Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

news.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 859 posts

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#711

Post by partiallypro »

andrepd wrote: post #579
partiallypro wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because something is normal doesn't make it right. That's debatable, but why should Microsoft allow its competitors have an advantage over them because of telemetry data? The collection doesn't do you any harm, it's not invasive. They aren't looking at your file names, or the text in your documents or your keystrokes. The only time they gather keystroke information is when you're in Cortana...which is literall…

>The collection doesn't do you any harm This kind of thinking sickens me. So you would be fine with me rampaging through your room and your house looking over your stuff, making a catalog of the things you own, the things you buy, what you do with them, at what hours, and how often, watching you eat, work, play, sleep, be with your friends, taking notes on who you speak to, at what hours, and about what... Since, as…

The collection Microsoft does is nothing like that, it's literally things like "did this users use the action center" or not. In Cortana it tracks your search, JUST like Google Now/Siri. It's not going through your documents or personal stuff at all. It's not even on the NSA level meta data, which I do have a problem with. It honestly sounds like you don't even know what it's tracking at all. Your analogy makes 0 sense at all. You might as well claim that "heat mapping" on websites is akin to rummaging through your trash.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#712

Post by [deleted] »

petersellers wrote: post #707
bduerst wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, even assuming Microsoft cuts losses and makes the company profitable again through some product integrations, it's still a huge price tag. LinkedIn has stalled growth and brought in $2.9 billion in rev last year, which means that all things constant it will take nine years to cover the $26 B price tag. Microsoft must really have some big plans for it to justify the costs.

With all things constant it will take a lot more than 9 years. The 2.9 billion in revenue doesn't account for the costs of running their business. Microsoft would need to make 26 billion in profit to cover the price tag.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#713

Post by surds »

LinkedIn has a huge presence in the professional users and businesses. A large number of people from non-tech backgrounds never got onto LinkedIn because they never kew of it or didn't really bother to create a profile here.

Imagine integrating LinkedIn profiles with Microsoft's professional tools or even Windows. The reach of LinkedIn will be massive if Microsoft gives it a push through Windows.

It's likely that this boost does not necessarily convert into increasing revenue, but it can certainly boost the number of active users that LinkedIn has.

And I hope, now that it is acquired, LinkedIn will stop pushing us to spam all of our contacts about joining it, updating profiles or whatever.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#714

Post by Xyik »

pilom wrote: post #694
Xyik wrote: post #643

I wish people would read company's quarterly performance reports before making claims about whether we're in a bubble and whether company x is worth y. LinkedIn generates a ton of revenue and is very arguably worth its valuation. Just because you don't use LinkedIn or SnapChat or whatever else has a ridiculous valuation these days doesn't mean its valuation is not justified in some way.

The problem is that revenue is not profit. If expenses are greater than revenue and the trends don't show that changing soon (i.e. "default dead") then it is extremely hard to justify such a high valuation. There are the employees, the physical infrastructure, the code they've written, the brand name, and maybe the marketing value of the users, but granting a valuation based on consistently negative profit is somewha…

That's debatable since many companies like Amazon are able to turn a profit by sacrificing growth. Good point though and this information is also available in quarterly earnings reports. The main argument I was making really is that people should take a look at some numbers before having such strong opinions. I believe last I checked LinkedIn was profitable.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#715

Post by sireat »

alex_c wrote: post #651
blowski wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I wouldn't bet on that since Microsoft surely sent a big team of their brightest cookies to make a valuation of the company. The same people who valued Nokia ($7.6 billion writedown) and aQuantive ($6 billion writedown)?

It's easy (and fun!) to criticize in hindsight, but there was a strong strategic case to be made for the Nokia acquisition back then. Obviously it didn't work out, but given Microsoft's cash reserves at the time it wasn't even a particularly large gamble.

I really did not see many people making a case for Microsoft's Nokia acquisition (here and in the business press).

It seemed mostly negative.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#717

Post by stcredzero »

hackaflocka wrote: post #648
ssharp wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a Fortune 200 headquartered in my area that, by far, has the worst application process and software I've ever seen. Aside from REQUIRING you to type in information like your high school's address and your high school GPA, they also have pre-screening booby-traps which you may need to lie to get past (e.g. my wife was applying for an HR job there and they asked if she had a bachelor's degree in HR, which she…

Great story. It's a sure sign that a strong bureaucracy has set in when one sees this. It's common in government organizations, but becoming more common in non-government (especially large) organizations.

becoming more common in non-government (especially large) organizations.

Been like that for awhile. You're just getting to know more of the vast ocean of all the bureaucratic mindset that is out there.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#718

Post by rpgmaker »

oblio wrote: post #150

The comments here are hilarious, they really reveal the IT bubble. The only real complaint about this purchase would be that LinkedIn was overvalued. And I wouldn't bet on that since Microsoft surely sent a big team of their brightest cookies to make a valuation of the company. But other than that, LinkedIn fits: it is a corporate social network, if you will. I know that "corporate social network" is almost an oxymor…

> And I wouldn't bet on that since Microsoft surely sent a big team of their brightest cookies to make a valuation of the company.

By that simplistic reasoning no big company would ever make a mistake.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#719

Post by dsl »

martyvis wrote: post #668
marme wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS bought skype just to stop google from buying they. Google made a big for skype and MS swooped in and outbid them. They never had any real plans for skype they just dont want to allow google to gain near monopoly in the consumer VOIP market. Which seems strange for MS to care about since they were not in this sector previously but Ballmer just held such a huge grudge with google and did it out of spite. Really show…

Skype for Business (and it's predecessor Lync) owns corporate voice and collaboration market

Cisco WebEx and Jabber own corporate voice communication (mostly because everyone uses Cisco VoIP phones). Skype is used mostly in the SMB market.

Re: Microsoft to acquire LinkedIn for $26B

#720

Post by stcredzero »

icebraining wrote: post #514
anentropic wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does anyone actually interact on LinkedIn? I thought it was just a platform for recruitment spam

In my experience, there's plenty of sales people and middle managers posting stuff and commenting. Usually platitudes and mangled quotes from rich people, plus submissions of their company's marketing blogs.

Those things are just the neurotransmitters spewed by people who are becoming analogues to neurons. (Not aware of why they are filtering and passing on signals, but somehow performing some kind of decision making in aggregate.)
Post reply on HN