Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Eyeing AOL?
meriksen writes "This article on the CNN website suggests that Microsoft is looking to acquire AOL. What are the chances and do /. readers think this will ever happen?" The NY Post story is slightly more informative.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Besides having to sell over Netscape (I think I have $10 here...) wouldn't there be a problem with Microsoft's existing deals with Comcast?
Well, when they deny like that, what additional proof does anyone need that this is pretty much a done deal?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Microsoft eyeing AOL? Sounds like they would make strange bedpartners for a few reasons I can think of; The Microsoft Butterfly seems to market directly to the AOL mentality, which many of you know to be among those who use "The Internet" to find out things, download music and chat ("The Internet" being the AOL homepage!)...
:-)
While I may think AOL is too big for Microsoft to acquire and manage properly, that's just my opinion and it's likely incorrect, as Bill Gates is an iron leader of a huge corporate empire, with the Midas touch, and elite backing that gives anyone with that much money a guarantee of acquiring even more. What is more interesting than all the market'spaek, is that Time/Warner wants to dump AOL... and for this I am not surprised, while the article is more along the lines of Microsoft wanting to get their greedy hands on AOL, any objective observation would lead one to ponder if AOL is having trouble, or projected trouble? Whenever I have ever sold a car, it wasn't because I wanted some schmo from the public to get my super amazing car and benefit from it; it was because the car was old and I didn't want it anymore.
'Nuff said.
could be very very bad... Say goodbye to AIM!
But then I thought of the combined cluelesness of AOL and Microsoft support combined. Be afraid.
Gnusay -- for all your talking gnu needs.
AOL builds horrible, buggy software. So does Microsoft. They are a perfect fit!
America Online acquired Netscape Communications $4.2 billion dollars in 1998 ...
RFC1925
Oh what a great couple that would make. I always knew there was something strange about this spring time...
On the other hand, this might also have its advantages. We wouldn't have to be anti MS AND anti AOL anymore because it would be just one thing or one enemy less.
Unfortunately, this makes excellent sense for Microsoft. When they put together MSN around 1994, it was obvious that they were trying to get in on this action. MSN never succeeded in terms of its weak user base.
Microsoft already has the cash on hand, and AOL Time Warner stock has dropped about 75% since the merger was completed.
This suggests that they're only trying to acquire AOL, not AOL Time Warner - so this wouldn't be the complete media content delivery yadda yadda that they want. However, AOL has a large subscriber base and serves as an awesome potential outlet for Microsoft's content.
But is it a scary thought? Oh hell yes.
-m.
Megacorporation TimeWarner (formerly AOL Timewarner) is eager to divest itself of the lagging AOL brand. This megamerger was a disaster for consumers (as all mergers are) as well as the interested parties, e.g., the capitalist shareholders.
Microsoft would make an equally odius partner to combine with AOL. Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas...
Stop corporate
Now I'll get viruses on a disc through the mail.
A-IMSOL.
(read each letter individually)
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
One of AOL's greatest strengths at the moment is the fact that it has easy access to the TV, movie, music, and magazine content empire that is Time Warner. Microsoft just doesn't have as large of a content machine.
This is important because AOL's not really just an ISP anymore. Many people who have a fully functional ISP connection are still paying AOL just for it's boatload of exclusive content. AOL without the Time Warner content base would look something like MSN, and just not have as many members as it has now.
Any MS-AOL would need to license more content than it would have in house. AOL's worth more inside a media company than it is inside Microsoft, I can't see how this deal makes sense.
Besides having to sell over Netscape (I think I have $10 here...) wouldn't there be a problem with Microsoft's existing deals with Comcast?
What problem would that be? Nothing really prevents Comcast and Time Warner Cable from merging if that's what they wanted to do, since there's no place in which the two cable companies compete with each other.
And if this deal goes down, you can thank the millions of dollars thrown around in back rooms. I can't believe this would ever even be thought of by MS, but they've got some huge balls. The operating system monopoly with the Internet service provider monopoly? (I know there are other ways of getting on the Internet and so do you, but does Billy Ray and Sheila down in Podunk? Besides, 35 million subscribers is not a drop in the bucket, either) Sheesh.... Do you need any more proof that this is a Bad Idea (tm)?
