Slashdot Mirror
Three Reasons Microsoft Paid So 'Little' For Facebook
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft's $240 million investment is much smaller than the rumored $750 million that Facebook sought. Why the difference? Wired Epicenter's Terrence Russell analyzes the deal, and points out three good reasons why Microsoft got a 'bargain'. 'Microsoft Only Needs an Entrenched Position - Ballmer's plan to acquire 100 startups in 5 years is still sketchy, but we got the point -- Microsoft wants momentum. If the company is to go forward as planned then taking a small, strategic piece of Facebook makes sense. Microsoft's financial interests in Facebook's ad platform already exist, so it only makes sense to strengthen that tie as the hype builds.'"
Buy low? I figured out who all you slashdot people are. Mr. Gates, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Trump, Mr. Carmak...
;)
$240,000,000 and you folks say that's a bargain? If I had $240,000,000 I sure wouldn't blow it on a website! I'd blow it on fast cars and expensive booze and hookers. Hell, I'd stick it in the bank at 5% interest and blow the $12,000,000 interest on fast cars and expensive booze and hookers every single year and leave the whole $240,000,000 to my kids. Come to think of it, if I had that kind of money I wouldn't NEED hookers!
I might even buy an iPhone, too.
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
hey, your not "Tom" as in "Tom" from Myspace are you?
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
Never ascribe to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Microsoft corollary: Unless it's Microsoft then never ascribed to incompetence or bad management what can adequately explained by pure unrelenting evil.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Balmer: $750 million dollars?? ****Agrrrrahhahahhahahah***** (throws chair)
Facebook: Ok $240 million could do nicely as well.