81–90 of 367 posts
S T — that is so going to mess up my AT&T email with Yahoo. Both my AT&T account and Yahoo email are intertwined.
Will it stay like the Rocketmail accounts did, or will they turn off service for legacy email to save money?
Verizon shouldn't be allowed to own any web properties. They inject a unique subscriber identifier into your HTTP requests unless you turn it off. http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/unique-identifier-hea...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hardly a unique case, AMD is worth less now than what it paid for ATI back in the day.
Dude ATI was in 2006, but in 2009 they divested Global Foundry in 2009 (which were a HUGE chunk of ATI's assets)
Verizon can get more users from Yahoo and merge them with their AOL users. No doubt this bigger user base can be sold advertising to earn more money.
Firefox stopped supporting Google searches and switched me to Yahoo, will this Yahoo change no longer support Mozilla and be taken off the list?
What the hell has Marissa Mayer been paid for? Everything about this smells like Yahoo! is being run by idiot MBAs with some spreadsheets somewhere totally misunderstanding that technology can empower people to do fantastic things including those working within Yahoo! - instead it's been hamstrung by each property not being held accountable to it's competitors effectively. I would have started competitors (startups)…
One group thought that Y! had a shot at a viable business. The other group wanted out, but didn't want to sell until they got their cut from the Alibaba/Y!JP investments (which also propped up the stock price for the whole thing). Mayer was hired by the first group to try and turn the tide. The second group agreed in the hope that it would also bring the stock price up a bit and make the non-Alibaba part of the company more valuable.
The IRS finally ruled that Yahoo can't just divest Alibaba &co. without paying a huge bill, and Mayer hasn't been able to do anything about the rest of the company. Which means the second group of investors is basically winning out and spinning off all the assets so they can close out their price at the value of the Alibaba stake and make their profit.
It's difficult to say that Mayer is 100% responsible since a good chunk of the board/investors didn't care or were actively against her from day one. Also, she didn't have all the tools that a turnaround CEO has at other companies because she had to protect the share price around the value of the Alibaba investments or that second group would simply fire her. It was always a longshot IMO.
Verizon shouldn't be allowed to own any web properties. They inject a unique subscriber identifier into your HTTP requests unless you turn it off. http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/unique-identifier-hea...
No company that sells Internet access should be allowed to also be in the content business.
Case in point: Google Fiber
Verizon shouldn't be allowed to own any web properties. They inject a unique subscriber identifier into your HTTP requests unless you turn it off. http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/unique-identifier-hea...
No company that sells Internet access should be allowed to also be in the content business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Had to look it up, for curiosity: In April 1999, Yahoo! acquired the company for $5.7 billion (or over $10,000 per user) in stock. [...] The company had 570,000 users. -- Wikipedia These 570k users only listened to audio, seems like the biggest waste ever. Cuban got a bunch of (undeserved?) money and Yahoo lost the same amount. Feels like a pointless transaction.
I'm not so sure. Here's my reasoning, but I'm just using logic, I'm really not super in-tune to this stuff. If the company knew thought its stock was 10x overvalued (Yahoo's stock did drop 90% a year or so later) then they really only sold it for $570 million. That is, if Yahoo knew its stock would be worth 1/10 of its current value in a year, buying a company with $5.7B in stock will add value to Yahoo so long as Th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Had to look it up, for curiosity: In April 1999, Yahoo! acquired the company for $5.7 billion (or over $10,000 per user) in stock. [...] The company had 570,000 users. -- Wikipedia These 570k users only listened to audio, seems like the biggest waste ever. Cuban got a bunch of (undeserved?) money and Yahoo lost the same amount. Feels like a pointless transaction.
I'm not so sure. Here's my reasoning, but I'm just using logic, I'm really not super in-tune to this stuff. If the company knew thought its stock was 10x overvalued (Yahoo's stock did drop 90% a year or so later) then they really only sold it for $570 million. That is, if Yahoo knew its stock would be worth 1/10 of its current value in a year, buying a company with $5.7B in stock will add value to Yahoo so long as Th…