I've done business with AOL for the past few years. Everytime I visit the AOL campus there is always talks of micro$oft buying them out. There were even talking about it when they merged with Time Warner. Stating that TW would spin off AOL for auction. Nothing really has changed much over the past few months to really push this deal through anytime soon.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. --Edmund Burke
Let's just consolidate evil in one spot.
Bill G pretty much already owns SCO -- if MS and AOL merge, Slashdot will just need one "It's Evil. Laugh" icon for all three.
Hmm.... then we can put Apple, Java, and BSD under one "Yup, It's STILL dying" icon.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
I note the EU had a disagreement with Microsoft. Does this mean an eventual purchase of Europe by the Redmond Conglomerate? So when is Bill Gates getting his reserved seat on the UN Security Council?
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
This would solve all the problems for spam in the world today.
* ^From.+(aol|msn).com
beautiful!
That's because you only watch American television. Try getting some news from more internationally-based sources (like the BBC), and you will see just how biased the American media actually is.
It's not that they taint the truth they are reporting, but they just seem to leave out the other side of the story a little too often..
When I formerly worked with Sprint, and MCI was trying to buy them, it was a God-send that it got blocked. It may prove to be the case here as well. We've already read stories on here about the EU not being Microsoft friendly.
In the end, would it benefit the consumer? I'd be inclined to say, "Maybe, but probably not". The only benefit to M$ shareholders is rolling in the monthly subscriber fees. However, they are from a fickle market: consumers. M$ gets their monthly royalties from a reliable, steady source: businesses. This is part of the reason Nextel kicks everyone's ass in terms of revenue per user (because they identified this marketing trend early and targeted it).
John
If it happens, we'll be able to find out once and for all if two wrongs really do make a right.
filmcritic.com - Movie reviews on Internet time
A while ago Microsoft was considering purchasing Google. On the other hand AOL has right to buy nearly 2 million Google shares. If MS buys AOL then, by implication, MS has the same right ...
A religious war is an adult version of a fight over who has the best imaginary friend
Miscrosoft may as well buy TW and have their massive content delivery system, which is one of the reasons MSN isn't doing well. After this can a merger with the Disney/McDonalds/Coca-Cola empire be close behind? McDonalds McWi-Fi or whatever is already "powered by centrino" whatever the hell that means, so they're already in bed with Wintel. This looks like the start of the sci-fi predicted super-corps that eventually replace the government. Blue Sun anyone? Where do i signup for the libertarian party...
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
...because of anti-trust reasons. It would be a monopoly on "sucks".
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
America Online has the right to buy a $22m chunk of Google, according to a filing by parent Time Warner.
Hmm...
g =n efd_top
This could be an interesting buy, I guess. See this
article in C|Net on AOL's rights in buying Google's
shares...
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5175783.html?ta
May god help net
A lot of people have been bashing AOL, and it's true that it's probably not a good choice for most /. readers. But they have a lot of features that are good for some pretty big niche markets (people with small kids, for example).
I have a Time-Warner cable modem. Time-Warner has to let other ISPs use its cable lines, so when you sign up, you can take Time-Warner's Road-Runner, Earthlink, a local company, or AOL as your ISP.
If you walk into the cable company office, you see tons of promotional material for Road Runner. They have cartoon road runners on posters all over the place, terminals in the office so you can see how fast it is, and all the rest.
But there is no sign whatsoever that AOL is available. You have to know about it. I'm not even sure you can sign up for AOL at the office -- you might have to call AOL and get it set up.
Whether or not you like AOL, it's a big brand, and a lot of people do like it. I think that if they had posters for AOL at the office, along side of the Road Runner stuff, they'd sell as many AOL accounts as Road Runner accounts.
They don't, though. Why? Corporate infighting? Not wanting the other guys to look good? I don't know.
The point is that AOL is an asset that Time-Warner, for whatever reasons, doesn't want to maximize. Someone else would do a better job.
Why would the Borg want to buy The Teletubbies?
