digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Microsoft Withdraws Its Bid for Yahoo

nytimes.com — Microsoft said Saturday that it was abandoning its blockbuster bid to acquire Yahoo after the two companies could not agree on a price. The breakdown followed a meeting in Seattle on Saturday morning between Microsoft C.E.O. Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive, and Yahoo C.E.O. Jerry Yang, Yahoo's co-founder and chief executive.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • controltheweb, on 05/04/2008, -17/+98In other news .. Microsoft reopens it's bid for Yahoo! Microsoft went through something similar with Hotmail all those years ago. When Microsoft wants it, it usually doesn't give up very easily.
    • gregdbowen, on 05/04/2008, -18/+30friggin' totally.

      This is a negotiating posture to see if yahoo starts to freak out about how much money they might lose. They have Msoft by the balls - big bloated Windows Vista balls.
      • geobay, on 05/04/2008, -3/+48Blue balls of death?
        • cowsgonemadd3, on 05/04/2008, -9/+5lol
        • carl0ski, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3doesnt really keep in line with the BSOD tradition
          Bloated Scrotum of Death
      • killtrocity, on 05/04/2008, -8/+2Jesus I hate those. *****.
      • HoratioHellpop, on 05/04/2008, -5/+24What the hell does Vista have to do with this?
        • Icyfenix, on 05/04/2008, -4/+7The amount of money Microsoft is hemorrhaging?
          • fkr3, on 05/04/2008, -2/+12Uh right.... I wish I hemorrhaged money like they do.
        • rrc589, on 05/04/2008, -1/+15It's customary for many digg users to bash Vista whenever a Microsoft related topic comes up.
        • Ryan166, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3friggin' totally
      • sagegoku666, on 05/04/2008, -3/+1mincey faggot balls
    • mephitix, on 05/04/2008, -5/+42They actually might if/when YHOO goes down to 15/share... I guess we'll find out in the next few weeks while it takes a beating.
    • TheZorch, on 05/04/2008, -8/+35Lets face reality here folks. Yahoo's stock is going to seriously tank because of this. They're going to take a hit where it hurts and its all a part of Microsoft's strategy. I've NEVER in my life EVER saw Microsoft back down from trying to acquire another company. Microhoo will happen, its only a matter of time.
      • krnldmp, on 05/04/2008, -9/+2Great. Then it will be MicrohAOL. Yahoo and AOL are almost identical in look and function anyway.
      • ilikechaitea, on 05/04/2008, -2/+24maybe dude....but then Microsoft has never aquired anything as big as this, or for so much money....has it bitten off more than it can chew?
        • ThndrShk2k, on 05/04/2008, -10/+4Doubt it. They run the world. Didn't you notice that most of the country's computers are windows?
    • hmunkey, on 05/04/2008, -5/+12This was probably planned. Yahoo!'s stocks are going to go down a huge drop. It will make Yahoo! more vulnerable.
      • Ratteler, on 05/04/2008, -3/+9Isn't that called stock manipulation?
        • tech42er, on 05/04/2008, -4/+6I don't think it's illegal. At least, it shouldn't be.
        • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3MS's proposal elevated the price of Yahoo stock and made it a viable investment. Now that Microsoft has withdrawn it's bid Yahoo looks like Yahoo again only worse for passing on that much money. This will cause investors to sell stock they own further dropping the value or passing on purchasing stock. So no it's not illegal and can't be made illegal since the market dictates the value.
          • Ratteler, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1But... if M$ swoops in after passing, and does a hostile takeover, I would think that's dancing on the gray line.
          • DarkShroud, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1They don't need to do a hostile take over. Since the last time I checked today yahoo's stock has fallen roughly 22% by some reports, this is the worst drop for them in 2 years. MS can let Yahoo's stock value take a beating from the market and then let them sweat for awhile before making a new lower priced offer.

            By the way, grow up and quite the $.
          • Ratteler, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1When they put the rights of the consumer above their quest for money, I'll stop abbreviating them M$. Till then
            M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M$M

            As for the rest of your comment, you may be right.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -5/+6I think it was "planned" that they would accept the offer.

        YHOO's stock was ~$13-ish at the time the offer was announced. They had something like 4-6 quarters in a row of losses. This last quarter (after the MS offer) was the first in a long time they made a profit (*cough*cook*the*books*cough*).

        MSFT withdrawing its offer is going to cause YHOO to return to its correct value.

        Frankly, I think they were overpaying. MSFT was making a generous offer to make the industry/regulators happy -- had they offered what the firm was worth (not even $13), people would have been irrationally upset because it was MSFT.
        • aboyd, on 05/04/2008, -0/+5@ dig1x:
          "YHOO's stock was ~$13-ish at the time the offer was announced. They had something like 4-6 quarters in a row of losses. This last quarter (after the MS offer) was the first in a long time they made a profit (*cough*cook*the*books*cough*)."

          False. They posted $160 million profit a year ago, followed by $150 million profit, $200 million profit, and finally $500 million profit. Anyone can read this for themselves, here:

          http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/results.cfm
        • orangysb, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3@dig1x
          did you just pull the figures out of your ass? at least make the minimal effort of checking up your facts
          yahoo has never made a loss in the past few years, if not never
    • spacecheese, on 05/04/2008, -5/+36Watch Google buy it instead.
      • tnoy, on 05/04/2008, -5/+19Its unlikely that a move like that would be approved. They'd end up with about 75% of the search market.
        • Akaji, on 05/04/2008, -1/+27Kind of like how MS has had over 75% of the PC market for a while?
          • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -4/+23Yes, but MSFT got there by using unethical business tactics, not through acquisition.
          • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -2/+15" MS has had over 75% of the PC"

            MSFT has much more than 75% today.
        • xTRUMANx, on 05/04/2008, -19/+1You kidding me? MSN+Yahoo can't possibly be 75%. Get your facts straight. I don't even know the numbers but a little math will show that would mean Google has less of the search market than one or the other (or perhaps both) which is friggindiculous.
          • SickofSects, on 05/04/2008, -0/+9except that he meant GOOG + YHOO.
      • dn11, on 05/04/2008, -0/+5i don't think that will happen any time soon. but they will certainly try to continue to get more of their services outsourced into Yahoo's business model. they would rather yahoo be dependent on them than be a part of them, and it is obvious that Yahoo would rather be google's bitch than have anything to do with MS
        • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1More like Yahoo was trying to get more money out of MS. Because Yahoo doesn't have anything to offer Google. Nor would a buy out from Google be approved by the US or EU.
      • ThndrShk2k, on 05/04/2008, -5/+2Why would google buy it? The most they would probably do is redirect to google.com

        Seriously, why put a crappy shell over their search engine when you can just link to your own with adsense revenue from the searches themselves and having fast loading results?
        • spacecheese, on 05/04/2008, -1/+10Yahoo! is way more than just email and a search engine however.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_ ...
        • carl0ski, on 05/04/2008, -4/+1spacecheese:your point?
          Google is way more than just email and a search engine
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_acquis ...
          YAHOO! is not unfortunately
          Close to 50 percent of the acquisitions appear to have been incorporated into Yahoo search and Advertising tools. arguably the remainder are are alternative methods of using search, bundling and hosting Information (Go Mobile Groups, maps)
          the remainder made up niche products Music, Games, HotJobs, Shopping Video used to generate advertising.
          Doesn't look far from a email, search and Advertising only company.
          Google however is pushing a paid Subscription and Software as A Service to create a Parallel and independent model to supplement its Search and Advertising.
          Selling hardware solutions (Google Intranet Search) and paid services such as Domain Registration.
          Anyone know why Yahoo bought Foxytunes? What are they trying to achieve with it?
          • Kamujin, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Really?

