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

Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

allthingsd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 52 posts

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#21

Post by cheez »

Useful_Idiot wrote: post #17
calbear81 wrote: post #9

I was part of aQuantive on the Avenue A | Razorfish side and was there for about 2 years leading up to the MSFT acquisition and was also part of another MSFT acquisition (Farecast) so I want to provide some context/opinion on where the business was at it when it was purchased. - The Atlas ad serving platform and related ad exchange platform was one of the top ad systems alongside DART, Valueclick, and others. There w…

Just for an interesting comparison: Top 100 mining companies in the world: You'll note that even BHP only hits ~$200bil. http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page67?oid=95... These are companies that fundamentally provide the materials for our societies. Shall we change into energy? ExxonMobil is top, at roughly ~ $300bil http://www.platts.com/Top250Home This is a company that powers the modern world. ~ $6…

> and let's not mention the top three AI specialists who committed suicide in the year Google launched their algos... ok?

What?

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#22

Post by Useful_Idiot »

cheez wrote: post #21
Useful_Idiot wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just for an interesting comparison: Top 100 mining companies in the world: You'll note that even BHP only hits ~$200bil. http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page67?oid=95... These are companies that fundamentally provide the materials for our societies. Shall we change into energy? ExxonMobil is top, at roughly ~ $300bil http://www.platts.com/Top250Home This is a company that powers the modern world. ~ $6…

> and let's not mention the top three AI specialists who committed suicide in the year Google launched their algos... ok? What?

I'd look into AI specialists who all decided to kill themselves in that "very common" way of putting a bag over their head, wrapping duct tape around their necks and then 'doing an oven' to finish the deal. You know, like those pretty wives of CEOs who commit suicide when their hands & feet are bound? Or ex-Dictators have heart attacks all of a sudden? [And yes, I can cite those ones too for bonus points].

It was very common for a short period of time. And yes: at least one was a kook of huge bullshit; the other two were not. And with tenure, the other two really had no reason to go all in. Especially with their family ties. Additionally, there was a car crash and so on, but these are mere accidents.

The hidden history of success is paving the road with the bones of your competitors.

This isn't to say Google themselves had anything to do with this evil: it merely... widened the broad spaces for saplings to grow, as the forest does when mature trees fall. In broader terms, one might call it: protecting ones investment.

And yes: I can post this with 100% immunity, because the conspiracy police meme will eat this for breakfast (see my above being junked), and nothing I say matters. It was just a sad time in AI research, when a few of the top theorists (and a bullshit artist) off'd themselves. Nice search algos though... nothing ever to do with anyone else's research.

Do you your own due diligence: if you want to be a player, know the game (and the real costs).

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#23

Post by dos1 »

earl wrote: post #20
paulsutter wrote: post #15

Microsoft bought aQuantive as a knee-jerk reaction to Google's acquisition of Doubleclick. It was comical at the time because - aQuantive's Atlas was a distant number 2 to Doubleclick's DART in terms of ad server market share - aQuantive had no plans to create an ad exchange, nor did their market share make that a credible possibility, and - Microsoft somehow paid twice as much for aQuantive as Google paid for Double…

But, had msft executed, there definitely is room for competitors for both dfp and dfa. Many pubs seem to want something, anything besides dfp. Plus the rise of ssps is (maybe?) a reaction to the pub adservers not innovating. For god's sake, openx (written in php!) is being used by pubs. also, hi (earl from qc)

Could you maybe explain some of those acronyms you used?

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#24

Post by xfax »

Argorak wrote: post #12
xfax wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why. http://ycharts.com/companies/MSFT/revenues#series=type:compa...

So, he doubled revenue over the last 10 years. They were already high to begin with, but lets see... http://ycharts.com/companies/MSFT/revenues#series=type:compa... Even more impressive: http://ycharts.com/companies/MSFT/revenues#series=type:compa... So, basically, Microsoft let its two main rivals close in at a tremendous pace. If I had Microsoft stock, I'd be rather disappointed.

Shareholders and long term investors (aka those who care most about management) look for long term stable growth in core businesses. Yes, you can argue that their performance compared to competitors has been dismal but MSFT is still a solid investment and has seen double digit growth rates for over 10 years - this is incredibly hard for a company this size. Most will argue that this good management.

For example, look at their revenue growth quarter-over-quarter:

http://ycharts.com/companies/MSFT/revenue_growth#series=type...

Also, GOOG and AAPL don't pay dividends (yet), which is a very good proxy for shareholder value:

http://ycharts.com/companies/MSFT/dividend_yield#series=type...

