MSN?
Theoretically Microsoft could buy up anything good about the internet so we can all shut our computers down and settle in w/a trip to the library and a good book.
I am sure Yahoo already lost a lot of users just because of the rumor/bid. I actually checked if closing/purging Yahoo account is still easy and my account exists there since 1998. Guess why that account was opened first time? Hotmail got acquired by MS and I was one of first to ask if there is a way to close my account ;) Moved to Yahoo the day it was announced.
Priceless quote. (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!! (Score:3, Interesting)
The only thing that matters: EMAIL (Score:5, Interesting)
Interesting that - imagine building a business using online apps, only to have your supplier go under and get bought out in some botched effort, and then lose history...
I think there are a number of serious implications in this MS/Yahoo deal. The monopoly aspect is actually the least problematic: the loss of history is a greater problem.
But then, maybe the Feds under a Democratic Admin will say "nuh uh!" and kill the deal...
RS
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have 10 years of email in yahoo. If MS takes over, what then? Will they force everyone into hotmail accounts? I think I'm going to be spending a few hours every night downloading and saving my email off line.
Interesting that - imagine building a business using online apps, only to have your supplier go under and get bought out in some botched effort, and then lose history...
Dude, that's the first thing I thought when I heard of "application service providers." For starters, I hated the industry since they couldn't find their own fucking acronym, they had to keep getting everyone confused with the other ASP.
Here's a good example I just found out about, an asp going after doctor's offices. In the last few I've been in, they're still running apps off of ancient LAN's, some are even DOS-based. All they need is a simple client-tracking and medical billing database and there's not
The Empire Strikes Back (Score:5, Insightful)
It was only a matter of time before Microsoft decided to try to get a final regulatory pass from the Bush administration before the inauguration of a less-sympathetic President in 2009.
This deal makes a lot of sense for Microsoft (sort of - I'm assuming Yahoo!'s ad business really is worth the cash), but I can't see how this is at all good for Yahoo! or the marketplace at large.
Is the plan to re-brand everything as Microsoft Live! (keeping the exclamation mark) - thus destroying pretty much the only thing Yahoo! has going for it - brand recognition?
I would be very sad to see Yahoo! and their odd collection of services get subsumed and destroyed in a merger with Microsoft. Yes, I'm assuming much of Yahoo!'s tech portfolio would be wiped away or left to die - this wouldn't be the sort of merger Adobe engineered with Macromedia by a long shot.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This deal makes a lot of sense for Microsoft (sort of - I'm assuming Yahoo!'s ad business really is worth the cash), but I can't see how this is at all good for Yahoo! or the marketplace at large.
The question is not whether it's a good deal for Yahoo!, the question is whether it's a good deal for Yahoo! shareholders... Anyways, paying a 62% premium on the market value to just let yahoo! die out seems like a pretty bad deal to me, so I very much doubt that Microsoft will just let the Yahoo! brand die out...
flickr (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not looking for another heavy weight image handling application. Got quite a few of those already, and all available GPL or similar. Flickr was cool because they published their webservice API, allowing others to create simple image uploaders or plugins for existing applications.
But for me, Flickr's main attraction was the ability to share images using a Creative Commons [creativecommons.org] license. It means I can use other peoples images as resources in my websites, which in turn enco
Microsoft's monopoly money... (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft is looking to put google out of business.
I contacted the FTC to complain (Score:5, Interesting)
I know about the other solutions, but none are as feature complete IMHO as Zimbra. Two words: Blackberry integration.
I for one... (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm..... (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/299523 [thestar.com]
Ballmer makes this comment:
" Signalling Microsoft doesn't intend to take no for an answer, Ballmer wrote that the company "reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo's shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.""
My question is how many chairs does that involve?
Perhaps (Score:4, Interesting)
I can see this in a two prong attack to get to Google.
First, by buying Yahoo, they get access to all of Yahoo's users which will be migrated over to MSN. This will give MS the strength to talk to Madison Ave and have the technology that is good enough.
Second, MS will then offer cut rate advertisement (or perhaps a new click model which is deeply discounted), which will force Google to react or lose market share.
Remember that Google is primarily a advertisement firm with some killer search technology, not a technology firm that also does ads- so to use a Ballmer quote from the past, to kill a company, you "cut out the air supply". Google's air is adverts.
Finally, this will cut into Yahoo's open source projects; just a little benefit for MS, but still, it's there.
