Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 50.17.16.177

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Yahoo and Time Warner Step Up Talks

alternative to Microsoft Corp.'s unsolicited offer for Yahoo

     
11:08 am on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Administrator from GB 

WebmasterWorld Administrator engine is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month Best Post Of The Month

joined:May 9, 2000
posts:22303
votes: 238


Yahoo Inc. and Time Warner Inc. have stepped up talks over creating an alternative to Microsoft Corp.'s unsolicited offer for Yahoo, people familiar with the matter said.

The talks center on a deal that would fold Time Warner's AOL Internet unit into Yahoo, these people said, though they still consider a Yahoo purchase by Microsoft as the most likely outcome.

Yahoo and Time Warner Step Up Talks [online.wsj.com]

1:25 pm on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 26, 2003
posts:1284
votes: 0


Yeah, because we all know Time Warner knows how to manage an Internet Brand. AOL was such a major success for them they want to go at it again.

If Yahoo's board is serious about keeping Yahoo as a brand and a viable business for its share holders the time warner mumbo jumbo is a few weeks to early for april fools day.

2:22 pm on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 22, 2003
posts:1483
votes: 0


>>we all know Time Warner knows how to manage an Internet Brand

Not to mention Britney-izing CNN. Showbiz "News" and SERPs, a perfect match.

3:35 pm on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jimbeetle is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 26, 2002
posts:3292
votes: 6


Yeah, because we all know Time Warner knows how to manage an Internet Brand. AOL was such a major success for them they want to go at it again.

A bit backwards, it was AOL that purchased Time Warner then found that it couldn't manage itself. Since the coup by the Time Warner side it's been trying to find a way to rid itself of AOL. If, big if, they can pull something together it would be a win-win for both sides.
8:46 pm on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 26, 2003
posts:1284
votes: 0


A bit backwards, it was AOL that purchased Time Warner then found that it couldn't manage itself. Since the coup by the Time Warner side it's been trying to find a way to rid itself of AOL. If, big if, they can pull something together it would be a win-win for both sides.

Doesn't really matter does it? AOL couldn't manage to save TW infrastructure after TW spent hundreds of millions implementing new switching systems across the country. Outside of the Media Mogul side TW/AOL *SHOULD* have been a match made in heaven.

I don't think yahoo is going to make TW behave any differently. Once a monolith, always a monolith.

10:47 pm on Mar 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member swa66 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 7, 2003
posts:4783
votes: 0


Anything is better for Yahoo! than Microsoft.
4:42 am on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 25, 2005
posts:989
votes: 1


contra. microsoft is the best that could happen to yahoo.

aol + yahoo = two sinking ships

both with main product "web portal" - that's so silly, makes you think you're stuck in the 90s..

9:43 am on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 12, 2002
posts: 696
votes: 0


Anything is better for Yahoo! than Microsoft

LMAO no way you forgot to put Ask in there ;)

Personally I don't believe Y will go anywhere as they are... so someone needs to come in and shake things up... M$ has money, desire to beat G and can easily hire in the best guys top make it work...

Wouldn't be my preferred match up - but at least we all might get some competition to G... which has to be a good thing.