Previous Entry | Next Entry

No (for now) Microhoo

  • May. 4th, 2008 at 1:43 AM
Euro Foo, Boo to werk, Dare!, Firefly: Sunrise, Jersey Pride 1204 - 2004, MT: Boo's Catnip Mouse Gun, Me!, Feorag: Staring into space, Trendy periodicals, Herriman: Ignatz, SF Omnibus, Precipitous Bluffs, Happy iPod, Mii, Sinfest: Carpe Diem, Last Exile: Sandwiches, I am a camera, SPV C600, How Like An Eye The Time, Black Helicopters, ph33r t3h ch33r, The Norm: Writing, The Developer, Firefox, Hellcatz: N.A.I., Simon Bisson - the button, Steam Train Geek: Shay, Love My Newt, LoM: Waving Sam, Fire up the Quattro!, Black Books: Manny, Firefly: Serenity orbit, Snark Maiden, Bryan Talbot: Me from Heart of Empire, I'm Stuck, Barcode memes, SPV, Hello Root Kitty, Two Kinds Of Bounce, Blackberry Pearl, Cosmonaut, Firefly: Love, East Putney, Iconised, Smug Kitten, No2ID, Mars Country Code, Flying a Kite, Creme Simon, MT: Piro working, Last Exile: Lavie, Racing Simon, Libere El Raton!, LoM: Turning Sam, Netsuke kitty, Firefly: Serenity, The A-Team is back, Snowking: Only doing it for the Whuffie, LoM: Sad Sam, Sylvia: ...but we persevere, Cat and Girl: It's a LiveJournal, Cat And Girl, LoM: Upset Sam, Duty Calls, Pebble's Evil Kitty Eyes, Firefly: It's our ride, The Sole Inhabitant, Where's Simon!, That's my phone, MacOS Kitten, Simpsons Avatar, Sinfest: Yarny!, Applegeeks: iPod Girl, Love Me
News has just come out that Microsoft is walking away from its bid for Yahoo! after raising its offer to $33 a share.

I'm not really surprised at this result. As much as he's like to think so Yahoo! isn't worth the $37 a share that Jerry Yang was holding out for, and I really don't think Microsoft wanted to go hostile considering the damage it would have done to the Yahoo! engineering teams it wanted. More than $33 a share, and Steve Ballmer would have been risking an awful lot of additional gearing that would have ended up diluting Microsoft's control of its own destiny.

So what's next? One option is to for Microsoft to take the same approach it did with Borland in the 90s - so recruiters in the Bay Area can probably look for a bumper year as Microsoft starts to cherry pick the talent it wants from Yahoo!'s engineering teams. That'll be considerably cheaper for Microsoft, though any results will take time to filter through its product pipeline. It took nearly 10 years for .NET to get to where it is today...

The other option is, I think, going to depend on how the Microsoft and Yahoo! stock prices behave over the next quarter or two. Monday should see a steep drop in Yahoo!'s price, and an equivalent (but not so dramatic) rise in Microsoft. The spectre of a hefty gearing has depressed Microsoft's stock, and the prospect of a payday has pushed Yahoo!'s up. If Yahoo! continues to trend down, its board is going to come under considerable pressure from institutional shareholders as to why it didn't take the $33 offer. Yahoo! will end having to approach various suitors, but there won't be a white knight until Microsoft comes in with a bid at around $28 (or possibly even lower) a share, which the Yahoo! board will be forced to accept.

Either way Microsoft gets the people and skills it wants for less than it was originally planning to pay, though the second option adds a few additional properties and the trauma of a merger...

Comments

[info]andrewducker wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 12:46 am (UTC)
Maybe they should buy AOL instead.

(I recently thought that AOL should have reinvented itself as a social networking system - they had an awful lot of what they needed...)
[info]sbisson wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 02:20 am (UTC)
Good god, no! AOL is completely broken, and has nothing that MS actually needs. By comparison Yahoo! is just mildly disfunctional - and its culture is a lot more like MS's than many of the naysayers actually realised.

I've spent quite a bit of time over the last few years talking to both companies' staff, and they're more similar than any other two companies I track.

[disclaimer - I've consulted for AOL in the past, and [info]marypcb used to work there...]

Edited at 2008-05-04 02:21 am (UTC)
[info]marypcb wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 12:41 pm (UTC)
except for the required clue. See my recent post on AOL/Google/content/advertising. AOL has nothing like Yahoo's ability to buy and build truly innovative services. Sure for every Flickr and FireEagle you have Yahoo Music, but AOL has really very little to offer Microsoft.
[info]andrewducker wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 01:03 pm (UTC)
I guess I don't think of Yahoo as being that innovative myself - I suspect because the interesting stuff (Flickr, del.icio.us) is being bought in rather than developed in-house.
[info]sbisson wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 01:07 pm (UTC)
You should have a play with FireEagle or Pipes then - also if you're doing AJAX at any time the YUI libraries are some of my favourites.

Yes, they bought in Flickr and del.icio.us, Upcoming and MyBlogLog (among others) but those were pretty good acquisitions and Y! is doing a lot more with them than Google has ever done with its myriad purchases. One of my theories for why MS should have bought Y! long ago was just to learn from how it handles acquisitions...
[info]andrewducker wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 01:14 pm (UTC)
True - Google is letting it languish.

I'm not terribly interested in the latest platforms - I don't have enough time to mess around with the infrastructure stuff. But if Yahoo are doing that under the surface in order to pull together all the services they manage then that's interesting.

Google could, indeed, do with putting more effort in - I should document the stupidities I've had since grabbing a google app for domains...
[info]marypcb wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 01:49 pm (UTC)
you have to have a clue to know what to buy and then not kill it straight away.
[info]felesin wrote:
May. 4th, 2008 07:41 am (UTC)
On the BBC tech news this morning they were suggesting exactly as you have done - that Microsoft will end up getting Yahoo at a significantly lower price than the current offer.