No No, Mozilla will be alive and well, first off Mozilla was an open source license. Second the Mozilla Foundation was created and AOL gave them a nice $2M gift to get started. They are are a separate legal entity. Mozilla is now independent of AOL. As for the future of xmms and winamp well who knows. However I think (IANAL) the "look" of winamp would be a trademark and not a copyright. If a trademark is not defended then you lose the trademark. Since xmms has been out for a few years now no worries.
As of Sept 2003:
-America Online had 24.7 million subscribers and a 25.6% share
-MSN had 8.7 million subscribers and a 9.0% share.
So MSFT could buy the dialup business and hold a significantly larger share of the ISP business. 34.6% does not a monopoly make.
Take the content and Roadrunner and Cable. Combine it with Paul Allen's Comcast and you now have 45% of the ISP market and a significant portion of the cable TV market
Time Warner Roadrunner broadband never offered AOL as an ISP option. So I suspect that they do not think highly of AOL even within the walls. You can even get Earhlink or Max.Inter.Net as an alternative!
Have you Meta Moderated t
In other news, Microsoft today announced plans to acquire the government of the United States. By leveraging innovative technologies, content providers streamline compelling enterprise solutions.
A Microsoft spokenperson commented, "By controlling what is arguably the most powerful government in the world, Microsoft will be able to better control the rights of consumers in regards to the company's valuable intellectual property." The first change to be made, according to Chairman and now Chief World Domination Officer Bill Gates, is to rename the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) to MRS (Microsoft Revenue Service). From now on, all tax dollars will go directly into Bill Gates' checking account.
Microsoft's acquisitions last week of the RIAA, MPAA, SCO, and the Equifax credit reporting bureau have empowered the company to supply the best operating system since Windows XP, enabling the multinational corporations next on Microsoft's acquisition list to gain a higher return on lawsuits against their own customers.
Microsoft stock climbed 90 points after the announcement.
That's a first.
This is idle speculation and it is completely unrealistic for all of the antitrust reasons.
1. AOL has the option to buy a large chunk on Google and Google is AOL's preferred search option. AOL promotes Google in their commercials.
It is no secret Microsoft wishes to bury Google with Longhorn.
2. AOL owns WinAmp.
Microsoft getting its grubby hands on WinAmp and other Nullsoft properties wouldn't be allowed. See the European Union's (non Mad Cow) beef with Microsoft and Windows Media Player.
3. AOL owns AIM and ICQ.
Microsoft acquiring either or both of these Instant Messenger platforms would not be permitted. AIM is essentially the standard IM client on mobile phones in America. AIM is also the basis for Apple's iChat software. There are too many parties involved that would object to this.
4. AOL has options to buy Amazon.com stock and owns shares.
'Nuff said.
5. AOL owns shares in TiVo and is a partner.
'Nuff said. See UltimateTV. Also see "WindowsXP Media Center."
6. AOL is an active partner in Sony's plans of offering IM services to the Playstation platform. While this has not happened on the PS2, it is most likely scheduled for the PS3.
Microsoft and the Xbox, not to mention the Xbox Next. 'Nuff said.
7. AOL is a preferred partner with Apple's iTunes.
Microsoft acquiring AOL will again be seen as a move to squeeze Apple out of the market just like over the AIM situation. This will only aide the antitrust lawsuit Real Networks has leveraged against Microsoft.
8. AOL was an institutional shareholder in Palm since the spin-off from 3Com.
Again, Microsoft acquiring AOL would be a headache because this would be yet another example of Microsoft hitting at its various competitors.
The Bush Justice Dept., already burned over the Antitrust Settlement, will in no way allow this to go through.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
I read something like this and I think to myself
Does America have NO anti-competition laws???
In Europe it is highly doubtful a huge predatory company, with a track record such as Microsoft's, would get the EU go ahead to acquire/merge with a company like AOL.
This sig has been deprecated.
New MSN/AOL Verson 6.66 With the new MSN/AOL you now recive the dumbed down internet from the biggest computer software companys that is above the law. You will be informed of updates though our Blue screen of udates. When you see the blue screen you need to update, no pop ups just a friendly blue screen to let you know that we care about you and there is a new patch ready. Don't worry about spam because no one wants email you anyway. Your new buddy list will have all of you AOL/MSN friends and one spot and file shareing has never been easyer with our new "back door" file server.
