Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Report: Microsoft Interested in Buying Yahoo Again

By - Source: WSJ | B 43 comments

This time, it appears to be serious.

Microsoft and private equity firm Silver lake Partners have apparently been drafting plans to submit a bid to acquire Yahoo. However, there are also talks of a cross talk ban, which would require parties interested in buying Yahoo not to talk anyone else and submit joint-bids after they gain access to sensitive financial data at Yahoo.

The move seems to be designed to increase competition among bidders and drive the price for Yahoo up. However, it could also alienate potential buyers and at a market cap of $20.4 billion, Yahoo is a big piece to swallow. Microsoft remains as the only likely buyer that could swallow a company the size of Yahoo. Microsoft offered close to $45 billion for Yahoo, but could get away with far less this time, especially if there aren't many bidders left.

So far, the acquisition talks are based on rumors and speculation. Yahoo has not publicly confirmed that it is available to be acquired. According to Comscore, Yahoo has about 17.2 percent search market share in the U.S.. Google is ahead with 65.4 percent, Microsoft is behind with 13.4 percent.

Display 43 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -6 Hide
    whitecrowro , October 21, 2011 5:11 PM
    Skype gone, Yahoo is next..
    Market share war prone to be lost. These giants are already too big.
    Spending billions instead of making your cloud (sites) better at raining dollars sounds desperate to me.
  • 9 Hide
    captaincharisma , October 21, 2011 5:17 PM
    like it wasn't serious last time?
  • 0 Hide
    warmon6 , October 21, 2011 5:19 PM
    jeez... i thought MS bought yahoo already.......

    I think i need a brain check......... XD
  • 0 Hide
    CaedenV , October 21, 2011 5:22 PM
    what do they have to gain from this? Bing is already kicking yahoo's butt, hotmail is sadly better than Y-mail (though y-mail is bigger I suppose), I just dont understand. It made sense when they were looking last time and Bing was entering the market, but now the only point would be to buy it in order to keep someone else from buying it.
  • 5 Hide
    ohim , October 21, 2011 5:27 PM
    Am i the only one who thinks they are actually after the instant messaging features only ? I mean they bought Skype now yahoo ... for Yahoo messenger ? And to be honest ... the eyecandy interface of MS`s Messenger combined with Yahoo`s texting and ease of use with Skype`s video calls would make the best instant messenger ever .. but that`s just my opinion.
  • 1 Hide
    maxinexus , October 21, 2011 5:31 PM
    This is not going to happen, again.
  • -5 Hide
    jdamon113 , October 21, 2011 5:36 PM
    Its just a sign, Microsoft is stright out of Ideas. It cant win , if it was not for the common practices of windows it would die.
    I am a Netadmin.. we use all Server with Microsoft, I wish we could go back to Unix.. I miss Solaris. We even now have a few apples in our mist. once everything goes web based. MS pc's will start falling like leaves during Fall.
    They need to step back and move in a diffrent direction.
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , October 21, 2011 5:45 PM
    BREAKING NEWS:
    Microsoft enjoys throwing money out the window. More at 11.
  • 5 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , October 21, 2011 5:48 PM
    CaedenVwhat do they have to gain from this? Bing is already kicking yahoo's butt, hotmail is sadly better than Y-mail (though y-mail is bigger I suppose), I just dont understand. It made sense when they were looking last time and Bing was entering the market, but now the only point would be to buy it in order to keep someone else from buying it.


    Eliminate the competition.

    Microsoft is really doing us a favor. There's too much stuff on the net nowadays and useless companies like Yahoo need to be shut down, but they won't do it on their own, so go MS! Yahoo services are redundant; Google is way more useful.

    jdamon113Its just a sign, Microsoft is stright out of Ideas. It cant win , if it was not for the common practices of windows it would die. I am a Netadmin.. we use all Server with Microsoft, I wish we could go back to Unix.. I miss Solaris. We even now have a few apples in our mist. once everything goes web based. MS pc's will start falling like leaves during Fall. They need to step back and move in a diffrent direction.