            Google's % of revenue directly related to online search?
      • tech42er, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3The DOJ, or at least the European Bureaucracy won't let them.
    • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -9/+20I think MSFT smelled the rat and is going to let the market remind YHOO what it thinks a fair price for the company is.

      MSFT is so widely hated in the blogosphere that I can see them being reluctant to take on the negative press of a hostile takeover.
      • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -6/+16Digg me down all you want. When YHOO's stock opens lower Monday, I get the last laugh.
        • Kamujin, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Well, Jerry. Looks like the rest of the world thinks your company is worth $23-24.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -4/+13Exactly, MSFT's original offer was priced with an incredible amount of "public goodwill".

        YHOO was very foolish to refuse. Believe it or not, MSFT is delivering incredibly compelling and innovative web properties and technologies. YHOO cannot compete - they are finished unless they do this.

        This smacks of false pride from YHOO.
        • init100, on 05/04/2008, -6/+6"Believe it or not, MSFT is delivering incredibly compelling and innovative web properties and technologies."

          Like what? I haven't seen any.
          • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4Just because you have your head in the sand doesn't mean other do.

            Take a look at the features of Live's mapping functions and then their image search. MS has managed to match just about all of Google's features yet make them different to attract use. Yahoo, well they have Flicker, email, and Buzz i guess.
          • MtheoryX, on 05/04/2008, -3/+1@DarkShroud: Directly replicating google's efforts is not innovative though.
          • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -0/+5Actually, Microsoft mapping technology is quite innovative. Its not direct replication of Google's.

            Funny though how Apple's Time Machine is considered "innovative" even though its direct replication of Microsoft technologies.

            I guess innovation is in the eye of the beholder.
          • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2@MtheoryX What part of "yet make them different" did you not understand? Same basic feature with very different details, many of which seem better than Google's. Because of the ignorance of your post I can already tell that you have not even tried Live Maps or Live Image search.
    • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -3/+13Sorry wanted to add.

      I wouldn't be surprised if MSFT uses this to help cherry pick the talent from YHOO.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -4/+2You mean YHOO talent, recognizing YHOO's days are numbered from refusing this exceptionally generous offer, decide to get off the sinking ship before it is too late -- that's what you meant right?
    • petska, on 05/04/2008, -3/+2China, Japan play a big part in this.. they will not approve of being acquired by a US rival such as M$. Yahoo has a lot of interests in Asia
      • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4Doesn't China have Baidu as a huge player in the search space? I can't see a legitimate anti-trust issue here from China's point of view.
      • tech42er, on 05/04/2008, -4/+4Yahoo! is! a! US! company! even! if! they! have! a! lot! of! interests! in! China! and! Japan!

        /what satirical British tech magazine am I?
    • rasmasyean, on 05/04/2008, -6/+0This was prolly an insider trading ploy.
    • Myztry, on 05/04/2008, -4/+7Microsoft still doesn't have another target to acquire. They have failed dismally with their previous 'organic' attempts. They still offered $5 billion over what they said what the absolute maximum. This is not over.
      My bet is Microsoft will talk down the Yahoo price then snap up as much as it can on the open market for as cheap as it can. Then negotiate for the rest, and give Jerry Yang and the smart investors the $37+ they are demanding for the remaining stock. Making the overall stock average down to what Microsoft can afford.
      Certainly Microsoft has lost it's behemoth status where a mere threat gets them what they want. They have to actually work for it. The bluffing keeps failing...
      • carl0ski, on 05/04/2008, -5/+1The American Economic Slowdown may have something to do with M$ decision to withdraw,
        • Myztry, on 05/04/2008, -3/+1Google isn't concerned by the US recession. Their market is less volatile (due to large foreign income percentage and other factors) than say Microsoft's.
          You'd think Microsoft would be even more determined to have some of that pie...
      • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Microsoft doesn't have to work for this. They're now going to let the market beat on Yahoo again. MS could have performed a hostel takeover if they wanted. But that would have looked bad to fans of yahoo. So now it's time to let the price of the stock drop considerably to force yahoo to sell to MS.
    • kentonguy, on 05/04/2008, -2/+2Just had to say that I barely even remember the days when hotmail was its own company..
    • m00n1, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2It was not similar. Hotmail was privately owned. They made an offer, it was refused. They upped it a few times till it was accepted. Totally different. It was up to the owner to say yes or no. Microsoft had the choice to go hostile and probably succeed, but chose not to.
  • jordankasteler, on 05/04/2008, -39/+2http://digg.com/business_finance/Microsoft_Withdra ... original NY times submission
    • inspecality, on 05/04/2008, -0/+19Actually this one is 10 minutes older.
      • gbarberi, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3Yeh, and there's another one five minutes older than this one. So, I don't get how the above link is even close to the original submit.
    • ThndrShk2k, on 05/04/2008, -0/+5That one ends with a 3

      this one ends with a 2

      So, um. How is the third one more original than the previous one (The second one)?
    • diggcensored, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2fail
  • mfingers, on 05/04/2008, -11/+2Yahoo asked the price share to increase to $37, the question is would they've sold it at that price if MS agrees to that?

    The answer is NO. Yahoo just wanted to get over it somehow.
    • laceration, on 05/04/2008, -1/+4Yahoo is at $18 and wouldn't sell at $33! Is this about money or something else?
      • carl0ski, on 05/04/2008, -3/+1Yahoo knew M$ was desperate to buy when they offered 40% overprice.

