Slashdot Mirror


The End of Yahoo: Marissa Mayer To Resign; Yahoo To Change Its Name To Altaba (arstechnica.com)

maxcelcat writes: Spotted on The Register's twitter feed: Yahoo! Submission to The SEC. Most of the board is leaving, including CEO Marissa Mayer. The company has been bought by Verizon and is changing its name to Altaba Inc. I'm old enough to remember when Yahoo was a series of directories on a University's computers, where you could browse a hierarchical list of websites by category. And here I am watching the company's demise. According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion. The Wall Street Journal notes: "Verizon officials have indicated all options remain possible, including renegotiating the terms of the deal or walking away."

401 comments

  1. How much? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Funny

    According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion.

    I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re: How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A huge windfall of user data for Verizon. Advertising coming your way soon!

    2. Re:How much? by negRo_slim · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not and I hope Verizon sees that and walks away. My only hope is Flickr finds a proper owner so I can keep using it.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    3. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that is nothing compared to Yahoo Japan or their Alibaba investment.

      Frankly Verizon should not bother. The blonde girl isn't worth it.

    4. Re:How much? by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except for that last line:

      The Wall Street Journal notes: "Verizon officials have indicated all options remain possible, including renegotiating the terms of the deal or walking away."

      So it's not really final.

    5. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't worth that much. Verizon and yahoo are in re-negotiations and it will sell for under $3 billion.

    6. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $4.8 million, not a penny more.

    7. Re: How much? by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The user data is available for _much_ cheaper than that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re: How much? by ark1 · · Score: 1

      How much are the hackers selling it for?

    9. Re: How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A huge windfall of user data for Verizon. Advertising coming your way soon!

      And Verizon can make money from the user data but Yahoo can't, because . . . . ?

      Also, from their filing with the SEC:

      "following the Closing, the Company will operate as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940"

      WTF? Investment company?

    10. Re:How much? by geekmux · · Score: 4, Funny

      According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion.

      I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.

      I'm genuinely surprised they managed to find a worse name than Verizon.

    11. Re: How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And Verizon can make money from the user data but Yahoo can't, because . . . . ?

      Because Marissa Mayer isn't running Verizon.

      WTF? Investment company?

      Hmm... Taxes?

    12. Re: How much? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      WTF? Investment company?

      I think that is in reference to the Alibaba shares and the shares in a few other China-based companies that Verizon isn't acquiring, so what's left will basically be a holding company for those shares and probably some patents too.

    13. Re: How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh shit, I forgot Yahoo! still owns Flickr...

    14. Re: How much? by fubarrr · · Score: 1

      Got alt-tabbed

    15. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.

      Yahoo has universal name recognition. That ha to be worth something

      Oh wait.

    16. Re:How much? by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm confused. Is $4.8 billion how much Verizon paid for Yahoo!, or is it how much Yahoo! paid Verizon to take it over?

    17. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd buy Yahoo! for a nickel!

    18. Re:How much? by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Have you even read the summary?
      Are you really that dumb, or are you just trolling?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    19. Re: How much? by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 0

      Tree fiddy.

    20. Re:How much? by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      I'm not here to teach any more than you are here open to learn.
      I was rude and correct, you were rude and incorrect and disingenuous to boot.
      You're welcome.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    21. Re:How much? by shanen · · Score: 0

      Damn, I only wish you were a company so I could sell your shares short.

      If you weren't a walking dick, then I might have thanked you for calling it to my attention.

      Oh well, another pointless and closed "discussion" on today's humorous Slashdot.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    22. Re: How much? by jcr · · Score: 2

      Nearly all of YHOO's residual value is their Alibaba shares. It makes sense.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    23. Re:How much? by fisted · · Score: 1

      and can't even recall ever wanting to directly quote the summary

      After you've been here for a few days, you will notice that quoting TFS in the fost prist is hardly a rare thing to happen.

      Out of curiosity, how much did you pay for your account?

    24. Re:How much? by zifn4b · · Score: 2

      According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion.

      I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.

      Where do I sign up for that job? Go to work, collect a hefty paycheck, be completely incompetent and unaccountable then get a wind fall at the end. PROFIT!

      --
      We'll make great pets
    25. Re: How much? by zifn4b · · Score: 1

      The user data is available for _much_ cheaper than that.

      Most likely you're an introvert. You see, extrovert sales and business people, their brains don't work that way. This is the "sell me this pen" scenario.

      --
      We'll make great pets
    26. Re: How much? by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

      so what's left will basically be a holding company for those shares and probably some patents too

      Patent for creating irritating user interfaces .

    27. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

    28. Re:How much? by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      I came here to say something like that. Read the headline and was like "altbaba? really?"

      Lets see... names of some successful tech companies:

      Google
      Apple
      Netflix
      eBay
      Tesla
      Slashdot :)
      Reddit
      Cloudflare

      Two syllables is the charm.

      3?

      IBM
      Microsoft

      more?

      Hewlett Packard

      I know, I missed gazillions of them, but just saying Altbaba doesn't exactly roll of the tongue. Even "The corpse of a company formerly known as Yahoo" has more cachet than "Altbaba".

    29. Re: How much? by TWX · · Score: 1

      so what's left will basically be a holding company

      'cause it worked so well for Sears...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    30. Re:How much? by Pulzar · · Score: 1

      I know, I missed gazillions of them, but just saying Altbaba doesn't exactly roll of the tongue. Even "The corpse of a company formerly known as Yahoo" has more cachet than "Altbaba".

      Maybe that's why it's called Atlaba, and not Altbaba. I'm not saying it's a great name, but it does roll off the tongue a lot easier.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
    31. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get an MBA.

    32. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion.

      I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.

      Where do I sign up for that job? Go to work, collect a hefty paycheck, be completely incompetent and unaccountable then get a wind fall at the end. PROFIT!

      Mayer wasn't incompetent, she took a shit company, bilked if for what it was worth, setup a golden parachute, and offloaded that pile of crap.

      Good for her putting a steak through the heart of that ghoul is disposing of it.

    33. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Altbaba

    34. Re:How much? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      I'm genuinely surprised they managed to find a worse name than Verizon.

      Maybe GTE?

    35. Re:How much? by shanen · · Score: 1

      Been here (and away and now back) for a few years and never noticed. I do sometimes comment on the TFS, but never wanted to quote it, basically taking it for granted that everyone participating in the conversation had to start by seeing it.

      Usually when I see an apparently floating quote, it comes from an AC comment. Years ago my settings were "gentle" so I could see them, but these years I stopped wasting time with ACs. If the comment is sufficiently interesting, then I might look for the AC, and in this case I was trying to assess if there was some basis for an "insightful" mod. As the joke goes, there was no "there" there, nor was there any prior AC comment to be found.

      Maybe you can explain the basis for regarding that top-level comment as insightful? I still don't see it. His [770223's] opinion is that the price was too high, but his surprise seems lacking in insight. Perhaps more importantly, it isn't his large amount of money. Actually I'm surprised, too, but I'd try to articulate the surprise in terms of the potential value of the email addresses and the reduction of that value due to spammers (though his "insightful" comment didn't even reference the breach that may produce more spam). I don't even see where my 'articulation' of surprise in relation to the value of the email addresses would have risen to the level of "insight".

      Then you introduced the new issue of paid membership. Sore topic. I have NEVER felt that Slashdot offered much value, but I have FREQUENTLY constructively suggested ways to make it more valuable. I would be delighted if Slashdot was so valuable that I eagerly wanted to send some of my money. Judging by the responses, it would appear that most of the members of Slashdot must be so independently wealthy that money is no concern of theirs. I can only regret my relative poverty.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  2. 55 million golden parachute!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Whheeee!!! (floats into a board room for a cushy part-time gig).

    1. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by hambone142 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've seen some estimates (googling "Marissa Mayer Severance" as high as $110 million.

      That's pretty good for running a company further into the ground. I would have done it for half the price.

      "Time to spend more time with the family" as they say.

    2. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by ark1 · · Score: 0

      Half the price, and twice as fast!

    3. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by MouseR · · Score: 4, Funny

      I haven't seen any figures but regardless, she did manage to sell a worthless company for 4+ billions. That's worth a bonus.

    4. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by ark1 · · Score: 2

      Verizon acquired AOL for 4.4B the year before...

    5. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by MouseR · · Score: 1

      The purchase details are still pending an investigation following the accounts leak. Most likely, the figure will go down. But by how much is TBD.

    6. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by uncqual · · Score: 0

      See, this is why we need things like a minimum wage.

      If we had a Federal Minimum Golden Parachute, I wouldn't be able to under bid you.

      But we don't, so your loss... I would have done the for two million and gotten the job done much more quickly (that's why I can do it so cheaply, I'm very efficient).

      Won't someone think of the CEOs?

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    7. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by Jumunquo · · Score: 2

      AOL turned themselves into a media business and actually owned a lot of high traffic websites like The Huffington Post, TechCrunch, and Engadget. Can't really see that worth $4B either, but it's not like they bought a dial-up business.

      Yahoo probably still has Alibaba shares I assume? That might be worth quite a lot, much more than Yahoo is worth.

    8. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 1

      But the Alibaba shares are not included in the sale - that's why the remaining entity is (almost) called Alibaba...

    9. Re: 55 million golden parachute!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, it isn't exactly easy to grow a business in a mature market.

      Mayer managed to get lots of investor attention, but couldn't translate that into growth amongst actual users. It was inevitable.

      It's a rock and a hard place. You can't pull out of your core businesses, but you can't do much to grow them either.

    10. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by Digital+Avatar · · Score: 1

      Yahoo had positive revenue before she got there. Hardly worthless.

    11. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by Barny · · Score: 1

      This is Yahoo we are talking about. I would have done the job for 5 cents and a ball of pocket lint.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    12. Re:55 million golden parachute!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo probably still has Alibaba shares I assume? That might be worth quite a lot, much more than Yahoo is worth.

      If you paid attention, that is exactly the part Verizon isn't buying. It's those shares of Alibaba which are pretty much the entirety of the remaining company which is renaming itself to no longer be Yahoo. After all, it's the actual Yahoo part that is being sold to Verizon.

  3. Finally! by Master5000 · · Score: 0

    Don't let the door hit you on your way out Mayer! She's one of the worst female CEOs ever. And remembering how she appeared in magazines giving advice on mothers with young children when she had baby care in her office. Dumb bitch thought everybody is as rich as her. She failed at Google, she failed Yahoo, let's hope she doesn't get to lead any company for the rest of her laugh. She's been a disaster.

    1. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She's one of the worst female CEOs ever.

      Yeah? Name one female CEO worse than Mayer.

    2. Re:Finally! by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Carly Fiorina, it's debatable.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That other girl from theranos. At least Mayer hasn't been found in violation ot a ton of laws and has not been sentenced by a regulatory organ or court to not exercise further her "profession"

    4. Re:Finally! by mmell · · Score: 1

      Carly Fiorina?

    5. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carly Fiorina..

    6. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Angela Merkel.

    7. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      She failed at Google, she failed Yahoo

      yeah, but her bank balance didn't though so do you think she cares?

    8. Re:Finally! by Luthair · · Score: 1, Insightful

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.

      The reality is Yahoo has been a zombie for years, only the investors weren't ready to admit it and put it down.

    9. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 1, Funny

      "She failed at Google"

      Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    10. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

      Fiorina? How about Elizabeth Holmes? Ellen Pao? No debate there.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    11. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally

      Bullshit. She was known as a shitty project manager but had a relationship with Larry and later a few other higher ups so most people just let it go and she rose through the ranks.

    12. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.

      >

      While at Google, she was demoted and left shortly after. Yahoo hired her because "she worked at Google, she must be smart".

      This sort of shit happens all the time. Helwett-Packard, world's largest computer hardware maker hired a CEO from a software-only company, who had recently been fired after only 2 years as CEO. And then, after only 11 months at HP, fired him and replaced with him the the former CEO of Ebay.

