searchengineland.com— A class action lawsuit has been launched against Yahoo claiming it mislead investors that its new ad system would make more money.
May 14, 2007View in Crawl 4
I read the article in the first place.That's how I saw it.It's not like Yahoo went forward convinced they'd lose their shirts.I still feel it's stupid for investors to have any right at _ALL_ to sue the companies they invest in, unless they directly lie about the numbers to inflate/deflate stock prices. They did not.I think there's a case for other people to sue yahoo.I still think it's a "I love money because I decided to invest in the stock market, whiiiiiine"
So the investors are suing.....themselves? This is ridiculous. As an investor what you do is change management...not sue the very company you own a portion of. Wtf is the point? If you win the lawsuit, you win one small battle but lose twice over. (1) Yahoo's profits drop after they include the settlement in their financials...less dividends. What else happens? s**tty press and publicity....stock plummets and your net worth goes down with it. WAY TO GO!
I can only speak for myself, but we're actually spending significantly more money for our clients on Yahoo now than we were previously due to the improvements in the new system. There were a lot of campaigns in the past where would've liked to have done more on Yahoo, but couldn't due to the system. It's still a long way from perfect, but the changes needed now are more incremental and would seem to be fairly basic upgrades as opposed to the massive overhaul it just underwent.The main thing is audience though. You could have the best ad network in the world, but if no one's using it it doesn't matter. I hope they can regain some marketshare, because the market needs a strong, viable competitor to Google.
Haven't you figured out by now that its the articles and titles filled with bad grammar that get on the front page, mostly because of people's need to correct errors and comment on how lousy it is. People have learned long ago that most Digg users don't care what the article is about, its about posting about how bad the grammar is, or looking for a chance to correct other's errors. It inflates the popularity of a submission which in turn causes more people to arrive and comment.I know its ironic I am taking the time to point this out and not relate to the article, but the best thing to do when a submission is filled with bad grammar or inaccurate titles is to simply ignore it. Less posts means less exposure means the article dies rather then being promoted to the front page.
unloudMay 15, 2007
But will you die?
novagenesisMay 15, 2007
I read the article in the first place.That's how I saw it.It's not like Yahoo went forward convinced they'd lose their shirts.I still feel it's stupid for investors to have any right at _ALL_ to sue the companies they invest in, unless they directly lie about the numbers to inflate/deflate stock prices. They did not.I think there's a case for other people to sue yahoo.I still think it's a "I love money because I decided to invest in the stock market, whiiiiiine"
theneooneMay 15, 2007
So the investors are suing.....themselves? This is ridiculous. As an investor what you do is change management...not sue the very company you own a portion of. Wtf is the point? If you win the lawsuit, you win one small battle but lose twice over. (1) Yahoo's profits drop after they include the settlement in their financials...less dividends. What else happens? s**tty press and publicity....stock plummets and your net worth goes down with it. WAY TO GO!
parrotheaderMay 15, 2007
I can only speak for myself, but we're actually spending significantly more money for our clients on Yahoo now than we were previously due to the improvements in the new system. There were a lot of campaigns in the past where would've liked to have done more on Yahoo, but couldn't due to the system. It's still a long way from perfect, but the changes needed now are more incremental and would seem to be fairly basic upgrades as opposed to the massive overhaul it just underwent.The main thing is audience though. You could have the best ad network in the world, but if no one's using it it doesn't matter. I hope they can regain some marketshare, because the market needs a strong, viable competitor to Google.
ghostnetMay 15, 2007
The lawyers win!
spyrochaeteMay 15, 2007
Did you forget how to use the thumbsup/thumbsdown buttons over those 2 years? Or the reply button? What the hell are you talking about?
topher06May 15, 2007
Haven't you figured out by now that its the articles and titles filled with bad grammar that get on the front page, mostly because of people's need to correct errors and comment on how lousy it is. People have learned long ago that most Digg users don't care what the article is about, its about posting about how bad the grammar is, or looking for a chance to correct other's errors. It inflates the popularity of a submission which in turn causes more people to arrive and comment.I know its ironic I am taking the time to point this out and not relate to the article, but the best thing to do when a submission is filled with bad grammar or inaccurate titles is to simply ignore it. Less posts means less exposure means the article dies rather then being promoted to the front page.