Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google In Bidding To Buy DoubleClick

Posted by kdawson on from the no-bargains-left dept.

A number of readers clued us to the latest development in the saga of te sale of DoubleClick: Google has thrown its hat into the ring against Microsoft and (reportedly) Yahoo and AOL. Most of the stories quote a Wall Street Journal piece that is only available to subscribers. Google's entry into the bidding may boost the price for the remaining pieces of DoubleClick (parts of the company having already been sold off) to $2 billion, twice what its current owners paid for the whole thing. Some reports speculate that this figure could give Microsoft pause.

17 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Great... by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mr. "Don't be evil" in the running to buy one of the most Evil and Rude companies on the 'net.

    Somehow I doubt it's to dismantle them and slowly kill the bastards responsible...

    1. Re:Great... by Checkmait · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree: Google probably put the bid in to stop its rival Microsoft from entering the online advertising market in force. Plus, with with Microsoft menacing with its touted eye-tracking ad technology, Google may be anxious to keep MS out of the ring, at least through merger or acquisition.

      As for the union of the opposite ends of the online ad spectrum, I think Google will influence DoubleClick more than vice-versa simply because it is the acquiring company and has the prerogative of tossing out all of the old management. I hope.

      --
      "All you need is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." -- Mark Twain
    2. Re:Great... by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that's a great idea. Why don't they buy DoubleClick and turn it into a bakery. Everyone likes bread!

      Presumably they'd be buying DoubleClick because it has value.. maybe they're just after their customer list, but more likely they're of the opinion that DoubleClick is doing some good business.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Great... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or, it is to make Microsoft over-pay for Doubleclick. Their warchest has dwindled to under $30B for the first time in something like a decade. If they over-pay for Doubleclick, then it might just be one big brick in the wall, ultimately contributing to the death of two of the greatest evils ever to walk the Earth! Muahahahahaha!

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Great... by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haven't you guys ever played Monopoly ? Google probably doesn't want the glorified pile of funk that is DoubleClick, because AdSense is far friendlier and more successful than DoubleClick ever was. However, Microsoft DOES want DoubleClick because they want to compete with AdSense, somehow, in a bastardized half-assed rip-off kind of way like everything else they've released in the past 30 years. If Google ends up buying DoubleClick, just to keep it away from Microsoft, it's a smart strategic move and one that Google can afford, especially if it means protecting their ad business. We all know how Microsoft plays... they don't care if they lose tons of money, as long as they drag everyone else down with 'em, then when the time is right they' pounce on their tired enemies. They're like chinese computer importers, only less puny!

      Google buying DC is kind of like a good monopoly player buying a single lot they don't want, just to keep someone else from completing their set and building friggin hotels. Believe me, buying St. James Place for $180 now is way better than paying your opponent $950 rent later. Same idea here!

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    5. Re:Great... by Traa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You buy a company, you buy the people that work there. If you work for a company like double-click you know what the company does, and it ain't pretty. If Google buys them they will either have to strip double-click clean of their employees and lose most all of the intellectual property that have put double-click on the money board or claim that they will teach all the employees how to "not be evil". Rrrrrright.

      Same goes for Microsoft, I just can't believe even they will sink this low.

      AOL, yeah...they swim around the same depth.

    6. Re:Great... by mgblst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doubleclick doesn't have that much IP, and the stuff they do have has nothing to do with the people that work there, it is in patents. It doesn't do anything that complicated.

      The only reason Doubleclick is such a big target, is because it is used by a lot of people. It already has a huge market presence. This was the same with youtube. Most people don't seem to understand that that is the important aspect of these buys. Anybody can build another video site, or myspace, but why would people move to them when they already have the originals. That is why they cost so much. It isn't really that complicated to understand.

  2. I said it in the last DoubleClick rumor thread by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't care who buys it. I'll never see a DoubleClick ad again as long as Adblock Plus can be set to *doubleclick* . Whoever gets them gets a losing business model.

    1. Re:I said it in the last DoubleClick rumor thread by Kpau · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have a personal policy of allowing unintrusive ads into my view and punishing obnoxious ads (and not buying their products). Doubleclick is one of the few domains that is completely wildcarded into Oblivion by my adblocker for their behavior.