    13. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Read these posts and you'll realize how tough Hillary had it from the get-go. Bigotry, nationalism, racism, sexism, tribalism of all sorts are not confined to truck drivers in the Deep South. Presumably almost all the folks posting here are college-educated with at least middle-class backgrounds.

      So no, Hillary didn't do a terrible job. She just didn't a spectacular job like Obama did in 2008 and 2012, and that's what is needed to get past this unbelievable bigoted shit.

    14. Re:Finally! by sheramil · · Score: 3, Funny

      She failed at Google, she failed Yahoo...

      She'll probably be the next head of Telstra.

    15. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the performance of these CEO's. Tell me that their performances justify the golden parachutes, celebrity status, and a political afterlife. It's not the sex, it the performance. Male failures aren't celebrated either (including Trump, he's just not risen to the final height he will fall from yet).,,

    16. Re:Finally! by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      let's hope she doesn't get to lead any company for the rest of her laugh.

      Does she now have a fluffy white cat and live under a volcano on a tropical island? She seems a bit young to be doing the evil laugh for the rest of her life.

    17. Re:Finally! by lucm · · Score: 5, Informative

      "She failed at Google"

      Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."

      Wrong. She was not in charge of search at all. She had a role in the design of the search page, then she was in charge of user experience and the shopping stuff. The search stuff was (is) handled by engineers not by a PM/QA person.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    18. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      She was/is a good looking woman, hence why she climbed so high.

    19. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mayer failed, so I'm not making excuses for her, but look at these posts naming all high-profile female CEO failures plus some that haven't failed (Rometty, Whitman, Barra) and try to make it justify their miserable existence as 30 years olds in their mom's basement.

      It's stupid. Performance of individuals should not be generalized by race, gender, religion, or other criteria based on tribal criteria. If it is, those posts should be modded down to -1 immediately. But many of the mods we have these days just aren't high character people.

    20. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 0, Troll
      Enjoy your personal revisionist history, the rest of us live in reality.

      Vice President, Search Products & User Experience ... Marissa leads the company's product management efforts on search products -- web search, images, news, books, products, maps, Google Earth, Google Toolbar, Google Desktop, Google Health, Google Labs and more.

      - Google.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    21. Re:Finally! by lucm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Dude not only do you suck at being snippy, you're wrong and that "Israeli Engineering Open House" blog page is not a reference.

      She was not in charge of search - she was actually removed from that team because the real search guy (Amit Singhal) complained and they sent her to the shopping division ("Products Search") where they eventually put someone above her because she was a pain in the ass.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    22. Re:Finally! by arth1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."

      My first thought was that the name was going to be a concern. One company with major search engine roots changing its name to one that starts with the same five letters and ends on the same as another major search engine? Will HP (or whoever owns the rights to altavista these days) let that happen without unleashing the lawyers?
      What's next? Google renaming to altabeta?

    23. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be so salty. You're just wrong and now you can't take it back.

    24. Re:Finally! by RubberDogBone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.

      The reality is Yahoo has been a zombie for years, only the investors weren't ready to admit it and put it down.

      Her reputation was for working at Google. Not for being some kind of super worker. No. Her rep was for being there and having been there early on and long enough to be somebody important without actually contributing a hell of a lot. It's really a lot like having a low /. user number. It gains some respect and whatever but it doesn't really mean much.

      The only reason Marissa's adventures at Yahoo lasted this long is that she was fairly smart and it helped obscure that she had no clue what the hell she was doing.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    25. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should call it hasta la vista Baby

    26. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a agree this had nothing to do with her.

    27. Re:Finally! by rrittenhouse · · Score: 1

      I believe Yahoo owns Altavista

      --
      -- I may be paranoid, but I'm still alive
    28. Re:Finally! by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Stephen Elop is an employee.

    29. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a snowflake. Not everything boils down to bigotry and sexism just because the general public gets tired of certain women skirting by on "just barely" and telling stories about how strong they are. For the case of Mayer, that couldn't be more true.

      I think many of us wanted to see yahoo rebound. After all, in a free market competition is healthy. Microsoft and google will now rule the roost in a field where Yahoo was king and it will be gutted mostly for user data and a few services. This causss natural anxiety about innovation or the lack thereof in the future.

      Maters was a disaster elsewhere but somehow fell backwards into a successful post. She acquired a lot of other assets that yahoo didn't need and it harmed those assets in the process. Instead of taking a core, internal look at th companies failure she was more interested in being a "female success story". Well, I'd you draw the public eye to you, and you perform completely lacklustre to the point of bombing a company, failure on security to your customers, and then running with a cheque... you deserve your feet held to the fire.

      We do worse to men. Does Martin Shkreli ring a bell? Cos most of us wouldn't mind gifting him to a volcano god.

    30. Re:Finally! by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      It's really a lot like having a low /. user number. It gains some respect and whatever but it doesn't really mean much.

      Of course that's what someone in the 800k range would say. Down here in the 300k range, we're feeling no pain. Except for those stuck-up 100k range-ers, they really boil my potato.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    31. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilery at State?

    32. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally

      Bullshit. She was known as a shitty project manager but had a relationship with Larry and later a few other higher ups so most people just let it go and she rose through the ranks.

      How do you think a lot of people rise through the ranks? We don't live in a pure meritocracy. It's still more who you know than what you know.

    33. Re:Finally! by fisternipply · · Score: 1

      Yes.

    34. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She was fairly successful at Google as a young star but basically got a 55 million dollar OTJ CEO training session @yahoo.com....

      Most folks spend years getting an mba and lots of experience. She was handed that for what? 5 yrs?

      I wish I can get paid OTJ for learning python....

    35. Re:Finally! by hublan · · Score: 1

      Wat?

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    36. Re: Finally! by Luthair · · Score: 0

      I'm not a SJW but you only need to read a number of these posts to see a number of posters are targeting her for being female and claiming she slept her way to the top.

    37. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she slept her way to the top

      That's a fact. Nobody is claiming it for any of the other female CEOs.

    38. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.

      She was in my management chain in the mid to late 2000s. She was "respected" by virtue of having power. It was widely understood that she was not skilled at managing people. Your source on the statement "widely respected both internally and externally" is simply wrong.

      Good management requires listening to people (underlings, customers, etc.) to get a complete understanding of what is going on. Marissa did not have the humility or patience to listen to anyone but herself. As a result, she made decisions that made no sense. I was warned about this by multiple people when I joined Google. I know other managers were aware of her issues, because they asked Bill Campbell to coach her on this. He gave up.

      I don't know that anyone could have saved Yahoo. However, the halo the press put on Marissa, simply because she worked at Google, is silly. Google succeeded in spite of her behavior as a manager (I was not around to see her work as an engineer). The idea that she could "fix" Yahoo was always a long shot.

    39. Re:Finally! by erapert · · Score: 1

      Do you mean "who you know" in the Biblical or Platonic sense?

    40. Re:Finally! by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Some time ago the new owners of Slashdot actually posted to KIA, Reddit's infamous Gamergate forum, encouraging readers there to come over here. That's why there's so much misogynist shit here at the moment.

      I don't think anyone can reasonably say Mayer killed Yahoo. She just failed to save it. I doubt most Slashdotters know how to save Yahoo, but a very loud subset does like blaming women for everything.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    41. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only Alt-Tab-A was a valid keystroke for something...

    42. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or in her case, it's who ya blow!!!

      Kaaaaaaaaaa chinggggg.

    43. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be honest, so far you are he only one in this thread that has generalized. I see people posting facts. You don't want to see the truth because it disagrees with you. Man up/woman up. She failed, not because she's a woman, but because she's just bad at what she does.

    44. Re:Finally! by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      300K range? Peasant.

    45. Re:Finally! by Misanthrope · · Score: 1

      Hwat?

    46. Re:Finally! by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Get off my lawn.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    47. Re:Finally! by slew · · Score: 2

      "She failed at Google"

      Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."

      Altaba - [Ahl-tah-bah]

      noun
      1. a contraction between Alta-vista (Yahoo bought AltaVista in 2003) and Alibaba (aka "RemainCo" part of Yahoo that holds $37billion of Alibaba stock). .
      2. a generic term for a used-to-be-search-company-that-still-owns-lots-of-Alibaba stock

      Example: "Altaba is a stupid but totally appropriate name for that company."

      verb
      1. to complete the process of running a business into the ground divesting all operations and turning it into a zombie company that will never die because it owns too much stock in a company that cannot/willnot buy the stock back without suffering a huge tax bill.

      Example: "Wow, that CEO totally Altaba-ed that company!"

    48. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ginni Rometty. You know, the useless one who has presided over 18 straight quarters of declining revenue in IBM?

    49. Re:Finally! by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      Dreadfully sorry old chap, were you saying something? I can't hear you over the sound of how much respect and whatever my UID gets me. *adjusts monocle*

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    50. Re: Finally! by Luthair · · Score: 1

      A 'fact' from an anonymous coward...

    51. Re:Finally! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's not that debatable, in my opinion. Carly is worse, much worse.

      Mayer took over a company that was already a big has-been, and ran it into the ground. It's doubtful anyone else would have succeeded in really turning it around, it's just a question of whether they could have done a better job extracting value from it (at the point that she took over) or turning into something that performed better by excising the stale parts.

      Carly took over a great company that made great products (HP) and ran it into the ground, splitting off the parts that made excellent T&M gear and medical equipment, and keeping the part that made crappy computing gear to compete with low-cost Asian companies. She did this largely by forcing an expensive merger with Compaq, which at that point was a lot like Yahoo: a big has-been.

      Also, before Carly took over HP, she helped run Lucent (a successful telecom equipment maker) into the ground.

      Mayer wasn't a good CEO by any stretch, but let's at least be fair: she took over a company that had serious problems, and then failed at doing much good with this bad hand of cards. This just isn't the case with Carly and HP. There was no good reason for HP to merge with Compaq, but she forced it and it really destroyed what made HP a great company.

    52. Re:Finally! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No. Carly is the worst.

      Holmes managed to build up a company from nothing into something hugely valuable. It of course turned out to be a giant fraud in the end, but she did at least manage to turn nothing into something for a while.

      Pao? I'm not sure I see how she was ever bad at all. She ran an internet forum site for a while, and due to the nature of Reddit and all its hugely diverse discussion groups, it's a lot like herding cats and she ran into some big problems and finally left. Maybe she could have done better, I don't know. Either way, Reddit is still just fine today and still hugely popular, so she certainly didn't run it into the ground.

      Neither of these rise to the level of destruction that Carly accomplished by pushing for a merger of HP and Compaq, destroying the great company that was HP and turning it into a purveyor of shitty laptops. She took a solid, excellent company and ran it into the ground, leaving it much worse off than it was before. That, to me, makes her the worst female tech CEO of all time. Mayer doesn't deserve this distinction; the company she took over was already a shitty has-been and it's unlikely anyone could have done anything great with it. She certainly didn't do anything good with it, but it's just not comparable to Carly and the way she ruined HP.

    53. Re:Finally! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Wow, this is a stupid post.

      We're discussing female tech CEOs here (with the discussion starter being "who's worst?"), so obviously it's going to be a comparison between various female tech CEOs to argue which one is worst. Male CEOs can't be compared here because we're talking about females.

      Maybe you should leave adult discussions like this to us college-educated folks since this seems to be a hard concept for you.

      But since you allege sexism, there's no shortage of shitty male tech CEOs (and male CEOs in general). Stephen Elop is a good example here from recent years. Steve Ballmer of MS is another one. Tim Cook I think is a great example; he's really running Apple into the ground it seems. In the last decade and outside of tech, Home Depot's ex-CEO Bob Nardelli was widely reviled as running that company into the ground.

