Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Verizon Is Rebranding Yahoo, AOL As 'Oath' (engadget.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the clean-slate dept.

Nathan Ingraham reports via Engadget: Somewhere along the way, Verizon's planned purchase of Yahoo got real complicated. Thanks to security breaches of gargantuan proportions, Yahoo has lost a ton of value -- and the company was struggling even when Verizon announced its intentions to buy the former internet juggernaut. Part of the value lost is in the Yahoo brand, which Verizon apparently considers toxic at this point. To that end, Verizon is changing the name of the combined Yahoo and AOL company. Business Insider first reported that "Oath" will be the new name of the company (which would be the parent company of Engadget). Minutes after we published this story, AOL CEO Tim Armstrong confirmed the change in a tweet. Engadget also makes note of a Recode report, which indicates that current Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer will not continue with the new company.

106 comments

  1. Oath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I take this oath that I will never go to that site.

    1. Re: Oath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too shall take that oath.

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

      Prick your finger or it didn't happen.

    3. Re: Oath by alexo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Prick your finger or it didn't happen.

      Just don't do that the other way around.

    4. Re:Oath by KieranC · · Score: 1

      'can oath!

      --
      Like food, this sig will also pass
    5. Re:Oath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I take this oath that I will never go to that site.

      Me too.

      (I suppose these days it is necessary to point out that that is a joke).

    6. Re:Oath by dwywit · · Score: 1

      'can oath!

      'ken oath
      my oath
      bloody oath
      oath of allegiance
      oath of fealty
      oath of blood

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    7. Re:Oath by chew8bitsperbyte · · Score: 1

      Well they could've used "Popplers" or "Tastesicles"...

    8. Re:Oath by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

      reference

    9. Re:Oath by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Oather Pendragon.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Oath by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      I'm on the internet since about 1990, saw WWW and Mosaic and all, I went on Yahoo! a few times because it was a search engine, then I went to Lycos and Excite and Altavista and finally Google. As a European I never went on AOL and have not went on yahoo for more than 20 years.

      I too take an oath to never go to that site!

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    11. Re: Oath by thomn8r · · Score: 2

      Prick your finger or it didn't happen.

      Directions unclear...

    12. Re:Oath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping for clownpenis.fart

    13. Re:Oath by nwf · · Score: 1

      More like Feces Pieces

      --
      I don't know, but it works for me.
  2. AIM? by dejitaru · · Score: 1

    But then what will become of my 19 year old AIM account? Sure I have no one to talk to now, but it's currently my oldest account that I enjoy keeping for nostalgic purposes :(

    1. Re:AIM? by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Maybe nothing. This is probably similar to Google becoming Alphabet......a corporate structure change that has little effect on the consumer facing brands.

      Given the companies involved, you can be sure that the 'oath' is to monetize your personal data in any way possible.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:AIM? by jtara · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe nothing. This is probably similar to Google becoming Alphabet......a corporate structure change that has little effect on the consumer facing brands.

      But, in this case, it is all about the consumer-facing brand.

      • They would like everybody to forget about Yahoo
      • And, everybody already has forgotten about AOL
    3. Re:AIM? by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think so, the confirmation tweet (quoted in the article) mentions 20+ brands that are going to live under the Oath entity.
      And frankly, overarching gestures with funny names, lots of brands, plus reorganizations that don't do anything, all in an attempt to......increase productivity? Are just the kinds of things that Tim Armstrong likes to do.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:AIM? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Anyone who buys Yahoo is buying it for the brand, however tarnished it might be. Building a webmail system, news aggregator, and search engine front end (using Bing or Google as the back end, who'd be delighted to work for you) is relatively cheap and easy these days. What takes effort and huge amounts of marketing dollars is to get people to visit mail.oath.com, my.aoth.com, etc, and have them sign up and keep coming back.

      I really don't think Verizon is buying Yahoo simply to run some kind of marketing stunt to get people to forget about it. Why bother? Why buy Yahoo if your aim isn't to buy an existing user base?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:AIM? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Now that everyone knows that Oaf is the new Yahoo, every other brand they lump into the Oaf brand is going to be viewed as being as toxic as yahoo itself.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    6. Re:AIM? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Yahoo's brand is so poisoned it has negative value now. They still have intellectual property, trained staff, and network and hardware in place that has value. Maybe in 10 years Yahoo's brand will have retro-value again. Occasionally failed brands are brought back years later and met with appreciation as people remember them with nostalgia rather than for how bad they were. You see car companies do this all the time.

      Wouldn't surprise me if GM brings back Pontiac in a few years, now everyone's forgotten how bad they were and only remember it as "hey Granddad had a Ponitiac".

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:AIM? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't surprise me if GM brings back Pontiac in a few years, now everyone's forgotten how bad they were and only remember it as "hey Granddad had a Ponitiac".

