Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: martinibuster
"We don't think it's reasonable to assume we're going to gain a lot of share from Google," Chief Financial Officer Susan Decker said in an interview. "It's not our goal to be No. 1 in Internet search. We would be very happy to maintain our market share."
The Coca-Cola Company (Coca-Cola) manufactures, distributes and markets non-alcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups, including fountain syrups, in the world.
PepsiCo, Inc. is a global snack and beverage company. It manufactures, markets and sells a variety of salty, convenient, sweet and grain-based snacks, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages, and foods.
The comment still stands. If I worked for Pepsi, I'd be upset.
[edited by: martinibuster at 4:30 pm (utc) on Jan. 25, 2006]
[edit reason] TOS #19 [/edit]
joined:Oct 27, 2001
Back on topic: The Yahoo CFO's comment wasn't a big deal. Maybe it would have been better if she'd said something like "We don't feel that search is our core mission," or "We've never been a search company, but we're pleased that we now handle X% of the Web's searches in-house instead of outsourcing that task as we did until recently." But in the end, her comment isn't likely to have any more effect on the company's stock, profits, or employee morale than a remark made by Google's CFO just over a year ago in a talk on click fraud: "I think something has to be done about this really, really quickly, because I think, potentially, it threatens our business model." (For those who haven't been watching Google's earnings reports, the AdWords/AdSense program has been doing just fine since that swoon-inducing warning was delivered.)
Wrong. In the U.S., she is responsible -- legally responsible, with criminal sanctions backing up that responsibility -- for giving accurate information about the state of the business, to all investors as well as the general public. Oxley-Sorbanes may have made a lot of executives more aware of that responsibility, but it has been there for years. The Enron, Worldcom, and Martha Stewart cases were prosecuted under per-OS laws.
This person has simply stated the obvious, plain truth about the whole situation. People are still going to flock to Yahoo, and they will still be a total money making machine. They would probably love to just be able to ditch the whole thing and just go back to having the directory. The results would be a hell of a lot better thatís for sure.
Itís really not a big deal, and their position for pure search, relative to Google is definitely not news. Admitting it yes, but the fact has been, and remains so, and if you really think about it, trying to catch Google is just an unprofitable goal. I think the honesty is totally refreshing and they should get a lot of credit for it. If they put the money they keep investing in an algorithmic search engine, into other things, they would make more money, and the stock holders would be happier.
If Yahoo were to sell all its search properties for twenty bucks, that would be a failure, but if search contributes a positive return in line with the investments made, there is no problem here from the corporate side. Of course as webmasters we can be disappointed that they don't work harder to make a better engine, but that is a whole different angle.
And Yahoo does have many areas to improve on in their finance, chat, and YIM technologies. Unfortunately, those services aren't nearly as profitable as search, but they are services that I as a user would hate to lose.
I think that the idea of "improve what we have" is much better for Yahoo than "beat our way to the top".
Susan, You Are Fired!
What on earth are you thinking? And what on earth are your more senior members of Management thinking?
This is simply a total meltdown. I don't own any Yahoo shares, but I liked them. If I owned their stock it would have been sold already!
Can you Imagine Gates making this type of comment? Bill, I own a lot of your stock, don't do it! However, I really don't think you will make this kind of mistake!
I really don't know what to make of this! It is such a rookie error that either you have to believe that Yahoo is incompetantant or that their employee's are? Ain't good either way for a company that showed promise!
Could this allow MSN to 'perfect' (yes I agree a little way off) their algo and search and power Yahoo then?
I am pretty sure Yahoo would not go back to Google for results - as their's are pretty pony - they have to do something.
With their close collaboration on the IM side, the two teamed together may truely be a match for G. Alone - no chance right now!
Could prove food for thought.