Slashdot Mirror


Time Warner to Spin Off AOL?

image77 writes "The Washington Post is reporting that Time Warner is considering spinning AOL into a separate company via an IPO. You might recall that AOL bought Time Warner for over $100 Billion in 2001, and then went on to lose almost that much in 2002."

17 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Aol is dying by guildsolutions · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AOL is a dying system. It was first used as a dial up connection with an interesting GUI. this is no longer what the end user wants. They still focus on dial up, versus the exploading broadband arena. IMO this is one of the first steps to its grave. Seperation of the company who's more or less holding it afloat.

    AOL? Hahaha you use AOL? damn dude.... I feel sorry for ya.

    1. Re:Aol is dying by ThePromenader · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... I agree. AOL has by far outlasted its beginnings, and this only because of the "first web generation" (cough) educated to its (double cough) teachings (flashing gif, banner banner. Please click where you normally shouldn't have to click to continue so that you can look at this nice ad first).

      In today's market world, when a company (holding) wants to rid itself of its less profitable ventures, it must first isolate it and make it independant from its "parent" inter-financial network. If someone is gaff enough to take the (dangling) bait, great, but if not, it becomes an investment apart, becomes less (investor) interesting, wilts and dies.

      We've seen this story countless times over the past few decades, with only the logo that changes.

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
  2. If the new company still... by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...stays under the control of Time Warner but ends up going off and doing it's own thing then they should name it "AWOL"...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:If the new company still... by eobanb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the reasons that Time Warner wants to spin off AOL (basically get rid of them) is that AOL is one of the stupidest companies I've ever known.
      Virtually all of AOL's assets, except for the wildly popular AIM, are worthless: their flagship subscription dialup service was killed by broadband (and a lot of people get broadband from Time Warner...). Netscape was killed by IE and now, Firefox (which came from Netscape's source...). Nullsoft's WinAmp was killed by iTunes, and meanwhile, AOL partners with Apple on iTunes. AIM is pretty much all that's keeping them going, and even that is being threatened (only on the horizon so far, but coming up fast) by XMPP. AIM (with IM, email, weather, news, games, and downloads) is essentially what AOL once was, but it's just all ad-supported now. When AIM goes down the tubes, replaced by Jabber, text-messaging, and h.264 video calling, America Online will be completely dead.
      TW understands this. They want to get rid of the liability that's AOL as soon as possible.

      --

      Take off every sig. For great justice.

  3. Market actually working? by TimmyDee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Normally I'm skeptical of the market correcting the mistakes it makes, but this appears to be a case that might prove me wrong. The AOL-Time Warner merger sounded like a good idea on paper, but the two companies were already large enough that integrating their services and products was probably too great a hurdle, especially considering the time-frame under which it took place.

    Either that or the combined company was horribly mismanaged.

    --
    Per Square Mile, a blog about density
  4. What's next? by VON-MAN · · Score: 4, Funny

    AOL to spin off CompuServe?

  5. It was just a .com trying to legitimize.... by PornMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The AOL purchase of Time Warner was just a way for AOL to try to use its share price to turn into something lasting. They knew at the time that their business was heading towards obsolescence. This was rather inevitable.

  6. Time Warner was getting sick of AOL by jZnat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Time Warner later mentioned that they were sick of their employees spending all day chatting on AIM and claiming they were "beta testing" the next release.

    --
    'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  7. Technically.... by fm6 · · Score: 5, Informative
    AOL did indeed buy Time-Warner, but it was really a merger. At the time, nobody realized (that they'll admit) how inflated AOL stock was, so it seemed to make sense to structure the merger as acquisition. That allowed them to pay for the merger simply by giving AOL stock to Time-Warner shareholders and renaming AOL as "AOL-Time-Warner".

    "AOL bought Time-Warner", while technically correct, is pretty misleading, since Time-Warner management initially had an equal role in the combined company. And "equal" soon changed to "dominant" as it become more and the AOL part would never lived up to initial expectations, and shareholders granted more and more authority to the Time-Warner part.

  8. This is like chicken livers... by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 4, Funny
    wrapped in half-raw bacon. Followed by a 12-pack of beer. Followed by a ride on the Tilt-a-Whirl.

    You just know it's all coming back up.

    --

    They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  9. Conglomerations and Backfiring by Crimson+Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, this just proves that money isn't everything. Around the time of the merger, one of the largest corporations on earth was being created. It was the greatest thing to happen to the corner of Wall and Broad in decades. Stock analysts gushed over the seemingly invincible titan.

    What on earth happened?

    It seems that AOL has lost its unique luster... the early days of the burgeoning internet long since past. The prime days of AOL were seen when there was no other way for Johnny Nontechie to get information from the internet with any kind of ease of use. It, arguably, represented one of the first comprehensive portals accessible to the end-user.

    The Internet grew, and AOL stopped being so unique. A failure to diversify and many flawed versions of the AOL software later, its popularity has waned. Time Warner has diversified its Roadrunner offering to add portal features, and so has everybody and their mother....

    Absorbing antiquated business models in lateral merger never makes for a good formula unless you plan to do something with the antiquated business model (you know, innovation and the like?). Was it planned to boost Roadrunner's position? Was it a lack of foresight? Who knows.

    It will mercifully end soon enough, this failed experiment.

    --
    The Crimson Dragon
  10. Re:About time, too - by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative
    AOL screwing over Justin Frankel
    (of Winamp, Gnutella, & WASTE fame)
    was a bigger travesty.

    The man was pure gold and the software he touched became golden too

    So what did AOL do? They put him on such a short leash that he quit.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  11. TW to spin off AOL, huh? by FlyByPC · · Score: 4, Funny

    Speaking as an aviation enthusiast, I hope they start the spin too low and too slow!

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
  12. Re:Their ages?? by Shai-kun · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a suspicion "Parsons, 57" and "Miller, 50" are actually their names.

    --
    ...or so I've been told.
  13. Re:Alright... by sabernar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't mark this guy Insightful. AOL is actually a big money maker for Time-Warner. Take a look at the numbers. Just because they don't make as much as they used to, they're still in the black. They actually make a lot of money, and they don't have to "siphon" funds from the parent company.

    Do your researching before spouting lies and half-truths.

  14. Re:Their ages?? by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why in the hell are the ages -57 and 50, extraordinarily normal ages for executives -of these people at all significant??

    I'd have to say -57 years is a rather unusual age for an executive. Or for anyone else for that matter.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  15. A moronic business move. by supabeast! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the years since the AOL/TW merger/buyout the two companies have had numerous chances to unite their collective business models. How hard would it really be to turn AOL into a subcription service that provides access to a massive amount of content - magazines, books, music, television, movies - with tiered access options, one of which would include the old AOL ISP service? Success would be almost guaranteed, after all, the two companies had some of the best marketing departments in the world, given that they both made the majority of their money by convincing people to spend billions of dollars on overpriced entertainment.

    This has to be the biggest missed opportunity of all time. If the shareholders were smart they would sieze this last chance to revolt, replace the board with people who have spines, and fire the entirety of the AOL/TW senior management, replacing them with some visionaries who actually deserve to handling a company with so many great possibilities, and not a bunch of worthless cowards afraid to transform the company into the world's first digital entertainment empire.