I'm not saying MSFT can't do better; OP asked why Ballmer is tolerated and I wanted to point out that there are plenty of reasons why.

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#25

Post by fungi »

calbear81 wrote: post #9

I was part of aQuantive on the Avenue A | Razorfish side and was there for about 2 years leading up to the MSFT acquisition and was also part of another MSFT acquisition (Farecast) so I want to provide some context/opinion on where the business was at it when it was purchased. - The Atlas ad serving platform and related ad exchange platform was one of the top ad systems alongside DART, Valueclick, and others. There w…

Razorfish pitched to our marketing department (I was the token tec on the panel).

Being a Microsoft appendage was a big negative from my point of view... as was the giant Silverlight logo in their pitch docs.

> MS could have leveraged this team as a focus group and to enroll these clients to test innovative ways

Don't do that! If we hire you to do work for us and you sucker someone in our org in to some shit like this, we will very quickly question your motives and ultimately the value of our relationship.

In the end the the marketing wonks went with the agency with the best creative (again).

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#26

Post by shock-value »

tomasien wrote: post #10
heifetz wrote: post #6

now when is zynga going to writedown 180mm for OMGPOP.

"Draw Something" is the #55 paid app on the app store STILL. So clearly it's bringing in and has brought in a ton of revenue since the ac (acquisition was in March). Sure not $180MM but it was also an acqui-hire. I think this could have ended up being a great deal for them, despite the negativity. It's not all about one game.

#55 paid app is not at all impressive given how much they paid for it. For that price Draw Something would have had to stick around the top ten, probably the top five, for quite awhile to make it worthwhile.

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#27

Post by rieter »

ThomPete wrote: post #18
laconian wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

??? Using that metric, MSFT: +115% since 2004. GOOG revenues: +3,320%

Please remember the context of this discussion. They point is that Googles revenue comes form one source and they haven't been able to find another just yet as users are moving to mobile. The growth you see is based on a revenue model made a long time ago not on their current performances which are to say the least as embarrassing as anything MS have done over the years. This should be concerning investors in google…

Google owns mobile advertisement, as well as mobile search. They are in an excellent position for the future.

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#28

Post by ThomPete »

rieter wrote: post #27
ThomPete wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please remember the context of this discussion. They point is that Googles revenue comes form one source and they haven't been able to find another just yet as users are moving to mobile. The growth you see is based on a revenue model made a long time ago not on their current performances which are to say the least as embarrassing as anything MS have done over the years. This should be concerning investors in google…

Google owns mobile advertisement, as well as mobile search. They are in an excellent position for the future.

Really?

Why aren't they making any money with it now then?

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#29

Post by eli »

earl wrote: post #20
paulsutter wrote: post #15

Microsoft bought aQuantive as a knee-jerk reaction to Google's acquisition of Doubleclick. It was comical at the time because - aQuantive's Atlas was a distant number 2 to Doubleclick's DART in terms of ad server market share - aQuantive had no plans to create an ad exchange, nor did their market share make that a credible possibility, and - Microsoft somehow paid twice as much for aQuantive as Google paid for Double…

But, had msft executed, there definitely is room for competitors for both dfp and dfa. Many pubs seem to want something, anything besides dfp. Plus the rise of ssps is (maybe?) a reaction to the pub adservers not innovating. For god's sake, openx (written in php!) is being used by pubs. also, hi (earl from qc)

dfp = DoubleClick for Publisher (helps publishers run the ads that advertisers buy)

dfa = DoubleClick for Advertisers (helps advertisers buy ads)

OpenX was an open source ad serving platform you could install on your own server, but AFAIK the company behind it has more-or-less killed the open source product and is instead pushing a closed-source hosted ad serving solution.

Re: Microsoft Writing Off Nearly All of the $6.3 Billion it Paid For aQuantive

#30

Post by vellum »

dos1 wrote: post #23
earl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, had msft executed, there definitely is room for competitors for both dfp and dfa. Many pubs seem to want something, anything besides dfp. Plus the rise of ssps is (maybe?) a reaction to the pub adservers not innovating. For god's sake, openx (written in php!) is being used by pubs. also, hi (earl from qc)

Could you maybe explain some of those acronyms you used?

DFP: Dart for Publishers http://www.google.com/doubleclick/publishers/dart.html

DFA: Doubleclick for Advertisers http://www.google.com/doubleclick/advertisers/dfa.html

SSP: Supply Side Platform http://www.adopsinsider.com/ad-exchanges/supply-side-platfor...

Open X: Open source tool for managing ads on your website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenX_(software)

Post reply on HN