Verizon Sells AOL and Yahoo to Apollo for $5B

Post by StratusBen » Tue, May 04, 2021, 1:37 AM UTC

nate-t wrote: post #318

StratusBen wrote: post #78

I'm really surprised that Yahoo Finance has not been spun out as an independent company at this point. I think as a stand-alone company it could easily be worth in the billions of dollars. Reportedly Yahoo Finance has revenue between $100M and $250M annually. With the increase in retail interest in investing it seems like a property that could have some growth potential behind it if they did things right and separate…

Hey Ben, just curious where you found the $100M-$250M annual revenue number? It sounds about right to me (looking at traffic numbers and estimated CPMs / conversion to Yahoo Premium), but I've dug for a concrete figure in Verizon's annual reports and never surfaced anything.

Post by tootie » Tue, May 04, 2021, 1:45 AM UTC

kumarvvr wrote: post #168

lbsnake7 wrote: post #116

Can someone help me understand this from an investment perspective? AOL and Yahoo were worth a combined $400 billion in the 90s. Was investing in either of those companies essentially a fail? Were all those investors wrong or did they somehow recoup their investment through dividends and such over the last 25 years to justify that market cap? Currently the market is telling me that Facebook is a $900+ billion company…

The stockmarket is like a round robin thingy, putting it lightly. All those who hold shares in FB, combined, are holding paper that is worth 900B. However, if even 10% of those wanted to sell their holdings at a time, the price would fall and the total holdings would be worth less for all. Now, why are they holding the shares then? Two things come into play. Firstly, say 5 years down the line, the holders have confid…

Post by fork1 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 1:49 AM UTC

px43 wrote: post #300

throwaway3699 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI, 'conservative investors' do understand crypto, they just think it's a bad investment.

> Just FYI, 'conservative investors' do understand crypto, they just think it's a bad investment. That statement is demonstrably false. There are two reasons to not be invested in cryptocurrencies at this point in history. You are either ignorant of the technology (which is fine, lots of more important knowledge out there), or it doesn't fit your current risk profile. There is not a knowledgeable person on the planet…

Post by skinnymuch » Tue, May 04, 2021, 1:59 AM UTC

Macha wrote: post #189

skinnymuch wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Verizon Media is 5th after the big two, Amazon, Microsoft. Unless LinkedIn is separate from Microsoft.

Amazon is smaller than Verizon Media in this space. Microsoft and Verizon Media are not independent - Microsoft handles Verizon's search ads, Verizon handles ads on other Microsoft properties: https://about.ads.microsoft.com/en-us/solutions/ad-products/... That said, single market players like TheTradeDesk or Xandr are larger in their own markets than verizon media, but probably not compared to the combined publisher…

Post by jjeaff » Tue, May 04, 2021, 2:08 AM UTC

totalZero wrote: post #289

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say 95% of investors don't understand crypto, whether they have high or low risk tolerance. But high risk tolerance investors are more likely to invest in something that has momentum without understanding the fundamentals. Betting with the momentum is often a good strategy.

Change that to "95% of crypto investors don't understand crypto" and you've got it. Betting with the momentum works unless (A) you're a latecomer to a ponzi scheme, or (B) there's a reversion that catalyzes longstanding doubt about an asset that has enjoyed a bull run. Both of these cases may well be applicable to a large portion of the overall crypto marketplace.