      As for Hillary, yes, she absolutely did do a terrible job, as did the entire Democratic Party. That's why they lost to the second most unpopular candidate in history (she's the most). They stuck a knife in the back of Bernie's campaign (as shown by the leaked emails), and pushed a horribly unpopular and flawed candidate at all costs, and didn't even bother campaigning in a bunch of states they thought were "safe" (e.g. Pennsylvania), and as a result, a bunch of people voted 3rd-party and a bunch more just sat at home (see the turnout numbers in comparison to 2008). They completely failed to learn from recent history: Democratic presidential candidates have lost election after election in the past several decades because they were uncharismatic and unpopular: Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry. They won with Bill Clinton and Obama, and what do those two have in common? They're both highly charismatic. Obama also did a masterful job of campaigning, and he energized the under-30 vote, getting them to turn out in record numbers. It was obvious early on that Hillary just couldn't do that, and had no love from the Millennials, but Bernie did (despite being even older). Even worse, Hillary and her campaign were outright condescending to young people, telling people it was their duty to vote for her because "it's her turn", "I'm with her" (not exactly a message that tells you why the candidate is worth voting for), that you're a sexist if you don't vote for her, etc. It was no surprise that she lost, and ultra-liberal filmmaker Michael Moore even predicted it long before the election. It wasn't bigotry that cost Hillary the election, it was the fact that she was a terrible candidate who reeked of corruption and seemed to be a warmonger, and this just wasn't enough to get people to get up and get out to the polls to vote for her. Meanwhile, a significant part of the country has been left behind by economic changes and they really thought a crappy businessman could actually fix things for them because he spoke their language and told them what they wanted to hear, so he actually had a lot of enthusiasm on his side. No one was enthusiastic about Hillary, except for a few idiotic sycophants like you; the vast majority of people who voted for her did so out of fear of the "worse evil", and historically that strategy has not gone well for Democrats. It works fine for the Republicans because conservative voters will happily go vote for someone just because of a single issue, whether it's gay marriage or guns or abortion or whatever. That doesn't work with liberal voters; they need to be inspired to vote for someone they believe in, because apparently they have higher standards (and of course more idealism). Too bad the DNC is too incompetent and stupid to understand this and back the candidate who actually does inspire people, rather than the corporate whore.

    54. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 1

      " she did at least manage to turn nothing into something for a while."

      So did Charles Ponzi. Your point?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    55. Re:Finally! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      My point is that I have more respect for someone who is able to build something, even if it's fraudulent, than someone who takes a perfectly good company and runs it into the ground.

    56. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 1

      That's fair. But it says a lot about your ethics.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    57. Re:Finally! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, it doesn't, that's just you trying to push an agenda. The debate here is who's a worse CEO. "Worse" isn't defined here, but I'm assuming that "incompetence" is the measure of "worse", and by that measure Carly is the worst of the lot. Fraudsters aren't incompetent (unless they incompetently perpetrate their fraud of course).

      And if you're trying to argue ethicality, I fail to see how Fiorina or Mayer are any more ethical than Theranos. They're all morally bankrupt people. People who become CEOs generally are.

    58. Re:Finally! by msauve · · Score: 1

      "They're all morally bankrupt people. People who become CEOs generally are."

      Even limiting that to SP500, you're wrong.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    59. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will HP (or whoever owns the rights to altavista these days)

      It's Yahoo

    60. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure where the hell your post is coming from, there's no point in bringing politics into this... but maybe she lost because she's trash and had a widely-accepted perception of being a lying, conniving, evil bitch, along with the hacked emails showing DNC's dirty (illegal?) tactics to ruin one candidate's chances of getting the nomination, her own campaign doing illegal things, her committing felonies while holding a position in public office... yeah, I don't think a lot of people were able to stomach that as it would surely have continued into the WH.

      But no, it's bigotry and all these -isms... surely that must be why she lost!

    61. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Running a for profit organization is an inherently violent, oppressive, violative act. Whatever can or cannot be surmised about the broader morality/ethicality of those who assume such a roll repeatedly, by choice, the act itself is a crime against social structures that are themselves necessary to any semblance of a just social order.

    62. Re: Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pure" meritocracy? People take the idea of a real, functioning meritocracy seriously?

  4. My new ringtone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. Re:My new ringtone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      holy shit i lol'd
      i don't even want to know how close to real this is or if its super edited
      i choose to believe

      UHEUHEHEHEH

    2. Re:My new ringtone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that what laughing all the way to the bank sounds?

    3. Re:My new ringtone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wouldn't be annoying at all... I hope she sucks a mean dick!

    4. Re:My new ringtone by Stud+McPeckChest · · Score: 1

      Posting to undo a bad moderation. Sorry

  5. Oh yea, go ahead and change the name, jerks! by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Most of the world will forget, some may even forgive, but we will not.

  6. Yahoo brand by manu0601 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is weird they decided to ditch the Yahoo brand, which is one of the last remaining asset (along with customer data).

    1. Re:Yahoo brand by david.emery · · Score: 4, Funny

      I always thought that Yahoo was well-named, a company run by a bunch of Yahoos...

    2. Re:Yahoo brand by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know right. I've had my Yahoo! email address for over 15 years. I sure hope I get to keep it....even though I seem to get a few snickers when I give it to people. DonkeyPunchMe@Altaba.com just doesn't have the same ring to it.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    3. Re:Yahoo brand by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I still remember, in the old days, arguing via email with a Yahoo curator - trying to convince her to add my little podunk website to their index.

      They really used to matter...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Yahoo brand by Lew+Perin · · Score: 1

      Maybe they meant Alt-Baba and just misspelled it.

      --
      Sorry, I forgot there are ads on the Web; I use Lynx.
    5. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      same thing happened to the poor guy who had "suckingdownacoolone@home.com" was changed to suckingdownacoolone@cox.net

    6. Re:Yahoo brand by javaman235 · · Score: 2

      Yep. The AliBaba similarity is strong in this brand. Also, did this news just come out after the Jack Ma meeting with Trump? This is something to watch, how this moves foward.

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    7. Re:Yahoo brand by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Informative

      I always thought that Yahoo was well-named, a company run by a bunch of Yahoos...

      I know, right? (For those that don't get it, here's what the word yahoo actually means when not yelled by a cowboy.)

      To the guy in the summary who said: "I'm old enough to remember when Yahoo was a series of directories on a University's computers"... well, I'm old enough to remember when 'yahoo' was a name for a boorish idiot.

    8. Re:Yahoo brand by bignetbuy · · Score: 1

      Wish I had some mod points. You seem to be the only one who actually understands wtf is happening here.

    9. Re:Yahoo brand by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      I use the for my junk email address.
      If I have to go to the effort of changing it to altaba.com, I'll just pull the plug on them.
      I'm a paying customer FWIW (didn't want the ads with the email).

    10. Re:Yahoo brand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Yahoo users are fools. The only value is in the bookmarks. So keep the domains and redirect them to the new site.

      How much do you think the AOL name is worth? Yahoo is no different.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "altaba" isn't a "brand", it's a bunch of unfortunate mutant syllables, moaning in their displeasure at being conjoined.

    12. Re: Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, bonerchamp69@altaba.com doesn't have the same ring to it....

    13. Re:Yahoo brand by JDAustin · · Score: 2

      I'm old enough to remember when Yahoos were depraved, simple humans (from Gulliver's Travels).

      Of course thats probably a apt description of the board.

    14. Re:Yahoo brand by Luthair · · Score: 2

      AOL is a bit different, most of their properties don't use AOL in their name. On the other hand most of the core Yahoo properties do, with some exceptions like Flickr and Tumblr.

    15. Re:Yahoo brand by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      It is weird they decided to ditch the Yahoo brand,

      Have they? I thought that the Yahoo brand was one of the assets that they were selling to Verizon.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    16. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo users are fools. The only value is in the bookmarks. So keep the domains and redirect them to the new site.

      Fools, yes, but not by choice.
      If you have AT&T as your ISP, then your email is actually a Yahoo account.
      My other choice where I live is Comcast and not even their high-speed stuff. Outside of the city, many people don't even have Comcast.

    17. Re:Yahoo brand by lucm · · Score: 1

      it's actually an acronym

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    18. Re:Yahoo brand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      A better choice is to not use your ISP supplied email, at all. Do you expect to keep your ISP for all that long? Using their email etc just makes the market for ISPs sticky, which is good for them, bad for you.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    19. Re:Yahoo brand by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      There was a time when my personal home page from college was the #1 entry for duct tape ... for taping myself to a wall and making a bunch of jokes about it. Man, those were heady days.

      How long has it been since they had their slogan, "Do you, uh ... YaHOOOOOO-OOOO?" Feels like just yesterday, but it's probably been more than a decade.

    20. Re:Yahoo brand by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1
      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    21. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the internet (specifically Slashdot), where hate is the word of the day, reading is hard, and you know what? Fuck you buddy. That's what.

      If there's anything that should be taken away from this, it's a reminder that there was a simpler time in which we all were simply struggling to understand how this wonderful thing worked. Now, we only seem to try to hurt each other with it.

      FWIW, you and the OP are correct AFAICT. Yahoo the brand goes to Verizon, whereas the share of the investment value in Alibaba goes to Altaba.

    22. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A friend's ex-wife was good friends with David Filo at Stanford.

      That's all I got. That and I used yahoo for a brief period of time between webcrawler and google.

    23. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You will for sure have attrition in users are the really noob ones won't understand the name change. It will amplify any current dissatisfaction they have with the service and leave them little reason to stay. Honestly, I don't know what the company thinks it's gaining from this move.

    24. Re:Yahoo brand by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      IIRC Yahoo! lost out to google because their search results were stuffed with paid ads. The more they fell behind google the more annoying their ads became. When it was clear they had lost the search engine (and email) race they morphed into a "web partner" for channel seven's advertising department. IMHO, the current CEO only succeed in enhancing the company's "cheap and nasty" smell.

      BTW: Older Aussies (such as myself) still commonly use the word "yahoo" in it's original meaning. Also the lead actor in the (brilliant) Aussie comedy "Young Einstein", goes by the stage name "Yahoo Serious".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    25. Re:Yahoo brand by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what people were trying to avoid using Yahoo mail?

      The only real way to deal with it if you care that much about it is to own a domain. You don't necessarily have to host your own mail provided you have the capability and will to backup the mailboxes you care about if you have to move providers. There are plenty of people like Google or Microsoft who will host your mail. As long as you control the domain though you retain the capability to take your business elsewhere.

      Otherwise you are tied to mail provider and your going to take the ride thru their M&As and bone headed UI experiments, or other misbehavior.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    26. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW: Older Aussies (such as myself) still commonly use the word "yahoo" in it's original meaning.

      Good for you. Pity you don't do the same with apostrophes.

    27. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is the first time I've seen brilliant and "Young Einstein" in the same sentence

    28. Re:Yahoo brand by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Yahoo Serious?

    29. Re:Yahoo brand by Pulzar · · Score: 1

      It is weird they decided to ditch the Yahoo brand, which is one of the last remaining asset (along with customer data).

      Are there any positive connotations left? A bit of nostalgia, perhaps, but I can't think of a single good thing about the brand at this point.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
    30. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the links, Yahoo is changing it's name to Altaba BECAUSE Verizon bought the brand. Verizon bought the brand and core assets, but what remains needs to have a new name in that case. So what was Yahoo as we know it remains Yahoo and is owned by Verizon. What remains (Asian investments primarily) becomes Altaba ... because it can't be called Yahoo anymore, Verizon owns that piece of it.

    31. Re:Yahoo brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Do you, uh ... YaHOOOOOO-OOOO?" Feels like just yesterday, but it's probably been more than a decade.

      Try two decades.

