[Eug]

Or at least YHOO is. MS backed away from their $33/share offer, since Yahoo!'s brass has been holding out.

The stock is now gonna drop significantly. Who knows, maybe MS will come back later and buy them at much cheaper prices.

I know a lot of anti-MS types will claim victory, but an empty victory it is. YHOO shares are gonna get kicked around on Monday. The purchase would have been good for Yahoo! shareholders, but now it ain't gonna happen.

P.S. I say this as someone who primarily uses Yahoo! for email, and disliked the MSification of Hotmail.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Good. I think MS buying them would have been the worst thing that could have happened for them. Anything that is good for Microsoft is bad for the consumer.

I don't like or hate Yahoo, I just find them so Vanilla.

[Eug]

Well, MS not buying them may just be worse for them. Or at least, worse for anyone holding shares of them.

[Chuckit]

Being bought by Microsoft would be good in roughly the same way as crystal meth. Sure, the investors would like the immediate rush, but it's not really helpful to the company in the long run.

[aristotles]

You have got to be kidding me. MSFT buying Yahoo would have been the death of everything Yahoo ever created. Yahoo Widgets would have most certainly been dead and gone.

I believe that Google and Yahoo will formalize their partnership to a greater degree in future. I feel the two companies will work to complement each other rather than competing directly with each other.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, MS not buying them may just be worse for them. Or at least, worse for anyone holding shares of them.

Microsoft buying them is no way better. I mean think of what they would have done to yahoo mail and flikr by cramming both full of bad UI and ads.

Not to mention do we really want MS owning another huge chunk of the internet.

Your Yahoo mail isn't a big deal, there a tons of better alternatives anyway. The real threat was MS having another monopoly.

[Chuckit]

What are the tons of better alternatives to Yahoo Mail? The only alternative that I've ever heard described as "better" is Gmail.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Microsoft buying them is no way better. I mean think of what they would have done to yahoo mail and flikr by cramming both full of bad UI and ads.

Not to mention do we really want MS owning another huge chunk of the internet.

Your Yahoo mail isn't a big deal, there a tons of better alternatives anyway. The real threat was MS having another monopoly.

Whether or not you like MS really has little to do with whether or not MS buying Yahoo! is good for Yahoo! (investors).

P.S. Yahoo! Mail already has a mediocre UI. I don't use flikr so I can't really comment there.

Anyways, if I were a YHOO investor, I would have loved to see MS buy Yahoo!. I'd take my profits and run. Now that MS is cancelling the offer, YHOO is likely gonna drop like a rock.

[analogika]

The importance of stock price is WAAAY overrated. Especially long-term.

Yahoo and flickr staying out of Microsoft's clutches (for now) is a Good Thing.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

What are the tons of better alternatives to Yahoo Mail? The only alternative that I've ever heard described as "better" is Gmail.

Free Email

No spam, ever.

[MacosNerd]

Its a smart business move on MS' side. Yahoo was setting the price unrealistically high and they realized a hostile proxy take cover would actually damage the search giant's business and theirs as well. They're better off walking away biding there time. If yahoo stumbles in their business plan MS will be there ready to scoop them up

[Love Calm Quiet]

A "toasted" Yahoo sounds tastier and much more nutritious than...

a Wonder Bread world where innovation is *soft* as in Microsoft.

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by Love Calm Quiet 

a Wonder Bread world where innovation is *soft* as in Microsoft.

How can you say that about Microsoft, the people that brougt us Vista, Bob, MSN TV, Zune, etc

[Love Calm Quiet]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Free Email

No spam, ever.

...and BTW:

What's with Doghousemail ? That links takes one to a puzzling page. And its link for their "compare prices" just takes one to a "directory of services" page... and no obvious link to their "free email".

If free email is central to their business plan, I a gain no confidence from its obscurity thereon.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The importance of stock price is WAAAY overrated.

That's easy to say if you're not an investor.

Yahoo and flickr staying out of Microsoft's clutches (for now) is a Good Thing.

I agree, but I think too many people here are missing the point. I agree that MS owning Yahoo! would be problematic for us consumers, but that's a total different kettle of fish.