      If the domain changes to "google.*" .... I may just be on the hunt for another search engine, eh?
      Listen carefully, google-bots... right now, I've got no problem with google-ads and try to click through on anything that interests me. Change that model and you'll summon one of my less pleasant personalities :)

    2. Re:I said it in the last DoubleClick rumor thread by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I share your sentiments. Unfortunately, only a very small percentage of Web surfers even know who DoubleClick are, Google may very well decide the loss of your dollars are worth the dollars of the unwashed masses.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:I said it in the last DoubleClick rumor thread by rm69990 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Internet Explorer has no widely used ad blockers available, and controls almost 80% of the market. Every non-geek Firefox install I've seen also doesn't have adblock installed. I'm sure a small percentage of users blocking their ads aren't going to hurt them all that much.

      However, I do hate Doubleclick....

  3. Where'd all the DoubleClick fanatics go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember a few years back, before Google's advertising services became popular, that using DoubleClick's ads on your site was all the rage. There used to be large groups of people who'd defend DoubleClick to the death, it seemed. Whenever talk of competitors' offerings arose, even the early ones of Google, these folks would come out in force just to prove you wrong. Sometimes they bordered on insanity. I recall one fellow asking me if I'd "shave my balls" for Google after I remarked that I liked how their ads were unobtrusive and relevant.

    Now we hear virtually nothing from these people. I think that this whole situation just goes to show how some of the most significant online media companies can become irrelevant so quickly. The MySpaces and YouTubes of today will likely be long forgotten even in as little as two to three years.

  4. Patents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps Google wants doubleclicks patents, with it they could potentially scare away any new comers into their cash cow ad business....

    #

    DoubleClick's "DART" Patent

    # 5,948,061. This is DoubleClick's "DART" patent, entitled "Method of delivery, targeting, and measuring advertising over networks." Here is the abstract:

            Methods and apparatuses for targeting the delivery of advertisements over a network such as the Internet are disclosed. Statistics are compiled on individual users and networks and the use of the advertisements is tracked to permit targeting of the advertisements of individual users. In response to requests from affiliated sites, an advertising server transmits to people accessing the page of a site an appropriate one of the advertisement based upon profiling of users and networks.

  5. Genius! Google is Shill bidding? by XenonOfArcticus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't it possible, that Google is engaged in a little eBay-style shill bidding? Google doesn't really want Doubleclick. In fact, Google would probably prefer NOT to have DoubleClick, and not to have DoubleClick EXIST at all. Google just wants to deny Microsoft an opportunity, or failing that, make them pay WAY more than fair value for the privilege. Google can play the table for a few rounds in a bidding war with Microsoft, and then back away at the last second when they think Bill has reached his table stakes. Not that Bill can't afford to pay some amount, it's just that at some point, Microsoft will really regret lining Hellman & Friedman's pockets any more than they had to. Google doesn't care if H&F get rich, as long as it makes Bill poorer. ;)

    And in Google's mind, it might not even be evil. It might be PREVENTING evil. If I were Google (and I'm not, darn it) I'd totally play it that way.

    --
    -- There is no truth. There is only Perception. To Percieve is to Exist.
    1. Re:Genius! Google is Shill bidding? by jorghis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haha, you google fan boys crack me up. Multi billion dollar companies dont enter fake bids. They are serious about buying.

      It really is surprising to me that everyone here seems to come up with conspiracy theories to rationalize their worldview of doublclick as 'bad' and google as 'good'. They are both companies in business to make money. Doubleclick uses annoying ads because they make money. Google uses unobtrusive ads because they make billions. The 'dont be evil' thing is just good marketing.

  6. Re:Ok, it starts being irritating by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll ask the question you seem to be asking but can't for some reason:

    Is it possible to do anything good with this data, or is the fact that it is collected at all make any use of it intrinsically evil?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  7. Re:Ok, it starts being irritating by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What's good, what's evil? Absolute terms don't fit here 'cause they are very subjective and biased. Crushing a rebellion is always good from the point of view of the ruler, while his subjects might see it as good or evil, depending on whether they see him as a tyrant or their white knight.

    I don't want to ask whether they want to do good or evil with the data. I just want to ask what they're doing with it. Whether I deem it good or evil is my subjective decision.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.