  7. Why Alttaba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not AltF4a?

    1. Re:Why Alttaba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds like a suicide bomber quote....poof no more yahoo

  8. Verizon kills Tumblr and Yahoo! Mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The internet rejoices.

  9. Yabba Dabba Doo! by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they paid branding consultants millions to come up with "Altaba", somebody deserves to be beaten black and blue with a briefcase, including the consultants.

    1. Re: Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      The consultants are already black and blue you insensitive punk. They were outsourced to India.

    2. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially when it consists of just taking the name "Alibaba" and replacing the first "ib" with "t".

    3. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's obviously a reference to altavista which was bought by Yahoo.

    4. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's like someone is trying to typo-squat Alibaba.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      If they paid branding consultants millions to come up with "Altaba", somebody deserves to be beaten black and blue with a briefcase, including the consultants.

      I'm guessing it's the same people who thought Marissa Meyer was worth tens of millions of dollars.

    6. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Hey, you have seemingly no idea how difficult it is to come up with a rather short name that's available as a .COM

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    7. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally A user for the shit pile emoji !!

    8. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tastesicles or poblers... the only two names that aren't taken.

    9. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like a cross between Altavista and Alibaba

    10. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      It's not like they had a high bar to clear. At least there's no exclamation point at the end of this one.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    11. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like someone is trying to typo-squat Alibaba.

      Then why choose "Altaba"? Why not "Alibibi" or "Alibiba"?

    12. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zoidberg: "What do you call them?"
      Bender: "Well, they are tasty, right? Let's call them tasticles."
      Crw: "Eww. Oh my no."
      Leela: "We can't call them that..."
      Bender: "Why not?"
      Leela: "It sounds too much like those frozen Rocky Mountain oysters on a stick. You know, testsicles."

      Hermes: According to government records, the only names not yet trademarked are "Popplers" and "Zittzers".

    13. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new name should be "Ctrl-Alt-Del".

    14. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by A+Friendly+Troll · · Score: 1

      Altavista + Alibaba = Altaba

    15. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Xest · · Score: 1

      It's called Altaba because Alt+tab is exactly what you'll do if it turns up on your screen.

    16. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by dr_blurb · · Score: 1

      I initially read it as "Alt-tab-a" (= your reflex is to
      press Alt-tab when you see anything Yahoo)

      But it's Altaba, the bastard child of Altavista and Alibaba.

    17. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Threni · · Score: 1

      I guess they just got an executive and some yes-men to work on the name over the weekend for free.

    18. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      somebody deserves to be beaten black and blue

      Stupid, as always with name changes. Get rid of the name people knew - and be a nobody. Vaguely "trendy" name like some this-year upstart.

      Do business with Yahoo? Well known name, been on a decline the last year but still big - can still turn around. Perhaps Google is more interesting, but if they have a better offer . . .

      Do business with "Altaba"? Another new kid on the block with an unclear vision. Most newcomers fail, so be very careful until they have proved themselves. And it sounds vaguely Arab-Chinese. So might be terrorists or a scam?

    19. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely it should be Ctrldubya then?

    20. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      By now even clownpenis.fart is taken.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    21. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      If they paid branding consultants millions to come up with "Altaba", somebody deserves to be beaten black and blue with a briefcase, including the consultants.

      It's actually a remarkable word, in that it *feels* like it's a palindrome but isn't, and simultaneously is an anagram of "A tabla". Hats off to the marketing genii.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    22. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the great idea, now I'll never forget their name!

    23. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Those were taken.

    24. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they meant "Alta Bista". just trying to get around any copyright infringement.

    25. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1
      --
      Time to offend someone
    26. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      The name is totally appropriate, if you understand its derivation. Altaba is the younger sister of Alibaba. Legend has it, that Altaba was always considered the "black sheep" of the family, but eventually became independent and successful through lots of hard work and determination.

    27. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Came here to find this joke. Was not disappointed.

    28. Re:Yabba Dabba Doo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, "AhLaLaLaLaLa" *BOOM* ...no more yahoo

  10. Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Chas · · Score: 5, Funny

    This version actually crashed a company permanently!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Up next: Ginni Rometty, CEO of IBM . . . although . . . they did get a butt-load of patents last year . . . maybe they need to change their name to IPM, International Patents Machines . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Then Mary Barra (GM) followed by
      Meg Whitman (what's left of HP)

      Great performers here.

    3. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not sure how many have been granted, but I have over 30 patents submitted with IBM. One really good, one ok, and 30+ other pieces of crap. I honestly don't get the point. They're so fluffy they have no teeth or they are just crap. I felt dirty submitting some of them, but the bonus cash was awesome. We would literally watch Sci-fi movies as a group and start calling stuff out for potential patents. Multiple patents are direct rip-offs of things in Minority Report, yea no prior art there. Then we would have brainstorming parties where they would have lists of words like sight, smell, hear, taste, and touch and then they would just yell out things like printer, what about a printer that prints taste, what about one that prints smells, etc, and they would write up a patent for every one. I honestly have no idea how they passed then non-obvious hurdle. They also often lacked a major component, hey we're patenting faster then light travel all I need is a faster then light engine. I'm down to one patent every 18 months, but they're solid things that unfortunately net me a lot less cash.

    4. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are both incompetent charlatans. Throw Ellen Pao in that mix too.

    5. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget Ellen Pao batting cleanup.

    6. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Thank god Altavista is still around !

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    7. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now she's on the prowl...

    8. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      At least IBM still does actual research. Companies like Intellectual Ventures consist only of stink tanks where they get together to make up bullshit patents like that. But not to worry: in a few years, Watson will be able to automate this and spit out patents for all obvious stuff that hasn't been patented yet.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    9. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Roman+Mamedov · · Score: 1

      Didn't you mean to post this on https://yro.slashdot.org/story... ?

    10. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why the patent office should go back to requiring a working prototype

    11. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Junta · · Score: 2

      To be fair to Romety, Palmisano was the one who set a crash course and 'roadmap 2015', got investors pumped and then promptly bailed probably knowing full well there was no realistic plan to deliver what he promised, but now it wouldn't be his fault. A lot of us were saying that Palmisano was nuts when he made that promise, then when he bailed we decided he was being personally very smart and was just setting up the next person to be the fall guy. Rometty stood by the pledge he made longer than she should have and the company was more and more damaged as a result, so she hasn't been the best leader either, but IBM's problems started long before she was in control. Palmisano was good at fooling the shareholders causing the price to go up, but that can only go on so long before a critical mass figures out the problem.

      IBM hasn't really had a good CEO since Gerstner. Palmisano just rode the inertia, and knew when to leave to look good.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    12. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Junta · · Score: 1

      Of course, while Whiman has done no favors for HP, Apotheker gets the award for reversing the good fortune that had occurred under Hurd.

      Hurd's tenure saw HP do exceedingly well, and Apotheker screwed over HP's core businesses in an effort to make it exactly another SAP.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    13. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by coofercat · · Score: 1

      When I worked at Yahoo, someone noted that in the US many employees were often filing patents for stuff, but that the company hadn't 'engaged' the Europeans as well because we'd filed maybe one or two in the whole history of the company.

      I did point out that any EU country's patent system has a higher entry requirement than a bit of cartoon strip and some fiction writing. As such, we were genuinely finding it hard to think of anything patent-worthy that we did in our brick-in-the-wall work lives.

    14. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay for girl power. The company may be in shambles but she broke the glass ceiling by golly.

    15. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by gosand · · Score: 3

      This is really OT, but....
      I worked at Motorola from '93 to '98, and they encouraged patent submissions. Pagers were hot, and they had just come out with their new 2-way pager. I came up with an idea for a middleware application to translate text-to-speech and speech-to-text for people to be able to bridge the gap between pagers and phones. It went to committee, but they passed on it because they didn't see the benefits and thought it wouldn't be cost-effective. I still think about that today... I wouldn't have gotten anything out of it but a few bucks, they would have retained all of the rights anyway. It would have been nice to have my name on something like that as a legacy. Instead, I held onto some stock for 20 years and took a loss on it. :|

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    16. Re:Carly Fiorina 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how many have been granted, but I have over 30 patents submitted with IBM. One really good, one ok, and 30+ other pieces of crap. I honestly don't get the point. They're so fluffy they have no teeth or they are just crap. I felt dirty submitting some of them, but the bonus cash was awesome. We would literally watch Sci-fi movies as a group and start calling stuff out for potential patents. Multiple patents are direct rip-offs of things in Minority Report, yea no prior art there. Then we would have brainstorming parties where they would have lists of words like sight, smell, hear, taste, and touch and then they would just yell out things like printer, what about a printer that prints taste, what about one that prints smells, etc, and they would write up a patent for every one. I honestly have no idea how they passed then non-obvious hurdle. They also often lacked a major component, hey we're patenting faster then light travel all I need is a faster then light engine. I'm down to one patent every 18 months, but they're solid things that unfortunately net me a lot less cash.

      We did this stupid shit at Ford Motor Company too. I frequently asked to have my name taken off bad patents. Money is nice, but I need my integrity intact.

  11. $55 Million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Mayer gets $55 million for running the company into the ground... Nice...

    1. Re:$55 Million by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      According to one of the linked articles she's only entitled to $55m if she's "removed". According to the SEC fillings, she's "resigning". Not sure if that makes any sort of a difference, but I'm sure it came up once or twice in the discussions. Either way, I sure wish I could get that much money for failing at my job.

  12. What... WHAT? by ckatko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.

    Who the hell throws away a household brand name and comes up with a brand new one? That's one of the biggest assets they still had. Yahoo as a brand name, Yahoo News (which tons of women still use as their primary source), and Yahoo e-mail (eww.) That, and of course as the older poster mentioned, their existing customer data. (Which everyone has now, hint hint, wink wink.)

    Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."

    1. Re:What... WHAT? by MouseR · · Score: 1

      So, was customer data really hacked or sold away?

    2. Re:What... WHAT? by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They are telegraphing their business plan.

      The Yahoo name is worth about as much as AOL's name. Fuckall. A way of painting 'I'm clueless, please abuse me' on your account.

      But Yahoo owns 20% of Alibaba. Yahoo could greatly increase their value by just becoming an Americanized version of Alibaba, competing with Amazon but with 100% chinese made knockoffs and junk (rather than 50%).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."

      Not really; the average person hasn't heard of Alibaba.

      The fact that you and I both saw it in the article summary, though, is still a hillariously bad sign.

    4. Re: What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Verizon you are talking about buddy. The same Verizon that just told long term contract users that unlimited meant you stick to their rate or choose a new contract. These guys are dickheads and I'm sure using a name that sounds close to another name for their emerging market efforts is not being done without reason. Read _$$$

    5. Re:What... WHAT? by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      Maybe "Aba" is an ancient Scandinavian word meaning Right. If so, apparently the new brand already has a bunch of followers.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    6. Re:What... WHAT? by Deathlizard · · Score: 1

      Yahoo! the name is the only thing worth over a billion dollars. Everything else Yahoo does is done better by someone else. Hell the only reason I can even think of why Verizon is buying Yahoo and not use the name is so they can finally get their customers off of the Yahoo Experience Email Clusterfuck they put their customers into almost a decade ago.

      It's like buying the Dead Corpse of Seabiscuit for a billion dollars and renaming it Sparkle Princess.

    7. Re: What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a Turkish word meaning coat.

    8. Re:What... WHAT? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."

      BING was also a surprise to everyone, and look how well it did

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    9. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a "bing"?

    10. Re:What... WHAT? by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      The yahoo name is still worth their home page and search engine.
      Both of those are valuable.
      I am not seeing what there is to earn on renaming, when there is no bad faith against Yahoo in itself.

    11. Re:What... WHAT? by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."

      That's the point. Isn't it.

      The second choice was probably gogle or gooogle

    12. Re:What... WHAT? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      The name isn't going away. The name is getting sold to Verizon with most of their core services. The husk that's left over after the sale will be little more than a holding company for Alibaba shares, hence the new name.