Remember Yahoo! wanted to be bought, but just not at $33. They wanted 12% more, or $37. It's not as Yahoo! actually had its consumers' interests at heart, despite how a few here are trying to make Yahoo! into some sort of anti-MS saviour. ie. They were holding out for more money, not for the integrity of their existing business model.

[ghporter]

Being bought by Microsoft is the equivalent to going out of business. The only exception I can think of at the moment is Bungie, and that's only because their product was so heavily associated with Bungie rather than MS. Microsoft wanted Yahoo! merely to take a poke at online advertising giant Google. That's the MS way-buy something that is competing with you, or that you can use to compete against someone, whether it's good for anyone or not.

In 2000 (or was it in late 1999?) Yahoo! stock went from around $600 to less than $60 a share in just days because of the "dot com bubble" bursting. They're still around and still strong. This is the same sort of thing. A solid company isn't going to disappear because someone offered to buy them out and failed, though on the short term it will hurt stock prices. Which means it's probably time to look at buying shares of YHOO.

[turtle777]

No offense, Glenn, but this is a bad reason to buy a stock, just because it has survived the past 6-7 years doesn't mean it will in the future.

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Eug 

That's easy to say if you're not an investor.

Yes, because then you're not myopically obsessed with the short-term performance of one number (and a number that can be influenced by nothing more than a rumor). It is indeed easier to say that when you're looking at the big picture. The fact is, if your company does well, the stock price will eventually reflect that. So the best thing you can do for investors in the long term is to do a really good job. If a move will artificially inflate your stock price in the short term but screw the company in the long term, that is a bad move for any investors who aren't just looking to make a quick buck.

Originally Posted by Eug 

I agree, but I think too many people here are missing the point. I agree that MS owning Yahoo! would be problematic for us consumers, but that's a total different kettle of fish.

Remember Yahoo! wanted to be bought, but just not at $33. They wanted 12% more, or $37. It's not as Yahoo! actually had its consumers' interests at heart, despite how a few here are trying to make Yahoo! into some sort of anti-MS saviour. ie. They were holding out for more money, not for the integrity of their existing business model.

I don't think that's true. The higher price was a bluff — Yahoo was valuing itself way more than anybody else, knew Microsoft wouldn't pay it, and they were right.

Originally Posted by Love Calm Quiet 

...and BTW:

What's with Doghousemail ? That links takes one to a puzzling page. And its link for their "compare prices" just takes one to a "directory of services" page... and no obvious link to their "free email".

If free email is central to their business plan, I a gain no confidence from its obscurity thereon.

There's a signup link right at the top. You get 25 MB space and your email is deleted if you don't use the account for 30 days. The features list also doesn't explicitly say it, but it sounds like you might not be able to forward email, send attachments or create rules with a free account. It sounds a little bit worse to me, to be quite honest.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

No offense, Glenn, but this is a bad reason to buy a stock, just because it has survived the past 6-7 years doesn't mean it will in the future.

-t

Maybe I wasn't clear enough in saying "look at." I am personally planning on examining the way Yahoo! stock performs over then next 3 to 6 months, then if they do what I think they will, putting some money into their stock. I think the Yahoo! brand has staying power, and I plan on watching how things shake out before I do anything, but I'm doing this in the expectation that this particular stock will be worth buying in the relatively short term.

For the record, I'm also looking at buying into a number of recently started but stalled real estate developments around where I live, for similar purposed. I like the idea of taking advantage of short term investors and speculators by using a longer term view of both stocks and real estate. After they start collapsing, over inflated markets oscillate a while before they settle back down, so I expect a few small peaks and valleys in both real estate and YHOO before they get back into a positive trend. I'm patient.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Whether or not you like MS really has little to do with whether or not MS buying Yahoo! is good for Yahoo! (investors).

I don't think the millions of people who use Yahoo are more concerned about Yahoo investors than the future of yahoo itself and the future of the internet.

Microsoft would have ransacked the company for any users or technology it could use and have added that crappy MS touch to it.

On the "investor" side it has so much opposition people would have walked out in droves.

[Visnaut]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Anyways, if I were a YHOO investor

Not investing in Yahoo. Check.

Originally Posted by Eug 

I would have loved to see MS buy Yahoo!. I'd take my profits and run.

