Here’s an interesting comparison chart for comparing Google (GOOG) deal versus Microsoft’s(MSFT) for Yahoo(YHOO).

I am actually really thankful that Yahoo went with Google as they are a similiar-nature companies whereas Microsoft has been a “has-been” operating system company.

Even as a non-expert on company mergers, I cannot see how Microsoft deal can help “any” company.  They really should fix their Vista or just recycle it somehow first.

Maybe Microsoft’s Live search is really on its last threads and they are trying to “buy” their way out into search engine wars.

Either way, I am all for no Microsoft, whether that’s my next computer or search engine.

via techcrunch

In a recent letter to Yahoo (YHOO) from the investor Icahn, Icahn states, “…if Microsoft is still willing to purchase our company and thereby create a true competitor for Google”.

What the heck is wrong with you man?  You got too much money and now you are greedy for more but Microsoft won’t help Yahoo become a competitor to Google.  This is a proven fact and everyone knows Microsoft is the worst company ever, they have practically killed their credibility with their blue death screens.

Our prediction is that Icahn will take money and run after the Microsoft-Yahoo acquisition.  Correct me wrong if that’s not your goal, Icahn.

Stop trying to be greedy and think “business”.  Your anger will not solve any problems or get you a new hummer.

Continue reading →

Well, it looks like Yahoo did respond to Carl Icahn’s intention to be filthy rich and sell out to Microsoft.

Phew, another day saved, we don’t want to see Yahoo (YHOO) under Microsoft’s (MSFT) hands.  The day we see Microsoft roll out it’s YahooVista engine will be the beginning of days when we see viruses and worms going all over the web.

Hackers love to hack Microsoft, I think it’s their branding.  Just let Microsoft play with its Live search that no one uses and keep Yahoo out of it pleeez!

I wish Microsoft used all its billions of money to help to homeless or the cancer society instead of trying to get bigger all the time.

Here’s the response:

Dear Mr. Icahn:

We are in receipt of your letter with regard to your intention to seek control of Yahoo!’s board of directors.

Unfortunately, your letter reflects a significant misunderstanding of the facts about the Microsoft proposal and the diligence with which our board evaluated and responded to that proposal. A fair-minded review of the factual record leads to one conclusion: that Yahoo!’s ten-member board, comprised of nine independent directors along with Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang, remains the best and most qualified group to maximize value for all Yahoo! stockholders.

Conversely, we do not believe it is in the best interests of Yahoo! stockholders to allow you and your hand-picked nominees to take control of Yahoo! for the express purpose of trying to force a sale of Yahoo! to a formerly interested buyer who has publicly stated that they have moved on. Please may I remind you that there is currently no acquisition offer on the table from that company or any other party. That said, we have been crystal clear in our stance that we have been and remain willing to consider any proposal from any party including Microsoft if it offers our stockholders full and certain value.

From the beginning of the process with Microsoft, Yahoo!’s independent directors focused on one central goal: how best to maximize stockholder value. At all times directing this process, Yahoo!’s independent directors carefully considered Microsoft’s initial unsolicited proposal, which was at the time valued at $31 per share. After considering input from its financial advisers the board unanimously concluded that Microsoft’s proposal significantly undervalued Yahoo! and was, therefore, not in the best interests of the company or our stockholders. While we rejected this offer publicly on February 11, 2008, we could not have been more clear in that communication and in every subsequent communication, both public and private, that we were and are willing to enter into any transaction that would maximize value for stockholders and provide them certainty of value.

The record of our efforts to engage Microsoft in meaningful discussions is unequivocal. Following receipt of Microsoft’s proposal on January 31, our board of directors has met over twenty times to review Microsoft’s proposal and Yahoo!’s other strategic alternatives. Throughout this process our board kept an open mind and an open ear. Our independent directors met with several of our largest stockholders to solicit their views and to make it clear that Yahoo!’s independent board is fully committed to maximizing stockholder value. In addition, at the direction of our board, our management team met with many of our investors to provide insight into Yahoo!’s strategy and views on value.

Our board’s openness also extended to Microsoft. Without reciting all of the contacts between us and between our advisers, the senior-most management of Yahoo! and Microsoft and the companies’ respective financial advisers spoke on numerous occasions and met in person seven times. During those meetings, Yahoo! discussed its strategic objectives in search and display advertising monetization, its perspectives on operating strategy and integration in a transaction with Microsoft, its perspectives on transaction synergies, and other non-price deal terms. Because certainty of closing is a critical issue, we sought to understand Microsoft’s thinking with regard to the regulatory issues associated with a potential transaction. In fact, at the board’s direction, our lawyers on March 28 asked for additional information in this regard, information which was never forthcoming.

On April 15^th, a meeting was held at Yahoo!’s request. At that meeting, which included our respective financial advisors, we made clear, once again, that we were open to a transaction with Microsoft. During those discussions, Yahoo! made a detailed presentation of its strategic and financial plan, its thoughts on integration and its view with respect to the potential synergies that could be achieved in a transaction, essentially laying the foundation for Microsoft to understand—and respond to—our board’s conclusion that Microsoft’s offer substantially undervalued the company. Following that meeting we also provided to Microsoft a list of key non-price deal terms that our board believed were critical items to be addressed in a deal to provide reasonable protections for our stockholders.

Throughout this period, Microsoft continued to state that it would not raise its offer, and even suggested that it could lower it.