    13. Re:What... WHAT? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The Yahoo name is worth about as much as AOL's name. Fuckall.

      The yahoo name is worth $4bn. God knows the rest of their assets are worthless.

    14. Re:What... WHAT? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      Who the hell throws away a household brand name and comes up with a brand new one?

      Lots of people! And it's usually stupid.

      Nokia for example. They (at the time) had one of the most well recognised brands in the world, up there with Coca-Cola. For some reason they decided to rebrand a bunch of my stuff as "Ovi" like "Ovi maps". Guess how effective that was...

      Oh and then there was Consignia. Remember them if you're British? No of course not. It was an abortive attempt to rebrand the most high profile brand in the entire UK: the post office.
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/bus...

      So, lots of people since you asked :)

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    15. Re:What... WHAT? by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

      I imagine they plan to flog the Yahoo name too in the near future, hence the name change. Closing Down Sale! Everything (including the name) must go!

      --
      John_Chalisque
    16. Re:What... WHAT? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Western companies are starting to realize that very soon Chinese brands will be big, top tier names here and that they need to get a slice early.

      It's the same thing that happened with Japanese and Korean products, only the Chinese have been making stuff for western companies for years anyway. Not just manufacturing it, but designing it. A lot of laptops are just re-badged, re-cased Chinese models, for example.

      A lot of Chinese gear is already as good or better than the western stuff. The low end of the electronic test equipment market is dominated by brands like Rigol and Siglent, and their gear isn't crap. It's incredible actually, compared to what was available 5 or 10 years ago. The UIs are good, the English manuals are good, the build quality is good.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a search engine for porn.

    18. Re:What... WHAT? by Junta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A lot of people make the mistake of judging Chinese output by the quality of what is done there as paid for by western companies. In effect, many western companies are pretty much getting scammed by getting the worst of the worst in China, and the western company doesn't realize they are getting the bottom of the barrel because they also buy into the 'China just isn't that good' story.

      Meanwhile native Chinese companies understand the lay of the land and can be quite competitive by leaving the bottom of the barrel to the foreign companies to deal with.

      It's the biggest pitfall of offshoring to any nation that the leadership is not intimately familiar with. If the business leadership has stereotypes about a popular offshoring destinations, they can get pretty much scammed into thinking they have average work for the region when they really get the rejects that aren't employable by the good local companies.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    19. Re:What... WHAT? by Junta · · Score: 1

      They should have renamed to 'goggles'. What? It's for the eyes, to search you know....

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    20. Re:What... WHAT? by geekmux · · Score: 1

      "Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.

      Who the hell throws away a household brand name and comes up with a brand new one?

      Ironically, you ask this of the asshats who threw away GTE and came up with "Verizon"...

    21. Re:What... WHAT? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Is there any evidence they intend to change the name of search etc?

      Last I checked, I still use Google Search, not alphabet search

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    22. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The company now called "Verizon" has a long history of throwing away brand recognition. ConTel, GTE, etc.

    23. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I hear is Alt-Tab-A
      What a curious key sequence.

    24. Re:What... WHAT? by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

      A way of painting 'I'm clueless, please abuse me' on your account.

      John Podesta used gmail. Just thought I'd mention that...

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    25. Re:What... WHAT? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      "Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.

      At first I though you were joking but then I thought and realized that I probably first used Yahoo in like 96 and now I feel old.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    26. Re:What... WHAT? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      That explains all the crumbling buildings in China?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    27. Re:What... WHAT? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There are clueless people everywhere. But all AOLers and these days all Yahoo email users ARE clueless.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    28. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people from GTE(Verizon)

    29. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This... this is a form of sarcasm or some manner of joke, correct?

    30. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never once read "Made in Ch1na" and was happy about the worksmanship.

      All of is either "good enough" or "crap" that is uneconomical to ship back.

      How do you identify kit that is "better than Western gear" among thousands of fly-by-night shops?

      They also do not have a concept of truth-in-advertising.

    31. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are misinformed.

      Yahoo currently has a big stake in alibaba, this stake along with yahoo japan (which includes an auction website that is more popular in japan than ebay) is being broken off and being named altaba. The rest of yahoo will remain as yahoo, and will possibly be bought by verizon.

    32. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, "ABBA" is an ancient Scandinavian word meaning "fluffy, feel-good music".

    33. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      search engine

      They actually use bing for their search engine.

    34. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BING was also a surprise to everyone, and look how well it did

      Well, are you going to tell us, or what?

    35. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not understanding the larger, cultural problem.

      In China, it's ok to cheat. In a business deal, if you get caught cheating, it's all "ha ha ha, you almost got me!" and some handshakes, smiles, and a pat on the back with a "I'll be watching you more closely now. You gotta watch this guy!" with a wink. It doesn't carry the moral weight of dishonesty like with dealing with Western companies. Cheating shows that you're "clever", not necessarily "untrustworthy". It's part of the negotiation and deal in China. You can work with the finest steel exporter in China, but if you're not checking the grade of the metals they're shipping you, you'll soon find your surgical-grade steel being replaced with rusted iron. Work with China and you're working with the Chinese culture.

    36. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know that niiggers eat nothing but fried chicken and watermelons? Not only that, but they are lazy as hell, only getting off their stoned asses to rape a white woman!

    37. Re:What... WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sears sold Craftsman Kenmore is next.

    38. Re:What... WHAT? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Alibaba isn't worth their book value, Yahoo can't sell the stock, per Chinese rules. But it is worth something. More than the name by far.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  13. As soon as I read the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    all I could hear was the laughter of a Woody Woodpecker-like Marissa Mayer escaping with bags of cash.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcSujceZDmg

  14. Yahoo brand by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think everybody's jumping the gun here. What's left of Yahoo after the sale -- which will basically just be an investment holding company -- will change its name to Altbaba. I see no reason why Verizon wouldn't continue to operate Yahoo's core web businesses under the Yahoo brand. To not do so sounds like a tremendous waste of money.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  15. Comparing Yahoo with Google... by Ross+Finlayson · · Score: 1

    ...is a perfect illustration of the principle: "A-level people hire other A-level people. B-level people hire C-level people."

    1. Re:Comparing Yahoo with Google... by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Wait, who hires the B-level people, then?

    2. Re:Comparing Yahoo with Google... by Dracos · · Score: 1

      B-level people are those who have reached their career pinnacle according to the Peter Principle.

    3. Re:Comparing Yahoo with Google... by jedZ · · Score: 1

      The B-level people are busy pretending to be A-level people I guess.

  16. Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Alomex · · Score: 0

    When Apple was in deep trouble back in the late 90s, we had three CEOs who failed to turn it around: John Sculley, Michael Spindler and Gil Amelio.

    Similarly with Yahoo, we have Terry Semel, Jerry Yang, Carol Bartz, Scott Thompson, Ross Levinsohn and Marissa Mayer, all of which failed to turn around the company. And of course according to many on the interwebs the main reason Ms. Mayer failed is because she has a vagina.

    1. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      She was hired because she had a pussy, she failed because she is a moron.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by jgfenix · · Score: 1

      1) She wanted to run Yahoo like Google but the corporate culture was very different. 2) She thought of herself as a visionary and wanted to be a little like Steve Jobs (and she decided stupid things like the color in Yahoo mail's Android App) but she lacked vision.

    3. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by DaMattster · · Score: 1

      Well, she killed off a lot of the talent by completely closing the work from home privileges that many of the employees held. That was the beginning of the end for Yahoo as we knew it.

    4. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll say one good thing about Mayer. The endless news crawl she ordered up for the front page was a 100 percent improvement over the Unix-style directory that preceded it. More entertaining, more fun, and more monetizeable in terms of sponsored content.

      That was her. If you're going to pound on her what went wrong, which is certainly fair, you should give her credit for her successes.

    5. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because it is not like she had a successful track record as a manager at a large internet company... oh wait!

    6. Re: Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, whichever CEO turned down the 45 billion offer from Microsoft is the worst CEO ever.

    7. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one ploughed it into the ground at high speed?

      Oh right.. Mayer.

      Go white knight somewhere else.

    8. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The core parts, like Yahoo! Mail, are going to Verizon and retaining the name, right? It's just the leftovers that get a name change, right?

      $20 to $50 per year for Yahoo! Mail seems insane. Matching inflation would be one thing, but such a jump seems greedy. But you know what? If they charged $50 to get rid of ads on all of Yahoo!, not just Yahoo! Mail, then that'd be something.

      How many web e-mail providers work with javascript disabled? Apparently Yahoo! Mail does, which makes it safer, right?

      Oh, if they really wanted to improve on Yahoo! Mail, they'd consider offering various versions to use. I for one am sick of e-mail providers changing the interface.

      The secondary address is nice. So is the disposable addresses we can create. But it'd be nice if we had the option to pay a one-time fee to create a third address and/or another disposable address base. And abuse could easily be tracked I figure.

      I like Yahoo! Mail. Been 20 years since I got it, I think. Could have sworn I created an account for Yahoo! Chat before Mail, but whatever.

      Okay, laugh, but Yahoo! Answers and probably Yahoo! Groups are still valuable to people. I hope that's considered part of the core and doesn't get flushed like Geocities did.

    9. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually she failed because she wasn't a genius mastermind who is also capable of miracles. Of course she might be much worse than that but that doesn't change the outcome.

    10. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by jcr · · Score: 1

      of course according to many on the interwebs the main reason Ms. Mayer failed is because she has a vagina.

      No, that's why she got the job. She failed because she's incompetent.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    11. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are dumb. First of all no one is saying she was a competent manager. All its being pointed out is that turning Yahoo around wasn't easy.

      Second, Yahoo lost the most valuation per month of tenure under Jerry Yang, who rejected the $44 billion offer from Microsoft.

    12. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      No, that wasn't the beginning of the end. I remember very clearly when she was hired that she was hired to "Turn Yahoo around" and other words like "Rescue", "Save", and so on were used. Yahoo was already a sinking ship.

      The work-from-home thing may not have helped, but it was far from the beginning of the end. The beginning started many years before she took charge.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    13. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No she got the job because she was a successful Google executive and the board thought she could replicate the magic in Yahoo, with all that insider knowledge of what works and what doesn't there.

    14. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by jcr · · Score: 1

      she was a successful Google executive

      Does the term "coat tails" ring a bell with you?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    15. Re:Why Mayer was so incompetent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one ploughed it into the ground at high speed?

      As I said, take your specious bullshit and go white knight somewhere else, halfwit.

  17. some of you really don't get it by slashdice · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yahoo (including the name), is being sold off to Verizon. Altababa is the parts that are left (ie, a big pile of Alibaba stock). The yahoo name, domain, etc are not going away, they'll just have a new corporate overlord.

    Kind of like how slashdot wasn't renamed (or improved!) when bendover.net bought them, or VA Linux, or VA Research, or SourceForge, or Geek.Net or Dice.com, or BizX. Other than (fuck) beta, there have been no updates whatsoever since 1998.

    --
    Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
    1. Re:some of you really don't get it by ark1 · · Score: 1

      Give points to this post. Core services acquired by Verizon will likely remain Yahoo branded.

    2. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why change something that works? look at what happend to digg...

    3. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there have been no updates whatsoever since 1998.

      The new owners managed to filter out APK's spam for awhile, which was nice while it lasted.

    4. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because they used APK's HOSTS file to block him.

    5. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot was as good as it was ever going to get in 1998. It's been down-hill since then.

    6. Re:some of you really don't get it by trawg · · Score: 1

      Other than (fuck) beta, there have been no updates whatsoever since 1998.

      Yeh. Good. That's the way we like it.

      (Although I wouldn't complain if we got Unicode support.)

    7. Re:some of you really don't get it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Other than (fuck) beta, there have been no updates whatsoever since 1998.

      Wow you think slashdot hasn't changed other than beta, and since 1998 no less? I'm nominating you for the least attentive person of the decade award. That should be an easy win.