        Yahoo was just leveraging this to negotitate with someone is potentially willing to pay more.
        If MS offered $25 a share initially Yahoo would have said I want $30
  • uceboyx, on 05/04/2008, -13/+1Oh noes it's over!
  • marksands07, on 05/04/2008, -9/+79*Watches the diggs rise as the twitter users login*
    • PHiZ187, on 05/04/2008, -10/+6Huh? Does NY Times have a twitter account? Does Yahoo own twitter? What are you talking about!?
      • Archeologist, on 05/04/2008, -2/+9http://twitter.com/kevinrose/statuses/802928975
        • lemcoe9, on 05/04/2008, -4/+5I got the same twit. It was scary.
        • gbarberi, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3It would have been nicer if KR had twittered the first digg submission (from Techcrunch - also they update their posts on the fly. NYTimes has great writing and analysis, but they don't update their breaking news much.).
          But, ah well, at least Kevin has found a way to get Breaking News on Digg's FP faster. So props to him for that.
        • gbarberi, on 05/04/2008, -0/+10And lemcoe9: it's tweet, not twit. Twits should be reserved for morons on twitter messaging stupid ***** like "just farted" or "eating dinner"
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twit -- Note that it's also British slang for an annoying person, so it fits well.
      • Mizzike, on 05/04/2008, -5/+5@kevinrose just twittered and linked to this story.
      • dick-richardson, on 05/04/2008, -6/+6Kevin Rose twittered it.
    • SIant, on 05/04/2008, -6/+2IRON MAN WAS SO AWESOME
  • Fraff5, on 05/04/2008, -24/+3Now if only Google would bid.
    • PHiZ187, on 05/04/2008, -4/+15Yeah, we're all dying for a search engine monopoly, that's it.
      • over900000, on 05/04/2008, -6/+4Yes because Google isn't a monopoly already. At least if the MS bid succeeded it would have provided decent competition to Google. Right now it's like iPod vs rest or Intel vs AMD.
        • PHiZ187, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3... Read the comment again. Fraff5 was suggesting that Google should bid for Yahoo...
    • Archeologist, on 05/04/2008, -4/+19Google doesn't need Yahoo.
    • Ganja420, on 05/04/2008, -2/+13Hooray for monopolies! Competition holds back the business... =b
    • Wildthing, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5It really amazes me how people think Google is god of life on earth. How do we solve global warming? Google should solve it! How do we cure cancer? Google should do it! How do we make Yahoo competitive with Google? Google should buy them! Seriously, wake up and do some thinking, people.
      • Definition, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Use Google's search engine. to cure cancer, solve global warning and oh.. they already beat them in competitions.
  • dnimphobic, on 05/04/2008, -15/+45Good, im tired of hearing about it. Its too bad tho that this will make Yahoo's stock sink like a fat kid without his floaties.
    • PolarBearCa, on 05/04/2008, -0/+42Don't you know fat floats?
      • RevoFM, on 05/04/2008, -5/+9Fat KIDS sink though.
        • Magnus150, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2I can attest to this, I always sink, and I ain't exactly weightlifting material.
    • rasmasyean, on 05/04/2008, -0/+6Muscle is more dense than fat.
    • uplaya101, on 05/04/2008, -8/+4This is perfect exaple of someone trying post a clever when its clearly not.
    • FriniK, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3i think the response should be " ... make Yahoo's stock sink like a body builder without his floaties"
  • drex8, on 05/04/2008, -17/+7Now that the deal has fallen through, Microsoft can channel some of the money to hire more developers, or convince freelance developers to do their job. More Developers is the key!
    • jilagan, on 05/04/2008, -1/+6It's not as simple as that. If it were, then Microsoft wouldn't have gone through this in the first place.
      • drex8, on 05/04/2008, -2/+2Dude, don't you think I know that? I was just hoping somebody would see the developers pun (albeit very much retarded) in that. And post the video, or do the chant. And I'm glad, sadfly did just that.
        Sadfly gets my digg.
    • sadfly, on 05/04/2008, -1/+30DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -3/+7My plan for a Microsoft turn around.
      Fire 90% of the lawyers.
      Fire 100% of the marketing staff.
      Hire more support personnel.

      Start a new OS line that is not saddled with having to be 99% compatible with XP/Vista. Rethink the problem from scratch to be more cloud based. Lastly, built it on FOR REAL open standards.

      Maintain XP, VISTA, 2003 Server product lines as this is where todays cash flow is coming from.
      • jejones, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9Microsoft won't use for real open standards; it lives on the applications barrier to entry. It can't win a fair fight.
      • mijelh, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3They will not use real open standards not only because they cannot win a fair fight (which they probably can't) but just because they don't have to: They have a monopoly on office suits and O.S., so they can basically do what they want.
        Non-open standard formats are not ethic for government usage for a number of reasons, including (among other reasons) the fact that you can't (shouldn't) make your citizens pay for software for reading official stuff. Some governments are starting to adopt this idea, and it's the only apparent reason why microsoft is trying the OOXML scam.
      • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3Yeah, this is probably 1 of 1,000,000,000 reason why I will never get offered the CEO job at MSFT.
      • over900000, on 05/04/2008, -1/+4Start a new OS line that is not saddled with having to be 99% compatible with XP/Vista.

        Apple can do this because they don't have the market share. Can you imagine what kind of hell MS would have to put up with if they did that?
        • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Well, Apple forked FreeBSD so they have yet to do it actually.

          But Microsoft already did this a long time ago. Window NT was a second OS line that was free from many of the compatibility constraints on Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME.

          The Windows NT line went on to replace their mainstream line completely. Windows 2000 is NT5.0. Windows XP is NT5.1. Windows 2003 is NT5.3. and Vista is NT6.0
  • BUrAph, on 05/04/2008, -9/+156Official letter from Ballmer to Yang:

    Dear Jerry:
    After over three months, we have reached the conclusion of the process regarding a possible combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!.
    I first want to convey my personal thanks to you, your management team, and Yahoo!’s Board of Directors for your consideration of our proposal. I appreciate the time and attention all of you have given to this matter, and I especially appreciate the time that you have invested personally. I feel that our discussions this week have been particularly useful, providing me for the first time with real clarity on what is and is not possible.
    I am disappointed that Yahoo! has not moved towards accepting our offer. I first called you with our offer on January 31 because I believed that a combination of our two companies would have created real value for our respective shareholders and would have provided consumers, publishers, and advertisers with greater innovation and choice in the marketplace. Our decision to offer a 62 percent premium at that time reflected the strength of these convictions.
    In our conversations this week, we conveyed our willingness to raise our offer to $33.00 per share, reflecting again our belief in this collective opportunity. This increase would have added approximately another $5 billion of value to your shareholders, compared to the current value of our initial offer. It also would have reflected a premium of over 70 percent compared to the price at which your stock closed on January 31. Yet it has proven insufficient, as your final position insisted on Microsoft paying yet another $5 billion or more, or at least another $4 per share above our $33.00 offer.
    Also, after giving this week’s conversations further thought, it is clear to me that it is not sensible for Microsoft to take our offer directly to your shareholders. This approach would necessarily involve a protracted proxy contest and eventually an exchange offer. Our discussions with you have led us to conclude that, in the interim, you would take steps that would make Yahoo! undesirable as an acquisition for Microsoft.
    We regard with particular concern your apparent planning to respond to a “hostile” bid by pursuing a new arrangement that would involve or lead to the outsourcing to Google of key paid Internet search terms offered by Yahoo! today. In our view, such an arrangement with the dominant search provider would make an acquisition of Yahoo! undesirable to us for a number of reasons:
    • First, it would fundamentally undermine Yahoo!’s own strategy and long-term viability by encouraging advertisers to use Google as opposed to your Panama paid search system. This would also fragment your search advertising and display advertising strategies and the ecosystem surrounding them. This would undermine the reliance on your display advertising business to fuel future growth.
    •Given this, it would impair Yahoo’s ability to retain the talented engineers working on advertising systems that are important to our interest in a combination of our companies.
    •In addition, it would raise a host of regulatory and legal problems that no acquirer, including Microsoft, would want to inherit. Among other things, this would consolidate market share with the already-dominant paid search provider in a manner that would reduce competition and choice in the marketplace.
    •This would also effectively enable Google to set the prices for key search terms on both their and your search platforms and, in the process, raise prices charged to advertisers on Yahoo. In addition to whatever resulting legal problems, this seems unwise from a business perspective unless in fact one simply wishes to use this as a vehicle to exit the paid search business in favor of Google.
    •It could foreclose any chance of a combination with any other search provider that is not already relying on Google’s search services.
    Accordingly, your apparent plan to pursue such an arrangement in the event of a proxy contest or exchange offer leads me to the firm decision not to pursue such a path. Instead, I hereby formally withdraw Microsoft’s proposal to acquire Yahoo!.
    We will move forward and will continue to innovate and grow our business at Microsoft with the talented team we have in place and potentially through strategic transactions with other business partners.
    I still believe even today that our offer remains the only alternative put forward that provides your stockholders full and fair value for their shares. By failing to reach an agreement with us, you and your stockholders have left significant value on the table.
    But clearly a deal is not to be.
    Thank you again for the time we have spent together discussing this.
    Sincerely yours,
    Steven A. Ballmer
    Chief Executive Officer
    Microsoft Corporation

    Source: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may0 ...
    • Archeologist, on 05/04/2008, -19/+11I don't know why you got dugg down. I'll see you on Reddit.
    • byronne, on 05/04/2008, -10/+119Unofficial letter from Steve Ballmer to Jerry Yang:

      Jerry-
      We will assimilate you, eviscerate your corporate structure and become more powerful than ever. HA HA HA AHA HA!
      Bite me,
      Stever
      • dn11, on 05/04/2008, -4/+31unofficial ballmer quote overheard today in his office "***** KILL YAHOO!!!" *$2000 chair being thrown*
        • CHAD3814, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2Yahoo's former CTO, Zod, had the license plate that said "KILL AOL"
      • tech42er, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9DEVELOPERS!
    • mizike, on 05/04/2008, -5/+43that letter is the legal equivalent of a bitch slap.....basically he's saying they're going to go ahead and hold back while either a) yahoo's stock plummets and the shareholders start to freak out as there's no foreseeable way yahoo can increase their value to what M$ was offering, or b) they make a bunch of stupid moves which everyone realizes would more or less destroy their company.

      don't be surprised if they come back around in a few months and make a significantly reduced offer....
      • grumpyrain, on 05/04/2008, -2/+3Exactly. Yahoo!'s problem is that they have not demonstrated some killer service that is going to take the world by storm, another Facebook or Myspace or digg or something that will generate an upwards arrow on their stock price. At the moment the company direction seems to be same-old same-old. If that hasn't been returning them a handsome profit in recent times, why would the future be different? And if the future is no different under the current company direction, then the share price will drop. I have no doubt Microsoft is playing games to get a better deal. It would be irresponsible to their own shareholders if they didn't. But I doubt Microsoft would go hostile over this takeover. Yahoo! has already indicated that they will make deals to literally tear the company to shreds if the takeover was successful, so there is no point to this.

        If Yahoo! wants to prevent a takeover by Microsoft, there is just one solution. Make tons of money in your own right so that the market does not see Microsoft's bid as generous.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -7/+2"M$" == auto-bury.
    • grumpyrain, on 05/04/2008, -3/+29That has got to be one of the most reasonable statements ever to be bashed into Ballmer's keyboard.
      • lordtyros, on 05/04/2008, -13/+7He's not a CEO for nothing, dumbass.
      • init100, on 05/04/2008, -0/+6Do you think that it was written by him personally? I don't think so. The letter is just too nice to be written by him. Must have been written by his personal letter-writer.
    • jwk4heels, on 05/04/2008, -8/+7"would have provided consumers, publishers, and advertisers with greater innovation and choice in the marketplace."

      More choice? How is assimilating and basically destroying the individuality of another company giving consumers more choice? And Microsoft has failed on the innovation front lately, if you ask me. I fail to see the logic here.
      • init100, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4I agree. It is also funny to read their complaints about dominance in the search space. They are very concerned when someone else is dominant, but when themselves are dominant, it is never a cause for conbcern and always because people "chose the best".
    • Vagabondjohn, on 05/04/2008, -16/+1I saw how long that comment was and dugg you down. Sorry,but i don't like to read.
      • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4Then get off digg and go to Youtube where you belong.
    • mijelh, on 05/04/2008, -10/+5I know what people say about Yahoo's shares going down etc. but I think Yang showed a great courage refusing Microsoft's proposal, to the point of preferring to destroy the company he created before giving it to Msft.I think it shows a great determination on his ideas. It might be negative for their shareholders but it is definitely positive for the internet community who will enjoy more competitors.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -4/+7"Yang showed a great courage refusing Microsoft's proposal, to the point of preferring to destroy the company he created before giving it to Msft"

        That is one of the most irrational things I've ever read. MSFT offered more than TWICE the market value of MSFT, and the YHOO board refused. Why? Because they knew that the dominant theme surrounding MSFT is one of the same kind of irrationality you've just displayed.

        YHOO bluffed, and MSFT called their bluff. I hope MSFT lets YHOO die instead.
      • tweedius, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3Business does not exist to show great courage and destroy ones own company in order to throw a finger at a titan, business exists to turn a profit for the good of the company and the good of the people who invest in the company (shareholders). Happy feel good I hate microsoft bs does not apply when microsoft is willing to give you billions of dollars for a search engine that no one uses anymore. And don't give me any crap about yahoo games and yahoo email, it's not worth the billions of dollars that microsoft was willing to give.
      • mijelh, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Business exist to make profit, so it's logical that I'm glad of a decision that benefits my own business (even if only as a consumer). Besides that fact I said he showed courage because he defended his ideas to the last consequences, which is in fact the definition of courage, but my ideas are very different and if I were Yang I would have accepted the offer, maybe because I DONT hate MSFT, nor do I love YHOO or Google, it's just business, empathy has no place.
    • PolarBearCa, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2What he fails to mention is that the letter was written in blood.
  • fdelucio, on 05/04/2008, -8/+1techcrunch http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/05/03/breaking-micr ...
  • crazysamz, on 05/04/2008, -10/+5They may be buying AOL according to wired... I hope they go through with that...
    • SilverBlade2k, on 05/04/2008, -10/+7Why? Microsoft ***** up anything they acquire.
      • IronTek, on 05/04/2008, -4/+38You think it's actually possible to ***** AOL up more?
        Not even Microsoft is capable of that, sir!
        • woody56292, on 05/04/2008, -4/+1But then what will happen to engadget?!?