Does not have a company's future or interests in mind. Check.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Now that MS is cancelling the offer, YHOO is likely gonna drop like a rock.

Concern for the price of a stock in one's own portfolio. Check.

Wait. I don't get it. Why all of this concern? You're not even a stake-holder in all of this, other than being a Yahoo Mail user; and you don't even seem to care that it also would eventually go down the shitter, along with everything else MS considers fluff out of the deal.

Basically, I fail to see what your argument is, other than stating the obvious. Okay, so their stock price is going to fall, and the investors that are in it to make a quick buck will sell. Big deal. Who wouldn't see that coming?

I don't mean to rag on you, it's just that I really don't understand what your motivations are to be concerned or disappointed that Yahoo wasn't bought out.

Personally I'm indifferent, but it's easy to see that MS's singular purpose right now is to try to beat Google at all costs. Their tactics are out of desperation rather than an overall strategy. And all of their huffing and puffing over the last several weeks have no doubt put Yahoo in the spotlight and helped them gain mindshare. Hell, even I decided to drop by their homepage, and I don't think I've done that since the 90's.

[Mastrap]

Shareholder interests ≠ User interests in this case. I for one am glad that user interests, for now, have gained a respite.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Visnaut 

I don't mean to rag on you, it's just that I really don't understand what your motivations are to be concerned or disappointed that Yahoo wasn't bought out.

Personally I think Yahoo has been in serious decline. They were ripe for a buyout. That chance for buyout has now evaporated.

I personally see Yahoo dying slowly over the next several years. A buyout by MS would do one of two things - solidify its base and inject new blood into it... or kill it completely, even quicker.

Several Yahoo'ers have said they would have left Yahoo if MS took over. Well, to be quite frank, if that were the case that might have just been a good thing. Yahoo has become very stale, and I wonder if it's because they have a lot of employee/idea baggage that needs to be jettisoned.

Originally Posted by Mastrap 

Shareholder interests ≠ User interests in this case. I for one am glad that user interests, for now, have gained a respite.

How so? Status quo is good for user interests? One of the reasons I haven't been totally against a buyout was because as a Yahoo user, I see just how mediocre it is.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I don't think the millions of people who use Yahoo are more concerned about Yahoo investors than the future of yahoo itself and the future of the internet.

Yeah, because those millions of people don't pay for it.

Microsoft would have ransacked the company for any users or technology it could use and have added that crappy MS touch to it.

As opposed to Yahoo! being a slow bloated company with their own crappy Yahoo touch to it.

On the "investor" side it has so much opposition people would have walked out in droves.

Actually, on the "investor" side a lot of people were hoping for a buyout. Looking at the stock forums now, a lot of people are pissed that YHOO gave up on the chance.

The ironic part of all this is that there's nothing stopping MS coming back one year from now and offering $20 for the stock, when it's valued on the market at $15.

[Eug]

P.S. I'm a little confused with the arguments about holding YHOO for a longer term.

Remember, before the MS offer, YHOO was gradually declining, with no real coherent plan for bringing the stock back up. They were essentially pimping themselves out for a buyout, and even were in talks with AOL. I don't think there's any better sign of a company in decline in 2007 than one trying to merge with AOL.

YHOO was below $20 before MS's offer hit the news. Once the offer hit, it jumped to something like $28.

I suspect that YHOO will drop back down to the $20ish or so price range relatively soon, which means if you were an investor, you'd have to have a 30-40% gain to get to those same $28+ levels again. And this is in the context of a stock that had been slowly declining already. And that's not even mentioning the fact that YHOO would have gone well over $30 had the deal actually gone through.

Anyways, YHOO is now down 22% in pre-market trading in Europe.

[turtle777]

I wouldn't touch Yahoo. They don't have a compelling story.

Yes, their brand is worth something, but that's about it. Yahoo has been slowly dying for many years now.

-t

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Eug 

That's easy to say if you're not an investor.

Obviously.

But it seems that most people, in their greed for a fast buck, appear to forget that companies also have customers, and *they* are what makes a company actually viable.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I wouldn't touch Yahoo. They don't have a compelling story.

