| 2:39 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I for one am glad this deal didn't happen. Yahoo is a welcome player in those very competitive spaces; I like that Yahoo exists; I'm glad they stood up for their worth and didn't cease to exist as Yahoo, independently. If the search space only consisted of GOOG and MSFT surrounded by gnats, the playing field would feel barren.
|it doesn't have the marketing machine that Google has |
@ronin: Google does not have a marketing machine. Coke has a marketing machine; Nike and Nestle have marketing machines. Google marketing is remarkably absent, except at trade shows, and that little Goooooooooogle link beneath AdSense ads. Yahoo similarly doesn't do much in the way of marketing - it's almost like in the Internet services industry, traditional marketing is considered tacky?
| 4:24 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm glad I sold my Yahoo the day MS made the offer, almost made back all my money.
| 4:28 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
....Google has a single product
That's been the official Microsoft propaganda line for some time. (However, I've never heard anyone with a technical clue propagating it.)
I'm not sure which "single product" Microsoft thinks Google has. I use Gmail. I _don't_ use their advertising services, but I've heard that they do offer some such thing. Microsoft was happy enough to copy Google Earth (um, I mean "retroactively innovate a unique new concept for display of geographical data." Microsoft never copies. They just redefine "innovation.") Google Print sorely perturbed the Luddite Professional Scriptoria known as "Publishers" (who seemed to think it was a product competing with their termite fodder.) I've tried out Google Documents: it didn't serve my immediate purpose, but I can see how it could replace a competing "product," saving $500.00 a workstation for a lot of people.
I'm not big on propaganda lines, one way or another. But I willingly use a wide range of Google products, even including that search engine of theirs. That's not something that I could ever have said about Microsoft. The number of products they have that anyone would use by choice could be counted on the feathers of one hand.
However, over at Groklaw we've noticed that they have an extremely quickly-responding astroturfing team. And some people not particularly tech-aware do drink the kool-aid.
| 6:00 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
>>>I'm not sure which "single product" Microsoft thinks Google has.
Adwords. That's their single product. That's where they make all their money. All the other stuff is just window dressing.
| 6:10 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I am glad MS walked away, simply because I don't believe Yahoo was worth even their opening offer.
The speed with which high tech investments can be turned from gold to dust is quite remarkable
For me it would be like Coke buying Pepsi , Re branding it and changing the inredients, and then expecting the Pepsi buyers to keep on buying it like nothing had happened
| 6:10 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
If you look at it that way then Microsoft only have 2 products. Not exactly impressive given how much longer they have been around for.
| 6:14 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Products which people actually pay for, actually, I've either bought most of them for me or for other entities
| 7:30 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
In that case Google has Urchin, Apps Premier, search appliance and a few others. They sell them as well, and people actually pay for them.
Do people really buy Microsoft Money these days? Come on ;)
| 7:30 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
"....Google has a single product."
There are indeed various definitions of "product".
hutcheson was referring to a range of products that not necessarily make money for Google.
On the other hand, if we talk about products that make money for a company, the claim that Google has only one product might be pretty accurate.
hutcheson's comment about Google maps isn't correct. He should find out about Microsoft's TerraServer.
| 9:16 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Yang: Maybe not so dumb, he owns a lot of stock himself, and probably doesn't want to throw away value. He's only been back in charge for a little over a year, and it takes at least 5 years to execute a turnaround strategy and see it to fruition with a company this large.
Yahoo still has some amazing assets, a lot of eyeballs, and a great deal of potential. Sure, it can all be squandered, but I can see Yang wanting to buy himself the time he needs to "prove" his strategy.
Microsoft is much more on the ropes than Yahoo is, at this point. They're loosing market share percentage point by percentage point on the desktop, on the web, in their productivity software, pretty much on all fronts.
Why would you want to get bought out by a company that is putting so much effort into squandering every advantage they ever had?
| 9:47 pm on May 5, 2008 (gmt 0)|
It would be interesting to know what's happened to Jellyfish revenue since Microsoft purchased them.
| 4:08 am on May 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|That's been the official Microsoft propaganda line for some time. (However, I've never heard anyone with a technical clue propagating it.) |
Those who expect a paycheck from Google would probably differ with the those who have a technical clue.
| 10:10 am on May 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The deal will happen once Yahoo stock goes down to the teens.
| 12:12 pm on May 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I do not think it is possible to buy Yahoo at the new cheap price like everyone claims. There are 2 reasons for this.
1. As soon as Microsoft makes another offer the stock will shoot back up, probably higher than this time.
2. From what I hear people loyal to Yang hold around 60% of the voting share so Microsoft couldn't have gone hostile even if they wanted to.
| 3:58 pm on May 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Google has a single product and isn't doing terribly well providing it |
Erm... anyone use a different search engine?
| 3:57 am on May 10, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I think the reason the deal was not went through because Yahoo is in a stronger negotiated position than MS. Yahoo can either be good or bad in some sense that make Google and MS afraid of. Yahoo can be a dangerous flipflop that shift the balance of power in the battle for supremacy. (That's why they play Google's deal while negotiating with MS.)
Let face it, the final count down will be very much likely between Google & MS. (Yahoo is a third kingdom that happened to be in the middle of a war zone). If MS was to battle Google, they need key products to counter attack Google which will be.
1. Compete with Adsense - #1 priority
2. Compete with Adword - #1
3. Compete with Search - #1
4. Compete with Gmail
MS currently don't have Adsense, (no publisher network). AdCenter is to small to compete with Adword. Search is not good. so to do it alone will be very much an impossible mission. (Why I think that way, because they have proven in years of failing and trailing Google and doing the same thing will not make any differences.)
Ok. So you may think that if MS can look for alternative options, then possibly we can guess that they may buy AOL, FaceBook or MySpace which are currently the strongest candidates. However, these guys won't have what MS need in order to compete with Google. (Social network is cool but not search. google=search) so even MS buy them all, they still don't have the Publisher Network (Adsense), AdWord, and Search which are the keys (ammunition) to kill Google. Which mean there are basically no alternative to Yahoo even they try to look around the globe and the outer space.
I think Yahoo figured that out ... so strategically, they are not in a hurry to sell them out. However, both Yahoo and MS aware that Google is the most dangerous guy.
For Yahoo stance point, chances they beat Google or MS are very slim. They can't go alone ... and much likely will be swallow by G or MS. So they obviously need to make the most out of it.
If I was Yang, I will buy out AOL or MySpace, then MS won't have any other choices or options but have to put the deal through at any cost.
If you put yourself in MS's shoes who would you rather afraid of? Google or Yahoo?
... THEN THE ANSWER WILL BE VERY OBVIOUS!
| This 46 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 46 ( 1  ) |