I really liked this line "...although it’s not entirely clear how the hell could an AOL-Yahoo merger ever be a good thing."
How does this merger make sense for either company?
Andrew
· 1 year ago
Stan, thanks for the recap in the first para. But I'm not sure I believe that Google doesn't want the Microsoft-Yahoo deal to happen. I think that Google wants as many distractions as possible for its rivals. And it's getting what it wants...
Mark Palmer
· 1 year ago
Great post. The part that should stand out is that the big players are still buried in their traditional business mindsets. This is true of so many companies today (think record labels as one). Companies need to start thinking about how they need to change to be competitive in the future.
benn
· 1 year ago
Nice post. I wrote a similar one earlier on my blog, except I have played out the whole soap opera instead of focusing on the reality - which is obvious to everyone except the big 4!
I just read a state this morning that google gets about 6.2 billion searches a month, yahoo 2.5 and msn about 1. So at 6 to 1 msn REALLY wants to change this equation. Even if they get yahoo they'd still be looking at 6 to 3!
Marc
· 1 year ago
I weighed in on this a few days ago on my blog as well. I can never understand why these behemoths think that buying other inept companies is a good thing. If it were Warren Buffett, well he could probably turn around a poorly performing company, but come on...two companies (MSFT, YHOO) who are having so much trouble innovating on their own think that a combo could be even better? Think again.
Well, the thing here is that such a deal would probably work for Micro Shoe...But definitely, they need to take all the money they're dealing with and put it towards the future, real innovation, and the like.
It's obvious they're thinking totally on the wrong plane to stay on top of this game. The whole idea behind being in the technology industry is the minimal barrier to entry and the hope that being a super smart outside the box thinking will facilitate you jumping light-speeds ahead of the powers that be.
EXAMPLES: Google to Yahoo + Microsoft Facebook to Myspace etc
If these guys don't stay poised, some young kid (hopefully me) will come up with something so impeccable and innovative that destroys their entire business models in one swoop.
I think a lot of people in the Web 2.0 game are coming up with ideas so non-progressive. To do this right, you need to be thinking of patentable technologies that change humanity and just happen to have an internet presence. The uber winning technology here has to be something that powers government mainframes to scan and cross-reference real people from satellietes or something--I think you get the point. And it has to do so without requireing billions of dollars to accomplish.
Semantic-based AI with real world sensors that don't take trillions to build.
Whatever, I'm just rambling about techno-babble to say that too many people are imagining a nice bubbly neon logo in the upper left corner of their site with a newsfeed in the center column, and an ad platform that reduces ad placement waste and targets better to increase conversion rates. To WIN BIG in the 21st century is going to take some serious shit!!!!!! And Hardware will be involved--specifically we will have to make hardware intelligent. Where's my wireless intelligence chip?
All Comments
How does this merger make sense for either company?
want to know what really happens? Tune in...
http://blog.neoco.com/2008/04/10/episode-4-the-...
http://www.mylifestartingup.com/2008/04/microso...
It's obvious they're thinking totally on the wrong plane to stay on top of this game. The whole idea behind being in the technology industry is the minimal barrier to entry and the hope that being a super smart outside the box thinking will facilitate you jumping light-speeds ahead of the powers that be.
EXAMPLES:
Google to Yahoo + Microsoft
Facebook to Myspace
etc
If these guys don't stay poised, some young kid (hopefully me) will come up with something so impeccable and innovative that destroys their entire business models in one swoop.
I think a lot of people in the Web 2.0 game are coming up with ideas so non-progressive. To do this right, you need to be thinking of patentable technologies that change humanity and just happen to have an internet presence. The uber winning technology here has to be something that powers government mainframes to scan and cross-reference real people from satellietes or something--I think you get the point. And it has to do so without requireing billions of dollars to accomplish.
Semantic-based AI with real world sensors that don't take trillions to build.
Whatever, I'm just rambling about techno-babble to say that too many people are imagining a nice bubbly neon logo in the upper left corner of their site with a newsfeed in the center column, and an ad platform that reduces ad placement waste and targets better to increase conversion rates. To WIN BIG in the 21st century is going to take some serious shit!!!!!! And Hardware will be involved--specifically we will have to make hardware intelligent. Where's my wireless intelligence chip?
James
from
FaceySpacey.com - "The Startup Incubator"