Yes, their brand is worth something, but that's about it. Yahoo has been slowly dying for many years now.

flickr is Yahoo!, too.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogika 

But it seems that most people, in their greed for a fast buck, appear to forget that companies also have customers, and *they* are what makes a company actually viable.

That's just it. Yahoo has been having a lot of trouble, and its future viability has been questioned. The reason the stock has been gradually dropping is because they haven't been able to impress its customers or its investors in quite some time.

Yahoo CEO on hot seat after rebuffing Microsoft's $47.5B bid

Monday's anticipated shareholder backlash will put Yang on the hot seat as he tries to execute on a turnaround plan that he began drawing up nearly a year ago after he replaced Terry Semel as CEO amid shareholder angst about the company's financial malaise.

"This squarely puts the pressure on Jerry Yang to deliver results and shareholder value," Standard & Poor's equity analyst Scott Kessler said. "You are going to see a lot of shareholders just throwing in the towel because they are going to realize it's going to take awhile for the stock to get back to where it was Friday."

---

Yang, 39, has promised that Yahoo's development of a more sophisticated and far-flung Internet advertising platform will produce net revenue growth of at least 25 percent in 2009 and 2010. That would be a dramatic improvement, considering that Yahoo's revenue rose by 12 percent last year and is expected to grow at about the same pace this year.

But analysts are skeptical about whether Yahoo will be able to hit those targets, raising the chances for a shareholder rebellion if the company stumbles during the next few months _ a distinct possibility if advertisers curtail spending in a shaky U.S. economy, as many analysts fear.

As it is, Yang and the rest of Yahoo's board almost certainly will face more lawsuits from incensed shareholders.

Even some of Yahoo's own employees may be irritated because virtually all of them own stock options.

What's more, Microsoft had planned to offer $1.5 billion in retention packages to the thousands of Yahoo employees it wanted to stay on after a takeover.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Remember, before the MS offer, YHOO was gradually declining, with no real coherent plan for bringing the stock back up. They were essentially pimping themselves out for a buyout, and even were in talks with AOL. I don't think there's any better sign of a company in decline in 2007 than one trying to merge with AOL.

Analysts now expect Ballmer to use the money he had earmarked for the Yahoo acquisition to explore other possible deals with large Internet companies like Time Warner Inc.'s AOL and News Corp.'s MySpace and promising startups like Facebook Inc. and LinkedIn Corp. Microsoft already owns a 1.6 percent in Facebook, the second-largest social network behind MySpace.

[torsoboy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

There's a signup link right at the top. You get 25 MB space and your email is deleted if you don't use the account for 30 days. The features list also doesn't explicitly say it, but it sounds like you might not be able to forward email, send attachments or create rules with a free account. It sounds a little bit worse to me, to be quite honest.

Checking the features page (TheDoghouseMail.com) it looks worse than any other free (or non-free) email solution that I have ever heard of. What a weird link to throw out there when someone asked about a good email alternative...

[BasketofPuppies]

A News Corp buyout still makes the most sense.

The real money made on the Internet comes from syndicated advertising. Google currently dominates that market to the point that it wouldn't matter if Yahoo!'s advertising placement technology were better than Google's. Everyone carries advertisments by Google because everyone is advertising with Google. Yahoo! and other competitors are left with table scraps.

If News Corp were to buy Yahoo!, MySpace, a division of News Corp, would surely switch its syndicated ads from Google to Yahoo!. The massive popularity of MySpace would force advertisers to advertise with Yahoo!, and from there, Yahoo! would be able to get Web sites to carry its syndicated ads.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Love Calm Quiet 

...and BTW:

What's with Doghousemail ? That links takes one to a puzzling page. And its link for their "compare prices" just takes one to a "directory of services" page... and no obvious link to their "free email".

If free email is central to their business plan, I a gain no confidence from its obscurity thereon.

Hmm, after looking at it again, it seems they changed their ToS. I had used them for a long time and never received any spam. Their service was good, but it looks as though it may not be anymore.

[@pplejaxkz]

I never liked Yahoo. I don't even know why, I just prefer Google over anything.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by @pplejaxkz 

I never liked Yahoo. I don't even know why, I just prefer Google over anything.

Well, I agree with you for search, but for email I still use Yahoo.