      In the mean time the rest of us see code change, content change, advertising change, layout change, even the damn colour has changed.

    8. Re:some of you really don't get it by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      I miss /topics

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    9. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for one thing, Slashdot is frequented by people that 5 minutes into a discussion went through Altaba, Altbaba and Altababa.
      What do you expect?

    10. Re:some of you really don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear they will be implementing utf-64 soon...

    11. Re:some of you really don't get it by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I always liked the slashback

      --
      Time to offend someone
  18. Like AltaVista? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AltaVista, Altaba, and AliBaba. One of these things is not like the other one!

  19. Quitting her job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I only hope that quitting her job took as much time as canceling Yahoo dial-up...

  20. Sad by DaMattster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A yahoo email address was my first official email. Melissa Mayer ran the company into the ground and she is gonna get a golden parachute.

    1. Re:Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, but she'll claim that she was discriminated against and it's not her fault.

    2. Re:Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascinating.

    3. Re:Sad by swillden · · Score: 2

      A yahoo email address was my first official email.

      Psst. <whisper>Dude, you don't say that out loud. It's almost as bad as admitting you had an aol.com address.</whisper>

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Sad by Monoman · · Score: 2

      In all fairness, I would say Yahoo was already entering into a death spiral when Marissa came on board. I don't see how anyone thought the company could have been saved at that point and figured her real job was to make the company look good enough to get it sold.

      She was probably doing as good as anyone else until the news of the email hacks came out.

      --
      Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    5. Re:Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol. I still have an AOL dialup account.

      For my mother. She doesn't like new things.

    6. Re:Sad by WallyL · · Score: 1

      It is prudent to secure "yourhandle" @ every domain you can, just like how a savvy business secures businessname.com and .net and .xxx and so on.

    7. Re:Sad by swillden · · Score: 1

      It is prudent to secure "yourhandle" @ every domain you can, just like how a savvy business secures businessname.com and .net and .xxx and so on.

      Why?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:Sad by WallyL · · Score: 1

      Because your less-than-technically savvy "friends" and acquaintances will try sending you email at WallyL at aol.com, which is not my email address, because mine is at gmail.com, but those people don't know the difference and send stuff to the wrong person.

    9. Re:Sad by swillden · · Score: 1

      Because your less-than-technically savvy "friends" and acquaintances will try sending you email at WallyL at aol.com, which is not my email address, because mine is at gmail.com, but those people don't know the difference and send stuff to the wrong person.

      I've never had that problem, in 25 years of email use.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  21. It *is* an Alibaba holding company by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."

    With Verizon buying Yahoo mail, Yahoo news, etc., the remains of the company will just be their Alibaba stock, which is already their primary asset. Buying Altaba *is* buying Alibaba, with one step of indirection. It's how you buy Alibaba stock if you want to (on paper) own a US company.

  22. Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by elrous0 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Just because your an SJW and you WANT some woman or minority to be the savior who proves that a female or minority can be just as good as any man, doesn't mean that you should automatically jump on the hype train just because they have dark skin or a vagina.

    But you won't learn, will you? The next Carly Fiorina, Ellen Pao, Marissa Myer, or Elizabeth Holmes is just around the corner, and you're going to taut them as the GREATEST CEO EVAR, aren't you?

    And that's a shame too, because the legitimately good female CEO's out there will ultimately suffer for all the over-hype of the shitty ones.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just because your an SJW and you WANT some woman or minority to be the savior who proves that a female or minority can be just as good as any man, doesn't mean that you should automatically jump on the hype train just because they have dark skin or a vagina.

      But you won't learn, will you? The next Carly Fiorina, Ellen Pao, Marissa Myer, or Elizabeth Holmes is just around the corner, and you're going to taut them as the GREATEST CEO EVAR, aren't you?

      She was just as good as several men who preceded her. QED.

    2. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      elrous0, why don't you mention the guy who was fired when it was discovered he lied on his resume to get the Yahoo CEO job?

      Oh, he was a he so the "SJW" taunt doesn't apply. Nice.

    3. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your != you are

      know your shit != know you're shit

      just saying

    4. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because your an SJW and you WANT some woman or minority to be the savior who proves that a female or minority can be just as good as any man, doesn't mean that you should automatically jump on the hype train just because they have dark skin or a vagina.

      I don't believe anyone here suggested hiring anyone just because of gender. I suppose you could argue that misogyny played a role in the recent election, but I think it is secondary at best. The most accurate word I've seen to describe the core of the recent election is, gaslighting. You can find more examples on google.

    5. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was fired after he got caught after 4 months as CEO. Meyer nearly destroyed Yahoo and somehow gets a free pass. Straight while male gets the axe, fashionable minority gets the golden parachute.

    6. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      It's not the hiring that's the problem so much as the insane over-hype that accompanies the hiring. Elizabeth Homes was getting gushing cover stories in major publications before she had even proven that Theranos's technology even worked.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except every major media outlet wasn't treating her male predecessor as if he was Jebus-the-savior whose shit didn't stink.

    8. Re:Valuable lesson for next over-hyped female CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also hard to save a sinking ship.

  23. Re: LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you tell a woman with two black eyes? Nothing, you already told the botch twice.

  24. That was just a way to lay people off by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    without coming right out and saying: We're laying you off (or worse, paying unemployment claims). What's embarrassing is that a company as large as Yahoo stooped to that level...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  25. Alt-Tabba? by DulcetTone · · Score: 1

    Was CtrlAltDel.com taken?

    --
    tone
    1. Re:Alt-Tabba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rationale for Altaba is that the key sequence can be easily struck by the first three fingers of the left hand. Try it!

      - AC Internet News Daily

    2. Re:Alt-Tabba? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      The rationale for Altaba is that the key sequence can be easily struck by the first three fingers of the left hand. Try it!

      Hey, who put the L way over there?

    3. Re:Alt-Tabba? by torqer · · Score: 1

      because they were told to get the L outta there.

  26. Why bother with a CEO? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seems like you could just as easily replace these CEOs with a magic 8 ball and get similar results.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Why bother with a CEO? by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seems like you could just as easily replace these CEOs with a magic 8 ball and get similar results.

      And now here you are, trying to automate away the jobs of CEOs. You evil creten! Just think of the terror their wives will have to endure -- down to only 2 summer houses. How long do you expect them to endure this punishment?

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
  27. Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The stupidest move was when Yahoo refused the Microsoft offer. It was just down hill from then on.

    1. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Precisely. Everybody blames Marissa Mayer, and while her time at the top has hardly been stellar, she was handed a sinking ship. It's Jerry Yang whose responsible for Yahoo's decrepitude.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure sure, keep white-knighting for the female.

    3. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Yahoo was in decline while Yang was still in charge, and he could have made the investors a boat load of money if he'd sold it to Microsoft. Whatever Mayer's flaws, I'd say she had an impossible task. But I get it, you love to blame women for things. It makes you feel manly... for some bizarre reason.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re: Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We get it, woman in your eyes can do no wrong and it's all the mans fault.

      Listen, place blame where it is due, she chose to be CEO so she thought she could turn it around. She didn't. She didn't do much of anything but reorganize a bunch of shit and collect money.

      Equal means what it means. If woman want equal rights then they deserve equal scrunity as well. You can't have it both ways.

    5. Re: Microsoft offered $45 Billion by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      No, the problem is that in your eyes women can apparently do no right. Did you think anyone had a serious chance of turning Yahoo around?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by TWX · · Score: 1

      Maybe even they have standards...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    7. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely. Everybody blames Marissa Mayer, and while her time at the top has hardly been stellar, she was handed a sinking ship. It's Jerry Yang whose responsible for Yahoo's decrepitude.

      So, of course the correct action to take is to go on a fucking insane shopping spree, in order to convince everyone she's doing the right thing, right?

      Instead of trying to dismiss away the actions of a CEO who's been at the helm for years, perhaps we wait and see how long it takes before someone has the balls to hand her the reigns again.

    8. Re: Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she didn't believe, this means she's a bitch who went in just for the money.

    9. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Prien715 · · Score: 2

      Marissa inherited a company with the most popular email, finance, and fantasy sports sites on the internet. Despite still being in an exclusive advertising deal with MS (who wants to use Bing ads?) prior to her arrival, she decided to turn Yahoo into a "digital magazine" (hiring Katie Couric and David Pogue). And she even decided to renew the deal.

      On the employee side, she introduced a "stack ranking" policy (shortly before even Microsoft abandoned it) that was done QUARTERLY which turned the whole company into a giant game of survivor. Even free sushi bars and smoothies aren't enough to keep many people from finding a new company (Google, Apple, Facebook) where you aren't constantly worried about being fired. Losing many of your long-time employees and focusing on short-term (quarterly) goals is a target-rich environment for anyone looking to break in and steal passwords.

      It isn't hard to imagine a future where Yahoo instead chose to focus on retaining their positions (Draft Kings is more popular now than Yahoo Fantasy Sports) and not renewing their deal with Bing search. The best thing Marissa did is probably improve the cafeteria.

      (Disclaimer: I worked for Yahoo in 2013 and have nothing but praise for the other engineers who work there.)

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
    10. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Most popular email, really? According to this site https://litmus.com/blog/email-... even three years ago Yahoo was below Gmail.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Microsoft offered $45 Billion by Prien715 · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you measure it. One way is the way you cited, another is number of active users -- and they're roughly equal as of last year (GMail has become much more popular). Yahoo currently had 1 billion as of February last year whereas GMail had the same at the same time (Feb 2016).

      BTW- Your sig is from Good Omens correct? Haven't read that in a decade -- I'm thinking I should reread it.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  28. What about my old free "@Yahoo.com" email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only thing I care about is that free email address I've had for as long as I've been on the internet. So if my 18 year old free email address is "someone@yahoo.com" does the name automatically change to "someone@altaba.com" and continue working as-is? And if so, will all the "@yahoo.com" emails get rerouted to my new "@altaba.com" address? Will my outgoing yahoo emails synched up to my local machine's mail client stop working for free? Will I loose all of my old emails? Will this FINALLY be the end to all that incessant SPAM that continues to incessantly flood into my account every day accumulated from nearly two decades worth of usage????

    1. Re:What about my old free "@Yahoo.com" email? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yahoo Mail, and the name "Yahoo!" are being sold to Verizon. Altaba is the name for everything that isn't being sold to Verizon.

      So no, you don't have to worry about your Yahoo mail address changing to someone@altaba.com. It'll actually be changing to someone@verizon.net.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  29. It's nice to have "yahoo" back as an English word. by haemish · · Score: 1

    I miss the word more that I'll miss the company.

  30. I've been doing computers ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... since Moby Dick was a minnow.

    Yahoo crapped out a long time ago when it lost its compass.

    They were, at one time, the "go to" search engine and stepped away from that core competency to do every goddam thing EXCEPT search.

    Let's remember this headline as we watch Apple make the same mistake.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:I've been doing computers ... by coofercat · · Score: 1

      ...and in fact Google too. Google's search results are still better than anyone else, but they're getting worse because they're too busy pushing their own agenda instead of just doing what people want.

      Ironic that possibly the only company who could reasonably compete with Google's search is dying just as Google is making enough space for someone else to make a viable search business.

  31. Altaba? by Teppy · · Score: 1

    How do you pronounce it? "OL-tuh-BAH?" "AL-TAB-uh?"

