Microsoft and News Corp in Yahoo Bid Talks

KingAlanI writes "The New York Times website is reporting that Microsoft is trying another angle in its bid for Yahoo: joining up with another behemoth, Murdoch's News Corporation. This is still very much in the preliminary stage, if anything, but an important development to consider. The idea of Yahoo working with fellow Web giant Google, in a plan to counteract Microsoft's takeover plan, is also discussed."

Brilliant

Of course! We need more EVIL! Get Murdoch on board....

I would like to congratulate Microsoft

For singlehandledly making AOL relevant again. I think my collection of AOL disks just increased in value.

Better link

This is a better link [iht.com] because it's reg-free.

The wrinkly photo of Murdoch (complete with disembodied hand) is just icing on the cake.

Time-Warner Is Also Making A Play

Don't count out another media player:

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0929033920080410?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true [reuters.com]

Hard to know whether this is going to turn into a bidding war, but no matter what happens, Yahoo's days as an independant 'net player on the big stage are numbered.

MSFT, Hotmail and Yahoo

troll -1

IMHO, I don't think Microsoft is going to gain anything by taking over Apple, Yahoo OR Google. They have acquired Hotmail earlier, and I personally know many friends switching from Hotmail to something else for pathetic services. I do not have a single contact with Hotmail address today.

MSFT is not known for quality, and, yes, it is loss to the world to have lost a good company to MSFT. But MSFT is not going to gain anything

/troll

Re:MSFT, Hotmail and Yahoo

"Here are up-to-date numbers for a single country, Turkey:"

Those statistics being "single country" also makes them less valid on the world scale.

I thought I smelled a fish when your statistics seemed to indicate that 1/3 of all Turks are "MSN users". This also means that if this [wikipedia.org] and this [internetworldstats.com] is correct, there are more MSN users than Internet users in Turkey. So let us just assume that EVERY single Internet user in Turkey is also an MSN user.

Could this possibly be representative for the world?

The answer is pretty obviously "no".
If all your statistics are correct, Turkey accounts for approximately 8.3 % of the MSN users in the world, but less than 1.3% of the worlds internet users (based on 1.32 billion Internet users from here [wikipedia.org]).

Either your numbers are completely wrong, or MSN is over 6 times as popular in Turkey as the average for Internet users. Either way, they are completely useless as proof of total MSN usage in the world.

Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire

If Microsoft is trying to convince anyone that its hostile takeover of Yahoo isn't evil, it's going in exactly the wrong direction.

Pot, this is Kettle

From the article...
"Microsoft immediately blasted the idea of a search advertising partnership between Yahoo and Google, saying it would be anticompetitive. âoeAny definitive agreement between Yahoo and Google would consolidate over 90 percent of the search advertising market in Googleâ(TM)s hands,â Microsoft said in a statement."

For some reason, this cry for justice rings empty. Does Microsoft honestly think THEY can make such complaints given their own gregarious behavior?

Re:Pot, this is Kettle

True I don't have much sympathy but ad hominem is still a logically flawed argument.

What MS says is logically true, I just don't happen to give a rats ass about them saying it.

But the question is...

Will this actually lure people away from Google? Right now the mentality is quite simply "Google It".

I'm not sure we'll be hearing "Yahoo! It" or "MSN It" any time soon.

It probably doesn't help that Google is the default search in Firefox either.

Re:But the question is...

Will this actually lure people away from Google? Right now the mentality is quite simply "Google It".

I'm not sure we'll be hearing "Yahoo! It" or "MSN It" any time soon.

It probably doesn't help that Google is the default search in Firefox either.

There's probably some quote out there along the lines of much is forgiven of those who can deliver. People forgive Apple the smeck-headed egotism of Jobs and the acolytes because they still manage to deliver a solid product. People are worried about Google actually being evil but they turn out some really innovative products just dripping with ideas. Microsoft takes a lot of shit for being evil and the products they come out with are dull and uninspired.

You can talk about propaganda and public relations and brainwashing when people say they have warm-fuzzies when thinking about Apple and Google. At the end of the day, though, people have to use their products. You can say it's marketing but a lot of people really, really like Apple and Google products. They can't all be kool-aid drinkers. If Jobs acts like an insufferable twat with the overbearing egotism of someone who thinks he's always right, well damnit, he usually is. We probably wouldn't dislike him as much if he turned out a Vista every once in a while. The Mac Cube was lame but not lame enough.

Could've been funnier

It could've said "Microsoft and Newscorp have banded together to make the proper sacrifices to Cthulhu to ensure their bid for Yahoo! is accepted." At least then the circle of evil would be complete.

Two great evils together at last.

Hey you've got right wing zealotry in my monopoly.

Hey you've got monopoly in my right right wing politics.

Ah two great evils that taste better together.

Microsoft + FOX + Yahoo! =

MicroFOX!