      They have to wait for everyone to forget about the Aztek.

      And besides, GM shed a bunch of brands because they simply had too many; it was too much corporate overhead, and too many dealerships competing with other GM brands instead of with other automakers. I do have to question why they kept around GMC, since their crap is exactly the same as Chevy's crap, but the overall idea of shedding lesser brands was correct. They really should have just stuck with Chevy, Cadillac, and maybe Buick. Or if they just had to keep GMC, then they should have gotten Chevy out of the truck/SUV business; having differently-branded vehicles that are really the same car with different cosmetics is a stupid idea in this age. Oldsmobile was always a terrible brand name and long past its prime, and no one cared about Saturn any more except for a few die-hards, since the cars were no longer different, but just more badge-engineered Chevies.

    8. Re:AIM? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but I doubt Huffington Post readers will care at all.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  3. I wouldn't mind having Marissa Mayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    show me her Oath face

    1. Re:I wouldn't mind having Marissa Mayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      show me her Oath face

      Soon to be merged with Future Unified Computing Konglomerate with the entity to be known as : Fuck n Oath

    2. Re:I wouldn't mind having Marissa Mayer by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      You mean her ahegao face?

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
    3. Re:I wouldn't mind having Marissa Mayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the new management took an oath not to retain Marissa Mayer

    4. Re:I wouldn't mind having Marissa Mayer by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      She would even screw that up.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  4. Oath vs OAuth by darkain · · Score: 2

    Oath vs OAuth. I see absolutely zero room for any potential confusion there at all in the tech world!

    1. Re:Oath vs OAuth by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Oath vs OAuth. I see absolutely zero room for any potential confusion there at all in the tech world!

      The "tech world" is not their target audience. And it is possible that between now and when they pull the wraps off the name will change.

      I really don't understand the value to them at all.I really don't understand how any of the assets, including subscriber lists, can have anywhere near the value they paid. They should have let Yahoo die.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:Oath vs OAuth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And OATH is already a thing (Initiative for Open Authentication). https://openauthentication.org

    3. Re:Oath vs OAuth by 6ULDV8 · · Score: 1

      Could be fixed with a simple trademark. "OAuth, We're Useful ®"

      I doubt Verizon spent much time or money coming up with the name.

      --
      Pull my finger for my public key.
    4. Re:Oath vs OAuth by speedplane · · Score: 2

      Oath vs OAuth. I see absolutely zero room for any potential confusion there at all in the tech world!

      I can't wait for some security hole to be exposed because someone wrote "import oauth; oauth.connect()" and got a company logo instead of a secure channel.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    5. Re:Oath vs OAuth by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The tech world will not get confused. The people who will get confused shouldn't actually ever need to even google OAuth, let alone understand it.

    6. Re:Oath vs OAuth by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I bet it will anyway. There is no way Yahoo will start being trustworthy just because they changed their name to hide their true identity.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  5. Prediction... by bmk67 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Both are still going to suck.

  6. Oath sounds like something you shout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you stub your toe on a leg of the kitchen table. I guess that makes it the opposite of Yahoo!

  7. Business plans by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Step 1: Buy a company for it's brand recognition.
    Step 2: Don't use the company's brand.
    Step 3: ?????
    Step 4: Writedown.

    1. Re:Business plans by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      Step 1: Buy a company for it's brand recognition.
      Step 2: Don't use the company's brand.
      Step 3: ?????
      Step 4: Writedown.

      Step 5. Write a new book on turd polishing and cash in big time.

      --
      Do you have ESP?
    2. Re:Business plans by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Write a book on turd polishing and cash in big time.

      Somebody beat you to it.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  8. New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If ever there was a more gawd-awful tech company name, I have yet to hear it, and I lived through the dotcom bombs.

    1. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If ever there was a more gawd-awful tech company name, I have yet to hear it

      Even worse than "Aolhoo" or "Yahaol"?

    2. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by sexconker · · Score: 1

      expertsexchange.com

    3. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      Gannett renaming itself Tegna is a pretty shitty one.

      Fucking Tegna. Some consultant made a bonus coming up with that. And somebody else got promoted for coming up with Oath.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    4. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by ShaunC · · Score: 1

      "Flooz" was pretty fucking bad.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    5. Re: New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mommy, that man is doing naughty things with a pigeon!

    6. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Flooz" was pretty fucking bad.

      Name was bad, true. Worse was fact that it wanted to BitCoin, but without the blockchain stuff, or a Bank, without all those pesky rules. They were going to take money, convert it into flooz, Use flooz at a store (guessing here, it's been a decade or so) - probably online, then allow you convert the change back into money again. Perhaps even earn interest on your money in their bank account. What could possibly go wrong! 3 things:

      • They never had support of the stores/sites
      • They didn't have a limit of how much you could cash out
      • They didn't verify addresses to credit card numbers

      Last I heard, they were getting investigating for money laundering and violating various bank statutes right before they liquidated.