    1. Re:Altaba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alt-tab! Ahhhhhh...

  32. I'm not sure Yahoo! was salvagable by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    Could anyone have saved Yahoo!? I'm not sure even any extremely successful tech CEO - Nadella, Bezos, Picheai - could have done the job. It actually may be amazing that it's lasted as long as it has. The one thing Yahoo! has that is top notch is its financial pages which I use and hope it's one of the things either saved in its present form or taken over by someone who can keep it going. The financial features Google has are just awful.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  33. Yahoo's demise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Letting the gov have access to emails was the straw that broke the camels back. People lost confidence in what was already a dying company. I'm sure they were well compensated by the NSA. And, I'm sure Verizon makes those deals too, but they diversify in a way that doesn't give people much of a choice in some areas. I had a Yahoo account, but only because the people I talked to are older. After the email incident, I took it off of everything I got and will never have anything to do with them again. I'm not having anything to do with a company or their circles they deal with that asks for forgiveness before bothering to ask for permission. People bitch about Apple not cooperating with the FBI, but they'd be in big trouble too like Yahoo if they did.

    1. Re:Yahoo's demise by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Some (not all) of Yahoo's problems:

      Fucking with Yahoo Portfolio, changing its format to something useless (over 90% of the comments hate it)
      Interspersing ads with news.
      Making Yahoo Finance "news" appear to be stories with content equal to The National Enquirer.
      Making their news page the same.
      Radically increasing the cost of a paid email service, whose only use is to screen out irritating ads.
      The "security stuff" that was ignored for years and kept from users for years.

  34. The web news, portalish business is still legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it turns out that advertising search is a profitable business. Still, the web/news, portalish business is still legit. I could see Yahoo Inc being a USA business, with the media people owned by the company, and then doing joint ventures, like Yahoo Japan, around the world. Yahoo Inc. would design the code, technology, and maybe even have standardized data centers. The local partner would then run the local media stuff. I think Yahoo tried to do to much unrelated stuff, and went with katie couric.

  35. And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And this, ladies and gentlemen is what a parade of mismanagement looks like. Corporate raider CEO after corporate raider CEO trying to pump up short term valuation at the expense of long term viability.

    I have said it before, I will say it again. Every executive level and board member should be required by law to receive all compensation above 10x median employee salary as stock options that start to mature in 5 years and mature 20% per year. Thus, if they get $10M per year pay, something like $9.4M is tied up for 5 years and they don't get 100% out of their first years pay until the 10th year. Force these slash and burn CEOs who are only looking to line their pockets to ensure long term corporate viability.

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    1. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that's not what the shareholders want is it.

    2. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And this, ladies and gentlemen is what a parade of mismanagement looks like. Corporate raider CEO after corporate raider CEO trying to pump up short term valuation at the expense of long term viability.

      That got you a +5 on /., but it is a load of crap. Mayer wasn't a raider CEO and she didn't try to pump up short term valuation. Quite the opposite, she tried to find some way to build real value in what was clearly a moribund company. I'm not saying she did a good job -- it's entirely possible that a good CEO could have found a way to preserve and grow Yahoo. But it's also entirely possible that there was just nothing there to work with, and in fact that looks most likely to me.

      Yahoo! had been coasting for a very long time when Mayer took job. Basically, the company's reason for existence ceased when Google proved in the late 90s that hand-curated directories were a dead end (up until that point, the general consensus was that search engines were doomed to failure; they were better at indexing but terrible at relevance and expected to get dramatically worse as the size of the Internet grew). But because Yahoo! had established itself as a major player it continued attracting capital, and thanks to some good deals with PC makers which got the Yahoo! search bar pre-installed on lots of machines, built considerable mindshare as a landing page and an email service. That ensured a small but decent ad revenue flow.

      But Yahoo! was never able to find a way to build a compelling product. Its ad revenues on the desktop were in decline, thanks in large part to the demise of the landing page concept and it basically completely failed to make the transition to mobile (though it did make some nice apps). What Mayer needed to do to be successful was to take the talent and the revenue and use it to create an entirely new business. Pulling all of the employees back into the office was part of her strategy for doing that, based on the theory that co-located people are more capable of generating innovative ideas (which is true, but "more capable" is not a guarantee of a result).

      But creating an entirely new line of business isn't an easy thing to do, even given a large pool of talent and plenty of money. Or, rather, it's easy to do on a small scale, but it's hard to create something that will scale rapidly up to become a multi-billion dollar business. It's actually a little easier to find a promising startup to acquire and then grow that... but even that is a crapshoot, and none of Mayer's acquisitions panned out.

      So, Yahoo!'s failure had nothing whatsoever to do with corporate raiding CEOs or pump 'n dump schemes. Mayer attempted to succeed, and failed, plain and simple.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by bigbang137 · · Score: 1

      Is that why they put spyware on their email servers too -- to succeed as you put it?

    4. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by swb · · Score: 2

      What Mayer needed to do to be successful was to take the talent and the revenue and use it to create an entirely new business. Pulling all of the employees back into the office was part of her strategy for doing that, based on the theory that co-located people are more capable of generating innovative ideas (which is true, but "more capable" is not a guarantee of a result).

      I think the idea of creating a new business out of it makes a ton of sense, but I think where Mayer personally ran aground was alienating her employees from day 1.

      I think the evidence is pretty clear Mayer has genius level intelligence based on her education and her work at Google, but I also think she came in with a chip on her shoulder from Google you could see underneath the Superwoman cape she donned. Showing up and disrupting the work culture with an "arbeit macht frei" mindset poisoned the well from day 1.

      The "I can work harder than you" attitude she pushed ended up seeming insulting to most people. I just don't think an extremely rich person who is also extremely well compensated and who thinks 80 hour work weeks are great can sell that idea to employees. Obviously they know she has the money to automate her entire non-work lifestyle, so it's basically sacrifice-free to her.

      I also wonder if she chose the right approach to re-inventing Yahoo. I can't help but think that the old-school "curated index" might have been the basis of a new Yahoo. Google search is a technical triumph but I'm often surprised at how useless it is, especially if you goal is finding categories of web sites or knowledge that have relevance. I still find myself occasionally spending time digging into forums for their "sticky" posts that have a list of links or sites that some human has determined have coherent relevance on a topic.

      I wonder if the right path might have been a variation on Apple's walled garden, but rather than walls, maybe it's a curated garden, an search/index site focused on culling the sewage out of the modern internet and leaving behind the useful information. But if the financial structure of the company is solely focused on Google-scale advertising then they were just doomed.

    5. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have said it before, I will say it again. Every executive level and board member should be required by law to receive all compensation above 10x median employee salary as stock options that start to mature in 5 years and mature 20% per year. Thus, if they get $10M per year pay, something like $9.4M is tied up for 5 years and they don't get 100% out of their first years pay until the 10th year. Force these slash and burn CEOs who are only looking to line their pockets to ensure long term corporate viability.

      If you are a long-term investor - this is EXACTLY what you should be looking for in a company. Lookup their Board of Directories, corporate governance policies and in particular executive compensation. If you don't see the word "clawback" over a period of several years as a part of the compensation - don't invest in that company. Yahoo and HP I have stayed away from for years as a result.

    6. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      Mayer wasn't a raider CEO and she didn't try to pump up short term valuation. Quite the opposite, she tried to find some way to build real value in what was clearly a moribund company. I'm not saying she did a good job -- it's entirely possible that a good CEO could have found a way to preserve and grow Yahoo.

      I think Mayer got distracted being a member of the SI valley glitterati and doing appearances on women's talk shows.

      That said the real problem was GREED. The way to 'save' yahoo was probable to accept that there was no direct path back to the glory days. The had some good performant properties like flickr and tumblr. Things like maps and mail could still probably make enough page views to justify the operation. They should have dumped/sold off the rest and been a smaller company with a strong brand and little dry powder in the bank to ready to buy a startup property that made some sense when the saw it. Investors would never all that though. They'd demand any capital raised from sales be returned as dividends and would sell their shares at the mention of even a short term organic growth strategy. So in a real sense Mayer's hands were tied, but hubris probably would have driven her to try and play miracle worker anyway; hence Alibaba

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    7. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, she took over a company that turned down $32+ billion from Microsoft. She knew what she was getting into. Yahoo was floundering back then....she should have seen it coming.

    8. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      What Mayer needed to do to be successful was to take the talent and the revenue and use it to create an entirely new business.

      One can argue Steve Jobs succeeded in doing that, transforming Apple from a failing computer company into a fashionable consumer electronics company that also sold computers. Has anyone else ever suceeded in doing something similar? Usually the company that dominated the old paradigm dies (Blockbuster) and the upstart takes their place (Netflix). The old company doesn't transition to the new paradigm because inertia.

      Pulling all of the employees back into the office was part of her strategy for doing that, based on the theory that co-located people are more capable of generating innovative ideas

      Even if someone came up with the idea for the next big thing, how do you sell it to the shareholders? "Forget search and email, Yahoo! is now going to sell brain implants!"

      I agree with you I don't think it was really possible to save Yahoo. The core business died and I don't think you can just pick a new core business off a shelf.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    9. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea for all those companies paying huge dividends - not. Take a company worth $10, making a stable annual profit of $1, and paying that as a dividend. As a CEO, I could pause the dividends for 6 years and then pay a $6 dividend, so the stock value rises to $16 in the mean time and I make a windfall on that artificial rise.

      Not that you're the only person to fall for this - governments around the world try similar short-sighted schemes, and smart accountants make a good living by circumventing them.

    10. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well it didn't help that their news page reads like TMZ

    11. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo was the original sponsor of Doug Cutting's Hadoop project. Cutting also worked on Lucene and Nutch. What was the technical basis of Yahoo search? Could they have built a Google-style search engine, and tweaked the results with sponsorship deals? They could've been Pepsi in the search market to Google's Coke.

    12. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM made itself over several times during its long history.

    13. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I think Yahoo was completely possible to save, but the solution would have been ugly. It had a handful of products that were successes (Some big like Yahoo Mail or Flickr, some small like Yahoo Groups), and it really needed to step back and ask the question "What's needed to support and develop these products?" And unfortunately the answer isn't "Thousands of employees", "a giant campus in the middle of Silicon valley", "A me-too mobile phone operating system", etc.

      It's hard for me to believe that the revenues in advertising from Yahoo Mail alone couldn't have covered the costs of maintaining Yahoo's core products, while leaving enough on the side to do the normal R&D that a start up would do.

      I appreciate though that's a miserable situation to be in, both if you're an employee or if you're managing a company. But that was the only solution that would have fixed Yahoo, made them profitable, and given them paths to a future.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    14. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason she was big at Google is because she was one of the cofounders girlfriends! Look it up yourself. Hardly a genius.

    15. Re:And This is What Mismanagement Looks Like by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Note that I did say parade. I agree that Mayer was probably just incompetent, but Yahoo had 7 different CEOs and most of them were looking to pump up Yahoo stock rather than to build a financially viable model and then each pulled the rip cord on their golden parachute and moved on.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  36. Is Ubuntu Affected? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I admit I tend to change the ubuntu (or rather Mint) provided default of Yahoo as a search engine, but were they getting much money from them?

    1. Re:Is Ubuntu Affected? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Nothing to do with Ubuntu or Mint. That's a Firefox thing. If you do a fresh install of Firefox under Windows or Mac, you'll also find it defaults to Yahoo.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  37. Alataba...Allababa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't even spell it. Dumb ass CEO executives. Everybody will forget it.

  38. Verizon is getting the name by virtig01 · · Score: 1

    "Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.

    Yes... and that's part of the reason why Verizon is buying it.

    The remaining company (current Yahoo ex-web properties) needs a new name since Verizon is getting "Yahoo".

  39. Sounds familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't "Altbaba" what you shout at the airport when you are blowing up a crowd?

  40. Ask your doctor if Altaba is right for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But seriously, what a bad name.

  41. Altabavista ? by AncalagonTotof · · Score: 2

    Sorry ... Could not resist ...

    --
    Totof
  42. Whew! by stolidobserver · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad I changed my 'real' name to Ball Zack many months ago.

  43. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And nothing of value was lost...

  44. Bad reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The filing refers to the remaining shell company that contains those parts of yahoo that wont be folded into Verizon -- not to what is normally thought of as Yahoo.