          /sarcasm
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -1/+6Care to name a single acquisition that "MS *****-up"?

        Does such bloviating pass for insight around here?
      • DarkPrince11, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Foldershare is actually great if not better than it was before.
    • Lynxpro, on 05/04/2008, -5/+4How about none of the above? AOL's got Engadget/Weblogs, AIM/ICQ, Digital Cities, Moviefone, Mapquest, WinAmp, and the remnants of Netscape. I don't want Microsoft with any of that.
    • krnldmp, on 05/04/2008, -2/+4Same difference.
  • dimebonics, on 05/04/2008, -22/+6EPIC FAIL
    • ism70605, on 05/04/2008, -1/+9The only EPIC FAIL was your comment.
    • RevoFM, on 05/04/2008, -7/+5A Cat Is Fine Too A winner is you An Hero Baby ***** Barrel roll Bayeux Tapestry Bel-Air Bitches Don't Know Bix Nood Bridget Buy A Dog Candlejack Catnarok Caturday Ceiling Cat Centipede filled vagina Chin-chan ***** Copypasta Creepypasta Delicious Cake Demotivators Desu Diabeetus Divide By Zero DO IT FAGGOT DO NOT WANT Epic Fail Guy Epic Threads FGSFDS F40PH Gaijin 4Koma George Zimmer Goodnight Sweet Prince HA! HA! Guy HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK ***** Happycat Happy Negro How Do I Shot Web? I Am In Your Base Killing Your D00ds I Came I Has A Shuvel IMMA CHARGIN MAH LAZER INTERNET HATE MACHINE Over 9000 ITTY BITTY BABY ITTY BITTY BOAT JESUS CHRIST IT'S A LION GET IN THE CAR! LOL WUT Longcat Moar Mudkips Nevada-tan O RLY Pedobear ???? Pool's Closed Profit Raptor Jesus The Sandwich Chef This Looks Shopped Waha WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Yaranaika ZA WARUDO 360 kid 4chan Battlecards 4chan Gaming 4chan Gold Account Audio Beat A Rod Because of Parkinson's Child Abduction BRB, CHURCH brb, compromised brb, soup Dental Plan Duckroll Dynamic Entry Extreme Advertising Fishing Cat #fortune Gary Oak Godhand Edit Goofy Time Guess The Meme Hi-tech military software Holy Grail I DIDN'T EAT THAT ***** SANDWICH OR THE TOILET THING EITHER! I Has A Bucket I need a price check ... Josef Fritzl JxcelDolghmQ Time for a Dicking Chocolate Rain Large Hadron Collider Leave Bond to me LINK MAH BOIIIII LOLCHAIR Mordor Octocat Operation LIONCASH Power Wrist SFW Porn Steve Irwin Stingray SUP DAWG Swirl Face Switch police on Tyrannosaurus Reich Uninformed Lisa VTEC Just Kicked In Yo What is a man? 404 Girl BIKECAT Blockatiel Borscht Broccoli Dog Card Crusher Chris Hansen DOUBLE NIGGER Doug DSFARGEG Garfield ENGLISH ***** Frosted Butts Gaijin 4Koma Happy Snake House Hypnotoad I am Legend I GOT NORTON! I'd Hit It INVISIBLE... IS IT CAN BE HUGS TIEM NOW PLEES? Is This Battletoads Jam It In John Locke KILL IT WITH FIRE Law 4 Kids lolicatgirls.swf Machine Code Man The Harpoons Mario Drawings Milk Bags MSPaint Relationship Thread Nanomachines Not This ***** Again OM NOM NOM NOM Party Hard PLEASE RESPOND Pretty cool guy Push Butan Put Shoe On Head Rape Clock ***** Dick Nipples Slowpoke Speedycat Spengbab Steel Hearts Teh Rei That ***** Cat delayclose.jpg TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL USB Cable Vespene gas Weegee What is Love? Wrong Location Nigger X? In My Y? YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG Zippocat Bring Back Snacks Bump Clippit Combofag Drawhore Fukken saved Grey Area I ONLY CAME TO VISIT YOUR INSIDES! in before X lurk moar Never forget Oh exploitable Pic Unrelated Posting in an epic thread Rules Of The Internet Sauce Stick It In Her Pooper Stop posting Verbose Thread Weeaboo WHARRGARBL X is not your personal army X Y is X
      ---------------
      Now can we go back to talking about MS and Y!?
  • limezor2, on 05/04/2008, -30/+99Who uses Yahoo anyway?
    • dick-richardson, on 05/04/2008, -8/+76Not that many, but quite a few use Delicious and Flickr
      • aboyd, on 05/04/2008, -0/+9Not many? What? I thought Yahoo! was the #1 visited site on the Internet? Ahead of MySpace, Facebook, Google, and MSN? Is that "not many?" Let's search for it... yeah, here:

        http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?lang=none&t ...

        Yahoo is #1. Hmm. Although YouTube & Google are #2 and #3, and since Google owns YouTube, you could combine their traffic, and then maybe Google is ahead of Yahoo. However, then it will only be fair for Yahoo to add in Flickr and Yahoo Japan and all their other properties. Hmm. Then Google will want to add in Orkut and all their other properties. Ugh.

        Can we just agree that they both have boatloads upon boatloads of visitors? Even if Yahoo ended up in second place after combining the traffic of all their properties, we can still see that it's a staggering amount of traffic, right?
    • snotrokit, on 05/04/2008, -2/+10Zimbra is huge.
      • synaesthesia, on 05/04/2008, -4/+17Zimbra? What the hell is that, a pokemon?
    • ElGigi, on 05/04/2008, -11/+4Ya-who?
    • dn11, on 05/04/2008, -1/+15the vast wasteland of the icy north is more well populated than you can imagine.
    • laceration, on 05/04/2008, -8/+17I do, who uses Microsoft?
      • HoratioHellpop, on 05/04/2008, -3/+10Only several hundred million computer users.
        • rasmasyean, on 05/04/2008, -2/+14Billions. Don't forget the priated copies.
      • chris9902, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5everyone. (you do even if you don't know it. Microsoft have their fingers in a lot of pies)
        • sekhui, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2*has its fingers...
          • Karmavs, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1is it really worth “correcting” someone with a different regional dialect than you. Plurals for organisations are correct in British English.
        • theWrkncacnter, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1mmm pie
    • sinnerman, on 05/04/2008, -0/+25Apparently, most people do:
      http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=glo ...
    • spuddy, on 05/04/2008, -7/+8Nobody goes to Yahoo. It's too crowded.
      • SickofSects, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5Subtlety does not seem to work very well on digg. You should have put a /Yogi Berra tag.
        Yogi Berra: Nobody goes to that restaurant anymore. It's too crowded.