This Sig for rent.
Actually, I could see Microsoft buying out AOL and it being a sensible business move.
The thing is, they wouldn't be running both AOL and MSN simultaneously. What they'd be paying for is the existing AOL customer base, which they'd then be able to migrate over to their service. (There are a number of ways this could be accomplished, but an "optimal" method might be creating a new "AOL 10" type CD that asks users if they'd prefer the "old AOL style" front-end, or just a direct connection to the Internet without it. This new CD could be modified to connect to MSN's existing phone numbers or gateways, allowing Microsoft to slowly phase out and sell off the hardware they obtained from the AOL purchase.)
As it stands, MSN competes pretty directly with AOL. (The "rest of us" don't generally consider either one a viable option for our internet needs.) If they absorb AOL, they might have enough customers to make it profitable.
That's a first!
Open source sig, feel free to modify and distribute.
*sniff*
I'm going to miss those free coasters and DVD cases.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
If Microsoft acquires AOL/Time-Warner and Comcast acquires Disney, then Microsoft will effectively control the cable broadcasting and communications market.
.85 votes per share will likely be determined to be unfair, as all shareholders that are brought along in the merger will have not been given opportunity for fair consideration of those terms.
The key to this deal is Microsoft's position as the largest single shareholder in Comcast owning 15% of the companies stock. Compare this to the Roberts family (Ralph Roberts, founder of Comcast, and Brian Roberts, CEO) holdings of slightly over 1% of the company.
If Comcast acquires Disney, then a voting policy dictating that the Roberts family shares are weighted in voting to = 7.5 votes per share while other shares are = to only around
Just think about the future that these two deals could bring us, Microsoft being in control of the vast majority of news, music and recording, movie, and print media in the United States while being capable of dictating the protocols that are used to connect to, and to filter the trafic to and from, the internet.
It's not a tin foil hat theory. It's simply the logical extension of such consolidation of communication and media marketplace under the control of one company that has a rather nasty history of not respecting the wishes of the community that they chose to do business in.
Oh yeah, Paul Allen's vompany Vulcan Northwest Inc. owns a 5% share in Microsoft, so we can probably count Charter Cable and a number of other media and telecom companies as being involved in this as well.
Read, L
I suspect the biggest benefit for Microsoft buying AOL will be to compete against Google for search market share. Currently the market is split between Google, MSN and Yahoo. If MSN take AOL's share from Google they might be able to claim a majority of the search market when they launch their upcoming search engine.
However, there's a chance this will be another case of the European Union blocking a merger that American anti-trust law OKs?
But I could see them trying something with the "home" version. MSN is already heavily advertized on a "home" desktop on install. If you don't know any better, you'd probably end up with MSN.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
After worldcom imploded, everyone looked to put the blame on them, but forget to ask about the partners in crime.
Simlar to the illegal practice of swapping bandwidth at the end of the quarter to inflate the value of the company that worldcom, quest and colt were involved in was also practiced by AOL.
But AOL has been deeply involved in Worldcom, as well as Microsoft with both of them.
Worldcom was also hugly overvalued, and way buying up company left and right, until the bubble burst when the MCI merger blew up.
The real question at hand is, when will the AOL bubble burst?
Or is there more to the Microsoft Worldcom AOL Triangle that will we find out when more people lose thier pension funds?
It is also a question, what is the real value of Microsoft? How much of it is hyperinflated, and what if it turns into another worldcom with cooked books full of accounting tricks. If it is anything like its partners, I would not be suprised if they were involved in such practices with them.
Also, Why is it that microsoft was interested in buying corrupt companies like Worldcom?
Introspection is the key to understanding
So when is Bill Gates getting his reserved seat on the UN Security Council?
Bill Gates? On Security Council? We're doomed!
You know, I always get nervous when I hear Bill's name mentioned in connection with word "Security".
“Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
And eventually they will merge with Sony to produce the American-Japanese company Microsoft-Sony. Not to be at all confused with Wayland-Yutani.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming