Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sets Three Week Deadline for Yahoo! In Public Letter
An anonymous reader writes "In a letter sent today, Microsoft writes to Yahoo's board of directors to tell them that they would like to 'negotiate a definitive agreement on a combination of our companies.' Their message is a combination of friend and foe: 'If we have not concluded an agreement within the next three weeks, we will be compelled to take our case directly to your shareholders.'"
Which means frankly, that MS is going to own Yahoo.
I don't know if this is good or bad, but time will tell... The shareholders hear only the sounds that money makes, and they are going to sell out quickly, especially in the midst of this recession.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Microsoft trying to take over Yahoo is old news. Microsoft threatening someone is old news. Techies should be rejoicing over the return of Galactica, and yet, what do we get here? Sadly, silence. Some geeks these days!
To paraphrase Captain Kirk: "I mock your superior intellect."
And Spock. "He is very intelligent, but his thinking is two dimensional."
This is my sig.
Come on, Yahoo. I think Microsoft is being reasonable here, plus offering quite a bit. Even though I'm not a huge Microsoft fan, there is a thing called common courtesy.
and making a lot more friends on the way.
Seems to become a staff/owner aging issue or they are getting desparate.
Amnesty International
I don't think you understand. In a publicly held company, the shareholders own the company. If they want money (and they do), they'll just vote out the board at Yahoo and vote in one that is in favor of being bought out.
The shareholders hear only the sounds that money makes, and they are going to sell out quickly, ...
... especially in the midst of this recession.
Shareholders are supposed to sell when they receive an advantageous offer. Advantageous being a return that is more likely greater than holding the stock. What do you think shareholders are, some sort of fanboys? More importantly, why do think the founders of the company went public and brought in shareholders, it was so that the founders could pocket a lot of money. So now the story that the founders sold to the shareholders turns out not to be true, and the shareholders are looking for their best option. This is the way public financing works.
The motivation to sell in this specific case is not the recession but a failed business model.
FWIW, the midst of a recession is usually the time to buy. The onset of a recession is usually the time to sell.
"We're determined to destroy both our companies, so hurry up and help us!"
expandfairuse.org
... that we'll be dressing up the Yahoo! logo as a borg ?
That'd actually be pretty sweet.
You know, despite being a Yahoo! mail user since the 90's who hates Microsoft as much as the next slashdotter, I actually hope they do merge now just so I can see that.
Doesn't this sound like a case for antitrust? I don't think EU would approve it.
Are they trying to drive the share price down? Is it against the law to put a company in uncertainty and controversy just for your own ends?
Twinstiq, game news
Putting icons to users desktop and tricking users by Start menu didn't work well for MSN. Yahoo won because people have chosen it, not by a trap, by actually going to www.yahoo.com or getting their toolbar (as opt-in) from toolbar.yahoo.com . They have chosen Yahoo because it promises a minimal configuration need which definitely won't "punish" you for not using Windows OS.
AOL purchased Netscape just for home.netscape.com start page for $5 billion. What happened when they made Browser irrelevant? People basically changed their homepage. People aren't that stupid.
In a world of closed source glass-clad skyscrapers, open source is the concrete and steel. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.
a faltering business model isn't generally associated with a company that is reporting 15% growth in revenues in the states, 20% in the EU and 30% in places like China - each quarter.
about 16 million unique visitors to its web sites each month.
Lavabit. Decent storage, but AWESOME privacy.
Ultimately, the shareholders of Yahoo! are its users. If they lose their users, their business is worth nothing.
So the first question is:
How do I let Yahoo know I'm bailing out of their email services if they turn into MicroHoo! ?
You seem to have a little sympathy for Yahoo. I used to but, no longer. They did it to themselves.
....
Other wise, yes , the combo of MSFT and yahoo is likely to be a "drain on resources". And it's going to be MSFT's . Oh joy Oh Joy.
Now if MSFT would buy AOL all would be well with the world.
Maybe they could diversify, maybe buy a airline, or Kmart
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Microsoft must be real desperate for getting Yahoo to theirselves. Funny thing is that there is no one to stop them if the stockholders will sell.
YPL also requires the preservation of all copyright and attribution notices within modified versions of the ZCS Open Source Edition.
You should have bolded this part. I skimmed over it twice before it hit me how much it means.
What the hell does Yahoo have that MS wants so badly?
Zimbra is the significant viable competition to Exchange, which is Microsoft's stranglehold on 'enterprise' computing. This group would like the government to stop the deal on anti-competitiveness grounds.
I think Yahoo! knew what would happen when they bought Zimbra and they know how important it is ($$$) for Microsoft to own it.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)