    • blakck, on 05/04/2008, -1/+11There's some sections of Yahoo that's actually pretty good. Yahoo Sports for example - they're the top rated sports site even over ESPN and SI. Yahoo Movies is decent too. It would be huge if Microsoft ended up acquiring them, as they'd have the second rated search engine and a myriad of other services. They'd still be far behind Google in all web services, obviously.
      • DMCer, on 05/04/2008, -4/+2*There're some section of Yahoo that are pretty good.
    • fatdog789, on 05/04/2008, -5/+12I use Yahoo. Most of the ***** they offer is better than the ***** google offers.
      • wilhoitm, on 05/04/2008, -3/+2You mean the porn stuff right?
      • SickofSects, on 05/04/2008, -3/+0You mean "two search engines, one cup?"
      • synaesthesia, on 05/04/2008, -6/+7Yea, I will admit that Yahoo beats the hell out of google when it comes to obnoxious full-browser overlaying flash ads covering up the page you're trying to read so that you can learn about the new Dodge or whatever the *****.
    • Hoogs, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2I do, the email is decent and I use the movies section often, but Yahoo! Answers has really gone down the tubes lately.
    • Theli, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2The same people who use Internet Explorer 6 and AOL?
      Never underestimate user base inertia.
  • WhatsInYouriPod, on 05/04/2008, -18/+11Microsoft would have ruined Yahoo! as it does with most everything it acquires! Haha, found this out from Kevin Rose's tweet on twitter!
    • Fox318, on 05/04/2008, -8/+5What was left to ruin. Yahoo has not created a substantial web technology in years.
      • Karmavs, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5YUI library?
        • MtheoryX, on 05/04/2008, -1/+1Okay, fine. Yahoo has not created TWO substantial web technologies in years. Ha!
    • dick-richardson, on 05/04/2008, -4/+16Yahoo sure as hell doesn't need Microsoft to ruin it...it's doing a great job by itself. And it's decisions like these that exemplify Yahoo's ineptitude.
  • glasderg, on 05/04/2008, -15/+2Does it really matter who wins?
    Hopefully Google bids for it, and takes full advantage of it!
    • nmnnotmyname, on 05/04/2008, -2/+6Why would google need yahoo?
    • grumpyrain, on 05/04/2008, -1/+6And seriously, who would want any company including Google to have that sort of monopoly on paid search.
      • LightSpeed4, on 05/04/2008, -3/+8a huge google fanboy who doesnt know what antitrust is?
        • nmnnotmyname, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Google Fanboys are normally anti-MS. If you don't know what antitrust is at that point, then... you need to get off of the internet.
      • init100, on 05/04/2008, -3/+4But it is okay that Microsoft holds a monopoly in desktop operating systems and office suites?
  • fatas, on 05/04/2008, -10/+70This is ***** great news for competition and capitalism.
    .... and Flickr
    • gr00vy, on 05/04/2008, -7/+5A fundamental part of capitalism is M&A. Without it, it is very difficult to price stock correctly, and stock prices would likely go down, not up. So this is NOT great news for Capitalism. It may be good news for competition and Flickr however.
      • known, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2Capitalism is

        1. Exploration of wealth
        2. Accumulation of wealth

        Rational Distribution of wealth is missing from Capitalism.
    • an0nym0us, on 05/04/2008, -2/+2Here's hoping more features will come to Flickr free user. :D
      • MtheoryX, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1It's already pretty damn cheap to go pro.
    • CarbonAndroid, on 05/04/2008, -2/+3I bet Google is secretly bummed. Microsoft would have ***** Yahoo up.
      • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2How so? Try naming one thing MS has acquired and ruined.
        • WomensUnderwear, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0LookOut
          • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2You haven't tried MS desktop search 3.0 or higher have you? If you're running XP you can download the full version of desktop search 3.0 or the 4.0 preview. It actually does a good job as long as you still have indexing enabled. The desktop search in Vista is rock solid.
        • Karmavs, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Vermeer Technologies

          • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1I haven't used Front Page since 2002. It worked ok back then, but now I don't know since I haven't tried MS Expression yet. Congrats on finding one of the few MS software products I haven't tried.
    • neFariou5, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1...and delicious
  • Shaman760, on 05/04/2008, -18/+143Yahoo can keep on sucking all by themselves now. Joy!!

    • dsmx, on 05/04/2008, -3/+11The alternative was having 1 huge company that double sucks. Now we just have 2 companies that suck.
    • jazzbeaux, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Does anyone actually still use Yahoo? And if so, why?
    • 4pple5auce, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Yahoo! is stupid to have not taken that deal especially in the middle of a recession. The shareholders wanted this takeover, it was blocked by conpany officers and Yahoo! buying a large chunk of it's own stock back, so an open market takeover couldn't happen. Come on, Msft is down 18% ytd and they still had this offer on the table. ***** Yahoo!, if they think they can stay afloat while defying the desires of it's shareholders then let them have their way.
  • illwil, on 05/04/2008, -11/+3Exclaim!
  • PHiZ187, on 05/04/2008, -12/+3Doh! There goes the price of my MSFT stock!
    • mephitix, on 05/04/2008, -4/+22correction: YHOO's price is going to crash and burn on Monday
    • wilf_brim, on 05/04/2008, -2/+11If anything MSFT will go up, the price was probably supressed as many thought the Yahoo merger was a stupid idea.
  • imperfectepoch, on 05/04/2008, -3/+5I guess now we wait to see what the next grand plan to save Yahoo! is.
    • lordtyros, on 05/04/2008, -2/+8There is no grand plan. Yahoo execs get paid well no matter how poorly Yahoo does. If I were a Yahoo! shareholder, I'd be ***** beyond belief.
      • wattersm, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5There's a good chance the share holders will sue Yahoo now, especially if the stock goes down because of this.
    • gubatron2, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Yahoogle
  • bbqsalad, on 05/04/2008, -14/+4developers, developers



    developers
    • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4OH! I get it, MSFT's developer-centric nature is funny. I see, all public-facing people need to be smug, turtle-necked douche-bags right?

      Perhaps MS should run some advertising telling the public how OSX and GNU/Linux runs on sticks and bubble-gum.

