Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo First Quarter Results: Revenue Dips Slightly, Profits Increase

New submitter dolilmao was the first with the news of Yahoo's first quarter results. From Techcrunch: "Yahoo just released its earnings report for the first quarter of 2013, with better-than-expected (non-GAAP) earnings of $420 million, or 38 cents per share. Revenue (excluding traffic acquisition costs) was flat compared to last year, at $1.07 billion. Analysts has predicted that the company would report revenue of $1.1 billion and 24 cents EPS. Wall Street normally evaluates Yahoo on an ex-TAC basis — including traffic acquisition costs, revenue was $1.14 billion, down 7 percent from last year."

6 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. probably fired everyone by danbuter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If revenue is down, but profits are up, I'm betting a bunch of the long-term employees were fired, as they were the most expensive. While this will help Yahoo's short-term outlook, a few years down the road will be really bad for them.

    1. Re:probably fired everyone by schnell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm betting a bunch of the long-term employees were fired, as they were the most expensive ... a few years down the road will be really bad for them.

      Pro Tip: the employees who have been at your company the longest are not necessarily your best

      .

      I think the value of long-term employees often depends very heavily on your corporate culture. In the startups (or startup culture) businesses I have worked at, the longest-tenured employees have been the most valuable due to their tribal knowledge. In older, more bureaucratic companies where I have worked, the long-timers are usually the biggest obstacle to getting things done. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I wonder which category of corporate culture Yahoo! fits into?

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    2. Re:probably fired everyone by shaitand · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's beside the point. Nobody who sees you slash and burn your tenured staff is going to have any loyalty to the company.

      This is the kind of shit that breeds every man for himself and short term thinking. How much something counts is only about how much it appears to count. Jump to the greener pasture on the other side at the first instant. Etc. Etc. It's actually bad for morale and bad for the company. Management and staff take an aggressive and hostile view of one another.

      Makes for a shitty place to work and the last place anyone is going to innovate, ever.

    3. Re:probably fired everyone by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody who sees you slash and burn your tenured staff is going to have any loyalty to the company.

      My experience is that employees know damn well who the deadwood are, and clearing them out provides a boost to morale. There is no "tenure" at technology companies, and very few tech workers have any delusional expectations about lifetime employment.

  2. Non-GAAP numbers by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hey guys, I did my own non-GAAP numbers for my income, and I made a net profit of $23 billion dollars last year! And I can prove it, I used Enron's old accountants to do it!
     
    Non-GAAP means nothing. GAAP stands for Generally Accepted Accounting Principals. You're only allowed to report taxes/earnings etc using GAAP. Using GAAP means you followed the rules, and conversely non-GAAP quite literally means you ignored all of the rules and made up your own. Really.
     
    To put it another way, GAAP is to professional accountants as ITEF's RFC is to networking engineers.
     
    Always ignore non-GAAP numbers, because it's how marketing drones convince dumb journalists (or worse, Slashdot editors) to publish fake, reverse FUD.
     
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generally_accepted_accounting_principles
     
    Always wait for the quarterly earnings report, THAT is required by law to use GAAP.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  3. Re:news for nerds? by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What time since ~2000 has Yahoo been a relevant technology company?

    That's actually a good question. I tend to see Yahoo more as a holding company than an R&D company, much like IAC/InterActive (owner of Ask.com, Vimeo, OKCupid, etc.) Seems to me the problem is with expectations; investors want Yahoo to be Google, but that's fundamentally not who they are, were, or ever will be.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."