    7. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by BigIrv · · Score: 1

      perfect!

      --

      --Good morning fellas; Hand me that thing; Boy, this work's hard; Guys, break's over.
    8. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      expertsexchange.com

      You're absolutely right Mr. S. E. Xconker they had a terrible name!

      They deserved an awful name, that site drove me nuts with it's pay wall and I'd occasionally accidentally click on one of their links when searching for how to solve something. I had to block them in google.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    9. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      buy.com to Rakutan.

      They went from an easy to remember really valuable .com address to something I'm not even sure I spelled correctly.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    10. Re:New Winner of the Worst Tech Company Name by nwf · · Score: 1

      So true! I used to shop at buy.com rather frequently. After that odd name change, I basically lost interest.

      --
      I don't know, but it works for me.
  9. Go with Yahool by kiviQr · · Score: 1

    They should have choosen Yahool as a new name!

  10. Late Aprils Fools? by Bentbob · · Score: 1

    Was Verizon late to the Aprils Fools party?

  11. I don't get it by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    If they are purchasing it, just call it "Verizon". "AOL X" (service) would now be "Verizon X".

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:I don't get it by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

      It's because they're l'oath to complete the purchase, and want to keep it separate.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    2. Re:I don't get it by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      In that case, call the division "Qaranteam"

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  12. Synonym for "to swear"? by david.emery · · Score: 4, Funny

    Makes sense, I've sworn a streak of oaths at Verizon, Yahoo and even AOL at various points in the past.

    dave

    1. Re:Synonym for "to swear"? by Zaelath · · Score: 2

      Will fit right in with existing Australian slang; Fucking Oath!

    2. Re:Synonym for "to swear"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'kun oath mate

  13. Oath? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    "Oath" as in the kind of swear words I use when referring to the evil, blundering bastard child of Yahoo and Verizon.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:OATH? by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Odd Acquisitions To Have

    2. Re:OATH? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outstanding? Are They Hell...

    3. Re:OATH? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open And Thoroughly Hacked.

      /drops mic

  14. Will it still be by FrankHaynes · · Score: 1

    Always OverLoaded???

    I just saw an AOL e-mail address on a message to a Yahoogroup (yes, those still exist, unlike the dinosaurs) and had to re-read the @aol.com domain multiple times to believe my eyes. Yahoo has been so lost for so long that I can't understand what value there is inside that empty husk besides the salvage value of all their hardware and real estate holdings.

    And AOL?? SRSLY?!?!

    --
    slashdot: A failed experiment.
  15. Limey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So Yahoo UK becomes Oath UK? lol

  16. OATH? by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 1

    Oh, Another Troubled Headf*ck?

    --
    They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
  17. Zero Authorization? by Cyberpunk+Reality · · Score: 2

    Anyone can see your credentials and log into your accounts? _Real_ _public_ internet. I like it! Very honest and forthright.

    --
    Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
  18. OATH? Should be OAF by RubberDogBone · · Score: 2

    OAF would be a better name. As in, you'd have to be an OAF to go there.

    Seriously, Oath? OATH? FUCK! How much did they pay the consultant who came up with this? And was it the same moron who came up with Tegna?

    --
    Sig for hire.
  19. How it happened by RubberDogBone · · Score: 3, Funny

    How it happened (probably)

    Hapless Consultant: I've got to come up with a new name for this pig.

    Hapless Consultant: FUCK. MY. LIFE.

    Hapless Consultant: Hey wait a minute.... no can't use FUCK but how about Curse. No... OATH! Yeah! Makin ma bonusess checksess

    Hapless Consultant: Now what other bullshit can I come up with before Wheel of Fortune comes on?

    --
    Sig for hire.
    1. Re:How it happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did anyone else immediately suspect that an attempt was made to use all the letters in AOL? And they failed with the L, so they traded in the L for a TH.

      "I'd like to buy a vowel Alex..."!

      Wheel! Of! Corporate! Names!!

  20. Better name: FLOP by krelvin · · Score: 2

    I think they should name it FLOP...

  21. Oath by Northdot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because all the good names such as "Placenta" were already taken.

  22. UR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At first, anyway, "Oath" sounds better than "URhax0r3d".

  23. Just more headaces by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    Cant see anything good of this for me .means all my email contacts will send an email to a dead domain name??not sure it works the same as a home address where mail is forwarded to the new address for a period of time. i actually pay for a @yahoo.com email address 19.00 a year its my clean address lol. cant see that staying the same either. @oath.com ugh..bad a duckduckgo well not as bad lol

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
    1. Re:Just more headaces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get a .com address with email forwarding for less than $19/year.