      We need to be *UPSET* that MS works hard to treat Developers like customers.
  • wiseman666, on 05/04/2008, -12/+6Hey Ballmer,

    If you are still looking to offload some of Microsoft's cash on a questionable investment, I am willing to open takeover talks for offers starting at $30 billion, cash only. That's a whole $14 billion less than what you were willing to offer Yahoo, and you won't have any problems convincing my executives to take this offer. I bet that we can hammer out a deal in less than three months, too.
  • helliottlaw, on 05/04/2008, -12/+2Perhaps drawing a parallel between this situation and the presidential race is absurd...but if one were to compare microsoft and yahoo to the democrats and google to the republicans, I would say that, in the end, the only players who are vindicated by the length of these talks and the ultimate results would be google/the republican party...McCaine and Page '08!!!
    • grumpyrain, on 05/04/2008, -2/+2Yes, drawing a parallel to the presidential race is absurd.
  • Ganja420, on 05/04/2008, -18/+22Now Yahoo can look into filing bankruptcy in the near future
    • aboyd, on 05/04/2008, -3/+2Except that they posted a billion USD in profit over the last 4 quarters, so that might tide them over a little.
      • aboyd, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2Wow, I'm dugg down for stating facts. I posted the link to the SEC filings in a post up above this. It's not like I made it up. You guys can go verifiy it for yourself.
  • newbill123, on 05/04/2008, -5/+42I think this is just another negotiating tactic. Microsoft has said they still want Yahoo! but not if it costs more that $33/share.

    If MSFT can walk away from the table for a week or so, the YHOO stock will tank and there will be a LOT of disappointed owners anxious for another MSFT approach.
    • mephitix, on 05/04/2008, -2/+18totally agree.. Monday is going to be a bloodbath for YHOO
    • JQP123, on 05/04/2008, -1/+10If the shareholders expect to deal with MSFT, it's pretty obvious that they need to replace Yang. Not sure what his objectives are but it's pretty clear that his main focus is not on helping the shareholders. He just refused a big wad of cash that would have gone to the shareholders. Thanks for nothing.

      My advice to Jerry Yang is watch your back, a lot of ***** off people are gonna come for your job.
    • rs2183, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0so many people are going to get burned on their may yhoo calls. but.. nice opportunity for those of us to place some puts tomorrow !
  • seltaeb4, on 05/04/2008, -3/+14Will an enthused Microsoft shareholder enlighten us as to what Microsoft could or would even *do* with Yahoo? Why is this such a great business idea? How will this in ANY way help either Yahoo! or Microsoft, or more particularly, their shareholders?

    As Dennis Miller once said about 2-for-1 offers, "Guess what? Two of CRAP -- equals CRAP! If they *really* wanted to screw you, they'd make it 3-for-1."
    • InvaderDem, on 05/04/2008, -2/+6I'm not a Microsoft shareholder, but I'm guessing that Microsoft is basically buying the name. They would slowly integrate Yahoo! into Microsoft's Live services. I think, and I'm not certain, that Yahoo is still the second choice for search engines. So if for some reason you can't find anything on Google, Yahoo would be the second bet. (My first is Live, then Google)
      • jm1234567890, on 05/04/2008, -1/+7You use what??
        • rkzda, on 05/04/2008, -1/+4I've used the live search, and though it is different than google, it works. Google is first, but occasionally it does not find what I want, and Live will.
        • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Live doesn't have the useless blog & forum spam that Google does. Live has it's own downsides as well, but it is a very good competitor to Google. The Live image search is pretty good as well. I use a variety of searches because they all have their niches.
    • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1MSFT would have left YHOO alone. Why? It has its own market, they would have diverged the two (in a brand sense) but at the same time, merge the advertising systems between LIVE and YHOO.

      This merger was all about eyeballs and a critical mass for advertisers and advertising revenue.
    • xenlab, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2It will give the shareholders an illusion that either company knows what the hell to do about google.
  • Startemus, on 05/04/2008, -13/+3Yahoo! Microsloth fails yet again.
    • uncoveror, on 05/04/2008, -2/+1With Microsoft in charge, searching for something on Yahoo would drift off topic and be worthless, just like Live Search. Microsoft plus Yahoo would still not equal Google.
    • agimat, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2Microsoft hasn't lost anything by pulling their offer. Yahoo however has damaged itself (intentionally and otherwise)
      in trying to avoid getting bought, not to mention they lost so many billions of value for their shareholders.

      At this point, Microsoft probably is thankful they were able to get out of that disaster.

  • MastaShake11, on 05/04/2008, -20/+9Thank god that Yahoo! didn't get bought buy $hitty Micro$hit
    • gcnaddict, on 05/04/2008, -7/+2"Thank god that Yahoo! didn't get bought buy $hitty Micro$hit"

      My brain failed to parse your sentence due to a number of errors:
      -invalid sentence logic: the word "buy" was used without an object.
      -word usage error: verb "buy" used where a preposition was needed. Perhaps the term "by?"
      -nonexistent term: "$hitty" is not listed in the Oxford English Dictionary. No legitimate alternatives can be found at this time.
      -nonexistent term: "Micro$hit" is not listed in the Oxford English Dictionary. No legitimate alternatives can be found at this time, though a number of combinations can be created with the prefix "Micro" which may suffice.

      Warnings:
      -sentence structure: "didn't get bought" is technically correct, though "has been bought" or "has been purchased" may convey your idea with more precision.
      -using "god" without capitalization in the term "Thank God" may offend those with primarily Christian religious beliefs.

      Re-stating your sentence is a particularly wise course of action.
      • Karmavs, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3“sentence structure: "didn't get bought" is technically correct, though "has been bought" or "has been purchased" may convey your idea with more precision.”

        Really? It seems to me that that would convey the opposite idea.
  • randomracoon, on 05/04/2008, -3/+13The real question is where does yahoo go from here. They have been losing market share for a while now. While they do have wonderful products like flickr, these offerings are not really revenue generating. There was a decent chance that with access to MS money bin, Yahoo might have pulled itself out by investing in a high-end developers and projects. Well, I guess we have to wait and see. This might, with equal ease, well be the start of the end, or a start of a new chapter.
  • lemcoe9, on 05/04/2008, -12/+5245 Diggs in 12 minutes. My lord
  • TheZorch, on 05/04/2008, -12/+5This will continue for about a day and half until Yahoo can no longer tolerate their tanking stocks. They'll beg Microsoft to make their offer again at this point. You people don't seem to learn anything do you, this is a classic Microsoft "take over a company" strategy which they've been doing for YEARS. This is not over until the Yahoo Yodler sings.
    • Kamujin, on 05/04/2008, -1/+5Dude, if you think that MSFT will bid for YHOO in another day an a half, your... on crack.