Despite this failure by Microsoft to respond in any substantive way to any of Yahoo!’s requests, on May 2^nd, the same day we first learned of Microsoft’s apparent willingness to increase its proposal to $33 (although this oral “offer” was never delivered in writing and did not include details of a cash/stock mix), our board determined to continue discussions, instructing Jerry Yang to indicate to Microsoft that we would be prepared to enter into a transaction that valued Yahoo! at $37 per share and that provided reasonable certainty of value and certainty of closing. This was communicated to Microsoft in-person at a meeting in Seattle on May 3rd. With Microsoft’s offer at $33 and Yahoo!’s counter-proposal at $37, Microsoft elected, within hours, to walk away from the negotiating table and informed us that they were “moving on,” having never engaged further on price or any of the key non-price deal terms.

In short, Yahoo!’s board was at every point in this process prepared to enter into a transaction with Microsoft that would maximize stockholder value—and included certainty of value and closing. What Yahoo!’s independent board refused to do was to allow control of this company to be acquired for less than its full value.

That brings us to today. Our business is performing well as evidenced by our first quarter results. As we have publicly stated, our board continues to actively and expeditiously explore strategic alternatives to maximize stockholder value. None of the alternatives we are considering would preclude us from entering into a transaction with Microsoft or any other party.

We continue to believe that Yahoo!’s current board has the independence, the knowledge, and the commitment to navigate the Company through the rapidly changing Internet environment and to deliver value for Yahoo! and its stockholders.

We look forward to a productive dialogue.

Very truly yours,

Roy Bostock

Chairman of the Board

via mashable

Well, this is a blog about whether Icahn’s new decision will make a better internet for all of us or not.

What is proposing is a serious push for Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT) to merge, this is great for investors, a serious threat to the internet community.

To Icahn’s letter and his new Nominees, the only concern I have is that MicroHoo will not be so great for us consumers.

Why?

Well, Microsoft has proven itself “useless” with its new Vista operating system. I do not condone “monopolized” technology that does not work well. If Vista proved to be otherwise, I might not think this way but especially after how Microsoft and all its partner PC retailers including Dell, HP, and others have NOT PROVIDED an XP solution to the new computers, this MicroYahoo thing will just kill off Yahoo completely and eventually we are all going to end up using crappy software and web search engine from Microsoft.

On the bright side, Microsoft has done some good things like the TellMe service for blackberry and the World Wide Telecope. They are doing more things to make the internet better but I am just afraid of what’s on the back of their mind.

I won’t even go back to the Netscape Microsoft era but I think Microsoft will do better if they stayed completely away from the search engine market as much as possible. Heck, they have Live search, why do they need to aquire Yahoo?

What I’d rather see than MicroHoo

Personally, I would rather see Google (GOOG) + Yahoo (YHOO), a GooHoo search engine would be more likely better fit for us consumers.

Uptake.com, is another website by Yen Lee, a former general manager of Yahoo Travel (YHOO).

After a quick peek, I got a sense that this could be Yelp for travel. Yelp did start out in San Francisco and I even saw a lot of their Craigslist listing for college kids to review restaurants and retail stores for like $5 per review. (when they were unknown that is)

Perhaps that’s not what uptake can do as travel covers so many different places but they could target major tourism areas like Las Vegas, New York, Hawaii, and San Francisco.

This site does have potential to become a lot bigger as I do like the site layout plus the GoogleMaps API looks great for a travel site. Now, they might even do better if they add a travel blog and write about places they go for promoting their site… (hint, hint?)

Looks great though and they could end up killing competitor sites like Orbitz one day.

(click to enlarge)

Is there room for another? Perhaps. Enter, Uptake, the invention of former general manager of Yahoo Travel, Yen Lee.

Having previously carried the name “Kango,” in its private beta days (circa, December 2007), UpTake is a site that purports to offer a collection of “the travel industry’s largest database of hotels and attractions,” plus an analysis of “more than 20 million online opinions.” All of it intended to carry out the industry promise of helping travelers “make better decisions.”

via mashable

I did a post about Yahoo Buzz when it came out couple months ago over at our Dot Com site, it looks like Yahoo’s (YHOO) Yahoo Buzz might be way bigger than Digg after all.

Digg will still hold its traffic as it has been steady with a large number of bloggers using the service.

For Yahoo Buzz to get even more popular, they need to open it up to all the bloggers, not just via invites.

I am sure this will happen soon and Yahoo Buzz might take a big share of the social networking market.

Furthermore, Yahoo Buzz has a more diverse audience than Digg. While Digg’s young, male, techy audience has been the stuff of legend since the site’s beginnings, 51% of Yahoo Buzz’s visitors are women. This doesn’t matter much to the users but it does matter a great deal to the advertisers; another legend has it that diggers never click on ads, and this might not hold true for Yahoo Buzz.

via mashable

Have you used Yahoo (YHOO)search engine lately?

Well, I haven’t used it honestly for couple months but I am impressed at their new real-time AJAX keyword suggestion feature.

They even have an “Explore concepts” feature, which I’d say is more towards Web 3.0 and the semantic web.

This functionality is way more advanced than Google (GOOG) at this point.   I am sure Google has something in the works to compete against Yahoo’s innovations but today I am impressed at Yahoo’s improvements.

Now, if Yahoo keeps improves their search engine algorithm a little bit or join Google to make the GooHoo thing real, that’d be the day we have some really really good search engine.

GooHoo, a combination of Google and Yahoo search engine, was launched just minutes ago. Google and Yahoo has combined the best of their user interactive content and search engine powers to bring internet users the “real deal”.

Google (NSDQ: GOOG) co-founder Sergey Brin recently said, “We have been talking to Yahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) and we are very excited to be working with them.” The goal? Tie the two companies into an advertising powerhouse, which I have decided to call GooHoo.

via informationweek