41–50 of 186 posts
OK, what's it going to take to keep tumblr running? That's literally all I care about here. Everything else in Yahoo can be gotten or done elsewhere, but tumblr's a social network, so there's value in preserving those connections.
OK, what's it going to take to keep tumblr running? That's literally all I care about here. Everything else in Yahoo can be gotten or done elsewhere, but tumblr's a social network, so there's value in preserving those connections.
Maybe Google would buy given that it's pretty much bombed out on photo sharing itself.
Yahoo controls 8% of search traffic and costs $4bn. Google controls 64% of search traffic and costs $558bn. That's a 17-fold difference in the price for 1% of the traffic. Even more if you take US search traffic only (to exclude Yahoo Japan). Verizon can get rid of the costly parts of Yahoo (mostly its media business) and have its own small Google to make cash. That was $1.8bn per year in 2015, while Yahoo's overall…
I don't know man. but if you loan me $4bn I will buy Yahoo and run it myself. I too don't understand how they can't make Yahoo a success. They have a couple of great products that people use like Fantasy sports and Finance. And mail would be just fine if they'd remove all the crap so it would run faster. Lots of non techy still uses yahoo mail, and that won't change as long as the service exists.
If anything, these two hacks being announced years later, along with their voluntary NSA backdoor, demonstrates that Yahoo! has skeletons in their closet.
OK, what's it going to take to keep tumblr running? That's literally all I care about here. Everything else in Yahoo can be gotten or done elsewhere, but tumblr's a social network, so there's value in preserving those connections.
Isn't Yahoo _really_ big in Japan? My understanding is a lot of their services are overwhelmingly popular there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why, because they dared to voice an opinion contrary to your own?
I fail to see how 4 billion is a great deal for a company that lost a billion logins and is hemorrhaging cash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see how 4 billion is a great deal for a company that lost a billion logins and is hemorrhaging cash.
And that's a fair, justified opinion to have. But attacking someone who holds a contrary opinion for having ulterior motives is an extremely uncharitable thing to do.
Is this related to the most recent hack? IE, are they valuing Yahoo as less now that there's more bad press?
Yahoo controls 8% of search traffic and costs $4bn. Google controls 64% of search traffic and costs $558bn. That's a 17-fold difference in the price for 1% of the traffic. Even more if you take US search traffic only (to exclude Yahoo Japan). Verizon can get rid of the costly parts of Yahoo (mostly its media business) and have its own small Google to make cash. That was $1.8bn per year in 2015, while Yahoo's overall…
Do you see how that argument is flawed? Leaders in a market tend to be worth much more and have much higher profits than even the 2nd player in the market, let alone the third or fifth. When you have a small percentage of the market, it's also much more difficult to make something out of it, than it would say for a market leader to go from 30% market share to 50% market share (and billions of dollars more in revenue).
We could repeat the argument for a small social network that has a much lower market value than Facebook per user, and so on.