      They very well might bid for YHOO, but it will be quite a while. Maybe a year. Google can't buy them due to anit-trust.
  • wiretapped, on 05/04/2008, -11/+6Jerry Yang should be forced to resign.
  • poundingruvz, on 05/04/2008, -5/+16sweet. i don't have to migrate my email and web hosting now.
  • Anator, on 05/04/2008, -5/+16Great News. The idea of Micrahoo is so disconcerting to me.
    • Atheuz, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1People will sell their stocks in Yahoo! now, the price for stocks will drop.

      Microsoft is just getting started, it's depressing yeah - But they will get what they want eventually.
  • indigothirdeye, on 05/04/2008, -15/+22Whew. I was going to stop using Yahoo if M$ bought them out. That saves me a ton of grief.
    • Emnsta, on 05/04/2008, -5/+4Continuing the use of Yahoo only hurts you, whether or not Microsoft buys it or not
    • jazzbeaux, on 05/04/2008, -1/+0Why do you use Yahoo anyway?
  • wilf_brim, on 05/04/2008, -2/+8Crap. Knew that I should have shorted Yahoo.
    • Wacer, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1I think shorting the airlines is a better option.
  • my10cent, on 05/04/2008, -14/+9Rest in Peace Yahoo, I never liked you and now you are soon to be gone.
  • cresswga, on 05/04/2008, -2/+3I wonder how much was this a case of the the board saying it was Ballmer's discretion (i.e. It was his job if it went ***** up) or just that Yahoo calling Microsoft's bluff left no option but to ultimately back down. Either way it is going to be interesting to see how it plays out.
    • JFetch, on 05/04/2008, -0/+4Yahoo execs were planning to sabotage Yahoo knowing they would lose in a hostile takeover bid. That way Microsoft would basically be left with the name Yahoo and that's it. That's what the deal with Google was all about. Make yourself look undesirable so they don't buy you.
  • InvaderDem, on 05/04/2008, -8/+2Well, I guess it's too bad. Throughout the whole ordeal it appears as though Jerry Yang has done whatever he can to hold onto his company. Deep down he did it not because of the shareholders but because he's a greedy egomaniac who realizes that he may have to get a regular job if Yahoo! was sold. I don't care what anyone says, to say your company is worth more than $40+ billion is an egotistical choice.
    Unfortunately, further down the line when Yahoo! continues to go downhill, people are going to regret not making the deal and will resent Jerry because of his choices.
    • Stroggoth, on 05/04/2008, -1/+4That's ok, Jerry is going to learn up close how good faith and fiduciary duty lawsuits work when his shareholders come after him for costing them billions of dollars! Jerry might *think* he owns that company.. but really the shareholders do.
      • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2Exactly -- MSFT's offer was *far far* too generous for the shareholders to pass up. The board is going to have some explaining to do.
    • scoates, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2Oh yeah, he's going to have to get a real job because his 3.9% is ONLY worth $1.5 _BILLION_

      (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24376328/)
    • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -1/+3" he's a greedy egomaniac who realizes that he may have to get a regular job"

      He'll never have to get a regular job. But, otherwise, I think your diagnosis is correct. Yang's ego is making threats YHOO cannot keep.
      • InvaderDem, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1Yeah, now that I think about it that way - he won't have to get a regular job ... or any job if he's smart with his money. I still say he's greedy and egotistical, though!
  • nikar, on 05/04/2008, -3/+14damn no yahoo search with the reliability of Vista
    • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2Vista's desktop search is awesome.
  • snotrokit, on 05/04/2008, -5/+11I am glad about this. I hope that Yahoo can pick itself up and get itself back into the game.
    Go Yahoo!
    • Wacer, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3Though I like Google better. This is a win for the consumers with more diversity in the market. Mergers always mean less options for the little guy.
  • joemofo214, on 05/04/2008, -8/+1sucks for yahoo, it has nothing else good going for it.... except for twitter, del.icio.us, flickr, and i guess project playlist.
  • kutza, on 05/04/2008, -11/+3In other news, yahoo stock plummets.
  • cheeseysynapse, on 05/04/2008, -7/+5I got 20, $20 puts @ 25 cents on YHOO baby! Hopefully it'll open around 18 monday! Yahoo, didn't have a chance............in 3 mo. Ballmer comes back and makes another bid and saves MSFT shareholders $10 billion...........AT LEAST. Good luck Yang.
    • petska, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2nice play, good luck on those.
      • CognitiveDiss, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2holy crap that was a good bet.. i have a google call contract that will soar as well.
  • thatsmyaibo, on 05/04/2008, -10/+2This will end up being a hostile takeover in my opinion. MS will replace Yahoo!'s board members and acquire the company through dirty politics.
    • dig1x, on 05/04/2008, -1/+1Just so you know, changing YHOO's board via proxy isnt a "hostile take-over".

      These terms have meaning, look them up.
  • squirrel83, on 05/04/2008, -5/+10Thank you NASA. . . It would have been scary Microsoft would be the largest Marketing tool . . . I dont think yahoos stock will plumit they have alot of potential with the new BUZZ and Flickr . .
    • DarkShroud, on 05/04/2008, -0/+1So stock investors know about such things as Buzz & Flickr?
  • xdjlao, on 05/04/2008, -2/+3in the long run, yahoo stocks will make make money. if microsoft does not offer a higher bid within the next two months, their partnership with google will surely increase revenues. i doubt merger between google and yahoo will take place...
    • gcnaddict, on 05/04/2008, -0/+2"their partnership with google will surely increase revenues"

      This has already caught the eye of the United States Department of Justice... which is a bad thing for both companies.
  • Jammerdelray, on 05/04/2008, -9/+2Yahoo should have taken the offer, they'll be kicking themselves if they have another lackluster quarter.
  • ScotchInBox, on 05/04/2008, -3/+15Not to sound like a MrSofty hater - but I'm really glad/relieved - the world needs more diversification and competition. Just look at the mess USA has with two crappy political parties...
    • dolemite01, on 05/04/2008, -2/+2Or coke and pepsi
      • gabacho2, on 05/04/2008, -1/+2Yea, its better to have just one ruling party, like the Nazis.

        (Godwin rule violation, I know)
      • blackjack75, on 05/04/2008, -0/+3Hum.. his point is not that two is a bad number is that it's a small number. Obviously one wouldn't be better.

        BTW, I think the coke pepsi analogy is rather good, give how little difference there is in practice between democrats and republicans.
  • Rogozhin, on 05/04/2008, -4/+15I didn't want to work for the behemoth, this is great news.
    • dn11, on 05/04/2008, -0/+5i've heard digg is hiring
    • ilgaz, on 05/04/2008, -1/+1Funny is, you can expect Yahoo people actually write such comments even with real name (sometimes), popup in your Yahoo messenger list (if you are very old timer) and you can actually suggest things to be checked by Yahoo. They can bitch about Yahoo Inc. in their personal blog without getting fired.
      Just compare it to Microsoft people who are afraid to give their @microsoft.com mails to web.
      I would say something else in comparison but thanks to Godwin's law ;)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.