However, your post illustrates the problem. Google is the force here to be reckoned with. While there is still value in Yahoo, its market has been slowly been eaten away by Google, which is why investors haven't been too happy with Yahoo.

YHOO opened the day at $23.05, down $5.62 (- 19.6%).

It went as low as $22.97, but It's currently at $23.25 (-18.9%). We'll see how it will go today. I suspect the reason it hasn't gone below $22 is because many YHOO investors think that MS is still interested, and MS is just trying to rattle Jerry Yang's cage before offering another bid. I wonder where we'll see YHOO at close today though. If it does close today at say $23.25, that means it will need to gain 23% to hit the same price it was at close last week.

[Sherman Homan]

Forty-five minutes into trading and Yahoo is actually moving up above its opening lows...
10:15 EDT at 23.84 down 16.8 percent

[Eug]

Well, it's doing a little bit better than I expected. I was expecting $20-22 at open, and not much more than that at close.

At exactly 10:30 it's $24.03, down "only" $4.64 (-16.2%). That means to get to Friday's price, it would need to rise 19.3% from here.

[ctt1wbw]

I still find it hard to believe will people buy stock in things like Google or Yahoo, seeing as how they actually make nothing physical that you can see or touch or hold in your hand.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

I still find it hard to believe will people buy stock in things like Google or Yahoo, seeing as how they actually make nothing physical that you can see or touch or hold in your hand.

Why? Manufacturing physical products has never been the end-all-be-all of business.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

I still find it hard to believe will people buy stock in things like Google or Yahoo, seeing as how they actually make nothing physical that you can see or touch or hold in your hand.

Neither do banks.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, I agree with you for search, but for email I still use Yahoo.

Why though? What's so great about it that has you worried about the future of Yahoo?

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Neither do banks.

That was my first thought, too.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Why though? What's so great about it that has you worried about the future of Yahoo?

Not much, which is the problem.

I like the layout better and I already had the account way before I had Google email so it's easier just to stick with Yahoo, but I'd be fine on Google email.

OTOH, I long ago switched to Google's Search because it's way better than everything else out there.

[ctt1wbw]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Neither do banks.

That reminds me, I have to stop at Google this afternoon on the way home from work.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

That reminds me, I have to stop at Google this afternoon on the way home from work.

Your bank makes your money?

Considering that most transactions of any importance are (or can be) done electronically, I suppose it's a legitimate counter-argument to point out that you can print out your Yahoo emails, as well...

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

That reminds me, I have to stop at Google this afternoon on the way home from work.

What an odd comparison. Are you saying you’d only buy stocks in a company that has a local physical address where you can go and talk to someone?

Would you invest, for instance, in your favourite sports team of choice (assuming they are listed, of course)? They don’t produce anything you can reach out and touch, either.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

That reminds me, I have to stop at Google this afternoon on the way home from work.

I'm there a lot of the day at work.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

What an odd comparison. Are you saying you’d only buy stocks in a company that has a local physical address where you can go and talk to someone?

He meant it as a dig at stopping by the bank on the way home to pick up some cash, if I understood it correctly.

Which is why my response addressed the incorrect inference that banks actually make their money, and that cash money has anything to do with how banks generate revenue.

[Oisín]

He meant it as a dig at stopping by the bank on the way home to pick up some cash, if I understood it correctly.

Either that, or he was making a point about how it’s not possible to ‘stop at Google on the way from work’ like you’d do in a bank, since Google is online-based.

Still an odd comparison.

[MacosNerd]

Sad (and failed) attempt at humor.

[kelso]

Originally Posted by MacosNerd 

Sad (and failed) attempt at humor.

It may of been a sad attempt at humor but you can't say you didn't crack a little smile.

[ctt1wbw]

What I mean is that you can't hold Google in your hand, or go into a Google store and see it, like you can hold an Apple in your hands or go in to a Home Depot. I'm driving a Jeep, you can own stock in DiamlerChrysler, or whatever it's called now. I just bought lots of stuff from Home Depot, which you can own stock in, and see the store and talk to the employees. I did a Google search for "bikini babes" and got some pics. So what? Google is so overhyped and overvalued, it's PATHETIC. As of now it's $595 per share. Per share of what? Something that's online only? Please.