To a monopolist, $40b is cheep money for killing 2 birds with one stone.
Now, will it happen?
That's another question.
This is bad on many levels (Score:5, Interesting)
That makes the game Microsoft vs Google.
Now, can Microsoft really take on Yahoo without destroying it? Will it be like when Compaq bought DEC? Or will it work? Yahoo is all FreeBSD, the engineers there HATE and laugh at Microsoft and its products. I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.
There is something different going on here. FAST, Fast Search and Transfer, previous owners of www.alltheweb.com, a search engine competitor to google in the late 1990s split from its search engine business which it sold to overture, which was bought by Yahoo. Microsoft is currently in the process of buying FAST, and next on the agenda is Yahoo. Bringing back together, the two halves of the old company.
It may be a coincidence, but it is curious. Why would Microsoft buy technology that it arguably already has or could build cheaper? What is it they are out to get? Are there patents or other "intellectual property" owned collectively by the two parts of FAST that they can use to sue Google?
Also, Yahoo is a HUGE open source user/contributor. A purchase by Microsoft will almost certainly reduce the number and amount of contribution to the open source environment.
Lastlt, isn't this *exactly* what the Sherman act was designed to prevent?
Knee Jerk Reaction (Score:3, Interesting)
Omens bad, they are (Score:4, Funny)
When you scramble up the letters in Microsoft and Yahoo it spells Hot Roomy Fiasco. That can't be good.
Wait, it can also spell Ciao, Frosty Homo. That's not so good either.
Question - Why is EU approval needed? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why do EU regulators get any say over whether Microsoft can purchase Yahoo? Does, say, Canada also have the right to block Microsoft from purchasing Yahoo? Could the US block BMW from purchasing Daimler?
This is based on the assumption that Microsoft and Yahoo are both incorporated in the United States.
Note: I am not a U.S. person, nor do I have a US-rocks, EU-sucks attitude.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Will MS buy #2 and make it #3 like them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Before MS buys something more successful than they are - I think they should do some serious introspection as to why exactly they were not able to achieve such a lofty goal on their own given how much more value they are (in their words) to the customer. If they just buy #2 there's probably a good chance they will sink back to #3 again as they integrate their #3 ideas on a business operating at #2.
I would think if they really wanted to be #2 they should pay Yahoo to 'buy MSN' and let Yahoo figure out what is wrong with their #3 problem and overlay the staff, technology and features that could make MSN #2.
Implications of 2008 US Presidential Race (Score:3, Interesting)
I expect something similar to happen here. Right now, the Department of Justice is unlikely to enforce antitrust law too strictly, and so at this point in time I don't expect the DoJ would have a problem with this acquisition. However, if Clinton or Obama wins the presdiency 10 months from now and this acquisition still isn't completed, don't be surprised if the DoJ starts looking at this much more closely and blocks the acquisition.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The FreeBSD / MySQL migration will be fun... (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember how many goes it took to get hotmail off of FreeBSD, and I expect Yahoo! to be even harder.
For the sake of innovation... (Score:3, Insightful)
Competition (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of the conversation has been about reducing the number of search engines from three to two. But for some businesses seeking on-line advertising, this merger will reduce the number of choices from two to one. If you are a business in competition with either Microsoft, one of its 'Channel Partners', lackeys, or other minions, MSN is simply not a viable option. I seriously doubt Microsoft will allow Yahoo to escape its 'One World, One Program' marketing vision.
Re:Zimbra (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Is this innovation? (Score:4, Informative)
I try and mix it up, I still use Google a lot but unless they find a way to get people to stop gaming the system, I think Google will have some problems. Seeing pages filled with banner ads in your first ten results for an engineering or computer science topic is disheartening.
Re:nice to see (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:nice to see (Score:5, Interesting)
The amount of Internet penetration here is very very less, apart from Hyderabad. Google is so popular that it is part of our songs [Like Bollywood, which are Hindi films, we have our own industry of sorts with Telugu films and yes they all have songs].
When a movie song has Google in it, it is because the average movie-goer knows what it is.
Google has become a part of our language. The same with some other regional languages include the National language Hindi.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
All my bookmarks are in del.icio.us [wikipedia.org] :-(
All my images are in Flickr [wikipedia.org] :-(
If I knew they were going to hand over all my data to Microsoft I wouldn't have signed up.
*sigh* time to start looking for alternative services.
Re:Going to Hotmail Hell (Score:4, Interesting)