    The entire story is bad reporting based on sloppy work.

    All of you getting worked up, or having a laugh? The laugh is on you.

    Suckers

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. Thinking back on the MS bid by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 2


    I! Cannot! Help! But! Remember! The! Many! Billions! Microsoft! Was! Willing! To! Shell! Out! For! Yahoo!.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2014/01/21/should-microsoft-acquire-yahoo-for-53-billion/#651371e6a19e

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    1. Re:Thinking back on the MS bid by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      I! Cannot! Help! But! Remember! The! Many! Billions! Microsoft! Was! Willing! To! Shell! Out! For! Yahoo!.

      Shatner? Is that you?

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  47. A bit late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A quick search for Altaba on Godaddy reveals a few names still available :-) https://uk.godaddy.com/domains/searchresults.aspx?checkAvail=1&tmskey=&domainToCheck=altaba

  48. before yahoo went corporate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    before yahoo went corporate, i used to have some chats with the webmaster in charge of the site..

  49. Re:LOL by jcr · · Score: 1

    This is what you get when you put women in tech.

    WRONG.

    This is what you get when you hire someone for no other reason than their sex. There are many women I know who do a fine job running companies and groups within companies, and what they have in common is that they spend more time doing their jobs than seeking publicity.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  50. Telecommuting by Max_W · · Score: 2

    So CEO Marissa Mayer was wrong about telecommuting. Her ban on working via network did not help Yahoo.

  51. Horrible name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Altalba - really? A horrible pick for a name. The name invokes visceral feelings of negativity. Not sure why.

    Does anyone else think the name is a poor pick?

  52. Altavista? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 90s called, they want their closely-matching brand name back...

  53. Does anyone miss Yahoo's category approach? by swb · · Score: 1

    I don't know if its possible, but I find myself missing their old category approach sometimes. Especially if I'm looking for a set of websites with information generally surrounding a common topic, but not necessarily matching any specific search term or results.

    Google has a kind of less than useful value searching on generic terms and doesn't seem to do a very good job of producing search results that list web sites associated with a topic.

    Maybe Yahoo should have tried to re-invent their old school directory/category approach combining search and some kind of AI designed to organize information by topic in coherent ways.

    1. Re:Does anyone miss Yahoo's category approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Curated directories made sense 20 years ago and there's no reason why anyone couldn't create something like that now, except that the internet is much, much larger and trying to keep up to date with categorical lists would require either a massive force of judgemental volunteers (like Wikipedia) or automation, either option would be abused to hell and back

      I too miss the www of yore, when some categories had less than 500 entries and netiquette was a thing, but it ain't coming back, ever.

  54. Freudian slip in Romania by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Altaba -> Alt Laba -> Alta Laba - Romanians will have a field day.

  55. where are SJW ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should point out than women are always better (at failing too)

  56. Why the Christian Name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like alt-right is the hyper conservative wingnut corner of the Internet, Altaba evokes the name of alt-abba, and Abba being the name "Father" that Jesus used on the Cross to call out to Daddy.

    Have religious conservatives and evangelicals taken over Yahoo from the inside?

  57. Yaaaaaaaaaay diversity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully they find another incompetent and malfeasant female CEO to install in the new organization so she can totally destroy that one too!

    IF YOU DISAGREE YOU ARE A MISOGYNIST RACIST ISLAMOPHOBE BIGOT

  58. Yahoo! gone, and good riddance. by thejynxed · · Score: 1

    It should have happened over a decade ago. This company was a case study in stagnation and mismanagement. They had no real vision for ages, and it showed in everything from their product (non-offerings) to their janky back-end systems that could barely cope with basic email functionality.

    Honestly, if I were in the market to buy, it would be to take the entire thing apart for scrap value to the highest bidder piecemeal.

    --
    @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    1. Re:Yahoo! gone, and good riddance. by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more. This was probably also around the time they changed from a search engine and decided to become a celebrity gossip site with a dated search engine attached to it.

  59. LOLOLOLOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And to think Yahoo could have sold themselves to MS for $32+ billion a few years ago and turned MS down.

    Perfect example of ineptitude.

  60. Too bad... by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    Their biggest issue was when they stopped being a search engine and started being a media gossip site. While it kinda feels sad from the whole internet history thing, Yahoo really died at least 15 years ago.

  61. Only leaving the Board of Directors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The filing only indicates she is leaving the Board of Directors. It says nothing about her leaving the CEO position. CNN is reporting that she will remain CEO.

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/09/technology/yahoo-marissa-mayer-altaba/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

    She may leave after the transition but nothing is set in stone....bad reporting by the tech industry press......

  62. 4 reddit comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Contrary to some news reports on Monday, only the part of Yahoo that is not being sold to Verizon will be renamed “Altaba”. In addition, Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is to step down from its board, but will continue to be CEO.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/09/yahoo-altaba-no-name-change-marissa-mayer

    2) Had to go depressingly far down to find anyone posting this.

    3) Yahoo consists of two parts; the parent company and the front-end company who operate the search engine and web-portal. The parent company owns lots of things in addition to Yahoo; a good stake in Yahoo Japan (another separate company), a stake in Alibaba, and they own things like Tumblr and Flickr.

    The front end company who run the search engine and web-portal is the one that is being sold. The investment company part will rebrand to Altaba, since Verizon will have the Yahoo name.

    4) Mayer was CEO of the front end company but also a board member of the investment company. As part of the deal going through she'll stay on a CEO, for the interim at least, but step down as a board member of the investment company.

    Contrary to other comments here it has nothing to do with her owning or selling stock in either parts of the company.

    If anyone's confused, it sounds like the holding company that "owned" Yahoo before Verizon bought it (also named Yahoo) is renaming itself. The Yahoo brand isnt changing.

  63. Yahoo finance? by kristianbrigman · · Score: 1

    So, more serious question: what's happening to yahoo finance? It's built-in as a data source in lots of places (e.g. pandas_datareader); what do people typically use for quotes instead today?

    1. Re:Yahoo finance? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      It's going to be owned by Verizon. That said, it was always unsupported, so the chances of it suddenly disappearing are no different today than they were a year ago.

      Google also has an API, but annoyingly they often put up a CAPTCHA if you use it, because some idiot at Google thinks APIs are for human beings who want to read JSON structures. Otherwise there are also a bunch of commercial services that'll provide stock prices via an API at a price.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Yahoo finance? by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Google portfoliio.

      If you look at the "new and improved" Yahoo Finance, it's unusable. 'Not sure how they're messing with it but with some PCs, it allows one to use the old format but on others, they have a totally fucked up version with lots of white space, mini graphs, dropping user's buy prices and more crap. If one reads the comments on the new format, over 95% absolutely hate it.

      I've found I can revert to the old format by clearing cookies.

  64. Ping by ne1av1cr · · Score: 1

    Will I still be able to ping yahoo?

  65. Verizon would be stupid NOT to renegotiate deal by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

    I can't believe they wouldn't be renegotiating after the breach. Why would they pay that much for the extra liability?

  66. Nice job Marissa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your mission is accomplished.

  67. I can't find it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't find the Alt-aba key combination on my keyboard. How I am supposed to get to my email account?!? Do I need to buy some sort of dongle now?

  68. Hasta la vista Alta Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hasta la vista, baby!
      I remember you when you where Alta Vista.
    Anyone remember DEC and the Deja Vu message boards?
    The first global Intranet pre-internet.
    The reason (DEC) they call the OS for Windoz DOS.

  69. Good riddance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yahoo pretty much died with it's chat platform years ago. The only service of theirs I use is Yahoo Mail as basically my spam account, and I can find another shit service for that, like AOL!

  70. It did pretty well, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yahoo! did pretty well actually, and managed to last 20 years longer than it should have.

  71. Altaba? by PPH · · Score: 1

    Should have been AltCtrlDel.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  72. Yahoo was much better before they went commercial by MrJerryNormandinSir · · Score: 1

    The Yahoo Web Directory was a great tool. as Yahoo went commercial the company deviated so far from it's roots that it became just another search engine plauged with fake news and celebrity gossip crap. So.. because of that Google became my web tool.

    Google is becoming annoying. I'm hoping the Verizon / Yahoo deal falls through and somehow Yahoo regroups, finds it's roots and becomes the
    useful internet directory that it once was. Drop the dumb celebrity crap, drop the sponsored fake news..

    If the founders of Yahoo were in charge, and they stayed with a technical focus rather than fake news and celebrity gossip I think Yahoo would still be a viable business today.

     

  73. newbies by Dareth · · Score: 2

    I consider myself a bit of a latecomer to Slashdot.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  74. Working from Home Generally Does Not Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I frankly don't see people working from home as being effective. Many people who say they are working from home are actually doing house work. I saw a note go by where someone said that they were working from home because their kid's school was cancelled. That's not working from home - that's taking care of your child while you perhaps reply to an email or two. I have no problem with people not coming to work because of a childcare issue, but take a vacation day.

    For the record, I also support shorter work weeks (35 hours), overtime for everyone, more vacation time, and more offices. But people need to show up to work, especially on teams, otherwise people run open loop for too long.

  75. The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, I remember being a teenager and hoping that one day I'd work for that crazy tech startup Yahoo! I eventually did, I thought I'd make a career there despite their lack of documentation of old organically grown systems. Or the fact that the IT department couldn't fix a technical issue with my roaming profile. But they finally outsourced my job. Now that they're owned by a telecom (I've worked for and with a few over the years), I'll be forced to lower my expectations further.

  76. Fuck you socialist SJW ball licker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I slaved to start my own company with no one's help but my own hard work and labor, I don't owe you SHIT. Do you understand that? In fact, if my vast majority share of the company becomes valuable I can cash in whenever I fucking want, and guess what? I can cash out right then and there without your social justice warrior requirements for me getting paid through my own labor. I hope that makes you extremely jealous :) Oh and If I chose to retain 5 board members for 2% of the company each I can do that as well, but guess what brad? I'm still a 90% shareholder! I still started the company ! If I started a company any hired shitty management and it failed, that's my fault!

    Its not up to some asshole like you to come parading in performance bonus' for a company where your share is tinsy tiny.

    Oh that's right, you'll never even start a successful business! Let alone ever implement these performance bonus requirements through your own hard labor. All YOU will do is work like a fucking slave demanding that those who took a chance and sacrificed much to "pay themselves less for being successful" .

  77. Marisa for president !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the very next step.

  78. The Late Marissa by lucm · · Score: 1

    And don't forget her unprecedented level of unpleasantness. For instance, she was allocating meeting time in 5 minutes increments and had people waiting in line next to her office for "their" 5 minutes to make sure her time was not wasted; subordinates, peers, superiors, vendors - everyone was "equal" when it came to waiting for an Audience.

    She, on the other hand, frequently showed up late to meetings. Sometimes hours late like in some famous instances where people had to wait for her to show up for a dinner with important clients.

    The real guilty people are those who hired her at Yahoo. Any background check would have raised all those issues.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  79. Those were the days⦠by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I also distinctly remember the years when Yahoo was still relevant as a search engine. I got really pissed off at Wells Fargo. So I typed in "Wells Fargo sucks" and I instantly received a link to a bank that I'm still with almost 18 years later. I used to do this all the time when I was unhappy with some company and I wanted to find a new one to do business with.

      But eventually, something changed. The results I would get with any basic Yahoo search turned out to be worthless spammy crap. This was about the time that Google showed up. I changed my browser homepage to Google and never looked back.

      Another place where Yahoo lost not only me, but many other people that I know, was when they started getting bitchy about closing email accounts, deleting everything and releasing your chosen username for someone else to use if you hadn't logged in within the past 30 days. That was really when they became the ultimate worthless fucktards as far as being a legitimate tech company.

  80. So Mellisa Mayer's..... by gerald.edward.butler · · Score: 1

    Alabia?