Yahoo's Google test means MS was right

The recent announcement about Yahoo testing Adsense for search result advertising just proves that MS is right and that Yahoo is not a viable standalone entity. We need strong and serious competition for Google because the last thing the world needs is a monopoly on the source of revenue for ad properties. Yahoo has now admitted defeat and MS is willing to put up the challenge. Throw in Fox and we could have a real competitor for Google.

Of course, combining 3 "also rans"doesn't mean we get a winner, just that we'll at least likely have a fight!

Don't Feed the Lawyers

True enough, but, y'know, why spend all this money on lawyers just to make this thing happen just to have a bit of a limp struggle against the google-constrictor. What's the point? The three of them are screwed as an entity. They could no more pull a decen

AOL Bailout

From the article:

Yahoo, which wants to remain independent, has been in a desperate search for white knights, holding conversations with Time Warnerâ(TM)s AOL and News Corporation.

A Yahoo-AOL merger would make for one mediocre company. I don't think that will scare off giants like Microsoft and Google. In the end we will be left with just two companies, unless the SEC says otherwise.

Interesting argument from MS

Microsoft immediately blasted the idea of a search advertising partnership between Yahoo and Google, saying it would be anticompetitive. "Any definitive agreement between Yahoo and Google would consolidate over 90 percent of the search advertising market in Google's hands," Microsoft said in a statement.

*blinks*

Re:Is this a poison pill strategy?

It's been a long time since I had a business class. Isn't this what is called the poison pill? Either buying up things that make the company a poor purchase decision, or entering into contracts that do the same thing etc?

No, I don't think so. I think Yahoo believes that a deal with Google might be more lucrative than its current course of action, which is to do all advertising in-house.

All in all, the goal seems to be to strengthen Yahoo in order to push up the stock price to avoid a hostile takeover. The poison pill approach is to make the company look so bad that nobody would want to buy it. I don't think that's what Yahoo's trying to do at all.

Re:Is this a poison pill strategy?

The parent wrote, "It's been a long time since I had a business class. Isn't this what is called the poison pill? Either buying up things that make the company a poor purchase decision, or entering into contracts that do the same thing etc?"

I think it would qualify more as a poison pill strategy if Yahoo! gave up their own ad service completely and signed a binding long-term agreement with Google, the kind that survives mergers and buy-outs.

Re:I have a feeling..

MSFT wouldn't enter the deal if it would hurt them.

Re:I have a feeling..

Why do I have a feeling MSFT is going to come out ahead with this deal As for if this will stand in the EU... that is another question all-together.

Actually, if you take the history of all buy-outs, the Net benefit for the firm doing the buying is roughly 0%. Though it's a historical average, where some companies may deviate, the company buying the firm tends to have no benefits in the long run. Even in the recent tech world AMD/ATI, TimeWarner/AOL, EBAY/SKYPE come to mind...

well, this will be great for MS if allowed

it is designed to kill Google, not compete. They are going to use their monopoly to control the web by forcing all MSIE users to become 'live'. Once done, their search engine will be integrated with their desktop. Of course, Google will sue in court later on, MS will be found guilty, and MS will simply pay. Not a bad deal for MS.

But I am guessing that W would allow it (MS paid a lot of money to his campaign), but EU, China, Russia, and japan will nix it. And yes, those countries do have a say. After all, they can simply shut down all Windows sales, which would push Linux to the forefront. And from their POV, that would mean new business opportunities.

That's the fact. Here's a link.

"... if you take the history of all buy-outs, the Net benefit for the firm doing the buying is roughly 0%."

Source: Wikipedia article about Mergers and Acquisitions [wikipedia.org]. Quote: "Historically, mergers have often failed (Straub, 2007) to add significantly to the value of the acquiring firm's shares (King, et al., 2004)."

That idea is well-known, but I was unable to find another link quickly. (It's only a Slashdot comment, not the result of a research project.) For example, the merger of Time-Warner and AOL is the worst business decision of human history, and lowered the value of Time-Warner so much that employees lost much of their invested savings.

The basic point seems valid in this case, also. Microsoft has proven, over many years, that it does not know how to run a search engine. Yahoo has proven, over many years, that...

I'm guessing that Steve Ballmer is doing this because he wants an outlet for his anger. It's difficult to see how owning Yahoo can benefit Microsoft. One possibility is that Microsoft can try to get a partial monopoly over some kinds of internet traffic. Many people with little technical knowledge use whatever Microsoft pushes them towards.

Microsoft is NOT a successful company, in my opinion. If Microsoft didn't have one-time monopolies created during a time when people were ignorant about computers, it would not make much profit.

Also, the failure of Vista may indicate that Microsoft can no longer hire people intelligent enough to write working software.

Re:

When your carefully nurtured trademark enters popular usage as a generic term for your product or service you are in deep shit.

As long as its a term for your product or service, you are fine. When it enters popular usage as a generic term for products or s