    2. Re:Just more headaces by Megane · · Score: 1

      I think they will keep the domain name around for at least a few years, no point in letting some squatter get it. Many years ago, I was surprised that american.com was owned by Cisco, and not by the airline company. They must have swallowed some other company that used it.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  24. Good names taken... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Companies are really scraping the barrel bottoms for catchy names anymore. Even if you didn't have any of the other idiocy surrounding this move to go on, you could tell morons are running things just knowing a table full of them concluded a meeting after enthusiastically agreeing this name rocked.

  25. But...but...but... by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    What about my old southwestern bell email account still tied to yahoo? mail.yahoo.com will now be mail.oath.com? LOL... Shoot, I don't even use it much.

    1. Re:But...but...but... by Megane · · Score: 1

      A while back, maybe a year and a half now, ATT shut down their own outbound mail servers that allowed you to send mail with any From address as long as you were on one of their IP addresses. Now to send outbound mail, it has to go through the Yahoo outbound servers (the old server names have a CNAME to Yahoo's servers) with your ATT username and password, and the From address must be registered using Yahoo Mail configuration. And now the outbound mail servers are controlled by a direct competitor! Outsourcing! Brillant!

      Maybe it's time to get outbound port 25 unblocked on my static IP block. (I run my own inbound SMTP, and have since 2000, but so far I've been happy to forward outbound mail through the ISP.)

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  26. In Australia, it will be re-branded as "Streuth" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Australia, it will be re-branded as "Streuth"

  27. Why purchase? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    If the brand got toxic, why do they purchase? The personal data leaked and is available for free, so where are the remaining assets?

  28. My guess... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Someone was constipated and was thus having oat flakes for breakfast.

    Causing this shit to pop out a few hours later.
    Alas, oat.com was already taken...

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  29. Definitely OAF by irving47 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I heard about it on AM radio today, so I really was sure they were saying OAF at first. Going by which companies are going into it, it definitely fits better, anyway.

    --
    I had a sucky sig.
    1. Re:Definitely OAF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also going to be hard to pronounce by many non-English speakers.

    2. Re:Definitely OAF by WallyL · · Score: 1

      "Welcome to OAF!"

  30. Better names by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    I think two trending names would be:

    Huli
    Cath

    What's your suggestion?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Better names by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Shit.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  31. Floppies by hduff · · Score: 1

    Will they re-brand all the floppy disks?

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  32. Oath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oath is a four-letter word

    1. Re:Oath... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      So is Yahoo to most people.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  33. they are swearing a tarryable oath by swschrad · · Score: 1

    "oaf" would have been more like it

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:they are swearing a tarryable oath by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Marvelous. That's what I'm going to call it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  34. Re:Better name: FLOP by e432776 · · Score: 1

    or OAF

  35. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    somebody should let them know...they missed April Fools by a couple of days.

  36. Oath. by Chas · · Score: 1

    As in "This motherfucking service...They all need to die...NOW!"

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  37. Re: Oath ^h^h^h^h oaf by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    oaf dot com. Has that delicate air of, let us say, ignorance mixed with a helping of incompetence an a whiff of disregard for the users. I also detect a bouquet of greed and a woody essence of concern for little but Marissa's golden fudge-packing parachute.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  38. Re:Better name: FLOP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oath-at-piece-of-crap-is-still-around?

  39. Apparently not fluid in aussie slang.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuckin' oath, not sure if that's the best branding for aussie customers..

  40. I guess they couldn't trademark "Oaf" by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    If "Oath" is the best they could come up with, I really wonder what the other runner-ups were? Yaho-aol? A-OO-L?
    Even "Avowal" would have been better.

  41. Oaf by Wild_dog! · · Score: 1

    Not sure who picked that name.

  42. Just dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Verizon just can't stop from making two bad decisions here. One is buying Yahoo and AOL in the first place. Second is trying to rebrand into something unrecognizable. At least if you keep AOL and Yahoo customers can recognize those two names. Rebranding or morphing into something new hardly ever works.

  43. A rose by any other name is still a rose by Nkwe · · Score: 1

    Xfinity is still Comcast
    Yahoo by any other name is still Yahoo
    AOL by any other name is still AOL

    Roses smell better than all the above

  44. Red State Rebrand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will appeal to certain segments of the whackjob right:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_Keepers

  45. Loathing Oath by danciarlette4175 · · Score: 1

    I loath the name Oath.

    1. Re:Loathing Oath by danciarlette4175 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they will send me a bunch of CDs to sign up.

  46. Alternative Business plans by n329619 · · Score: 1

    Step 1: Buy a turd for its quality.
    Step 2: Use the turd.
    Step 3: ?????
    Step 4: Sell the turd somehow.