    I hope YOU will fall instead. Cloud computing is death of consumer computing's freedom.
  • 0 Hide
    de5_Roy , October 21, 2011 5:59 PM
    Quote:
    This time, it appears to be serious.

    as serious as the time microsoft discontinued zune? :p 
    Quote:
    Cloud computing is death of consumer computing's freedom.

    +1.
    i'd like my data with inside my pc's storage and not on some faraway storage which might fail any time and inconvenience me (even if the cloud storage had fail-proof systems in place).
  • 0 Hide
    davidgrenier , October 21, 2011 6:09 PM
    I hope YOU will fall instead. Cloud computing is death of consumer computing's freedom.


    He wasn't stating he was supporting it, just that's what's inevitably gonna happen. And just to stress the point I'm gonna repeat it:

    once everything goes web based. MS pc's will start falling like leaves during Fall.
  • 0 Hide
    dgingeri , October 21, 2011 6:16 PM
    When I was in high school, there was this girl that kept telling my friends she was interested, and then we I was getting ready to ask her out, she'd tell them she wasn't anymore. This went on for almost a year and a half. (She was a freshman when I was a junior, she and many of my friends were in theater club, but I wasn't, so I rarely saw her directly. Most of our interaction was through friends.) It was so annoying. In the end, we never did go out. (She was cute, but not too bright. Really not my type.)

    I'm thinking this is probably what will happen with MS and Yahoo. There will be constant rumors, MS backing off, and finally Yahoo declares bankruptcy and MS buys all their patents, leaving the company itself to flounder and die.
  • -1 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , October 21, 2011 6:20 PM
    Quote:
    He wasn't stating he was supporting it, just that's what's inevitably gonna happen. And just to stress the point I'm gonna repeat it:

    once everything goes web based. MS pc's will start falling like leaves during Fall.


    It is not inevitable. If the consumers realize the massive disadvantages of it, cloud computing will go down the drain, where it belongs.
  • -1 Hide
    killerclick , October 21, 2011 6:24 PM
    de5_royi'd like my data with inside my pc's storage and not on some faraway storage which might fail any time and inconvenience me (even if the cloud storage had fail-proof systems in place).


    So... no webmail for you? What if your hard drive dies or your computer gets stolen... or your house burns down (and you happen to keep your backups inside your house)? Those things happen way more often than irretrievable data loss in mainstream cloud based services.

    You cloudophobes are so silly, your e-mail already resides "in the cloud" until you download it (and may even stay on the server if you use IMAP) and I doubt even half of you have any important data to be worried about. It's all just fear of change... the thing that happens to old people.
  • -4 Hide
    killerclick , October 21, 2011 6:26 PM
    amk-aka-phantomIt is not inevitable. If the consumers realize the massive disadvantages of it, cloud computing will go down the drain, where it belongs.


    Cloud computing is the only thing that makes sense when you use multiple devices, IMAP or web mail access, Facebook, etc. And your data is safer in the cloud (on a server cluster spread across continents) than in your man-cave or wherever you keep your computer.
  • 2 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , October 21, 2011 6:30 PM
    killerclickCloud computing is the only thing that makes sense when you use multiple devices, IMAP or web mail access, Facebook, etc. And your data is safer in the cloud (on a server cluster spread across continents) than in your man-cave or wherever you keep your computer.


    The hell?! How is my data safer on the cloud?! Besides, I don't mind cloud-based services. I just want the software that runs fine locally - OS, games, etc. - to remain local.
  • 2 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , October 21, 2011 6:34 PM
    killerclickSo... no webmail for you? What if your hard drive dies or your computer gets stolen... or your house burns down (and you happen to keep your backups inside your house)? Those things happen way more often than irretrievable data loss in mainstream cloud based services.You cloudophobes are so silly, your e-mail already resides "in the cloud" until you download it (and may even stay on the server if you use IMAP) and I doubt even half of you have any important data to be worried about. It's all just fear of change... the thing that happens to old people.


    My hard drive dies - lol, I have backups, and they're cheaper and more reliable than the "cloud". My house burns down - I'll have bigger things to worry about than my data; besides, I DO have backups outside my house :)  I'm not afraid of data loss in the cloud; I just don't see why a consumer needs it.

    Data is important if you make it important. Like your movies, games, music and pr0n? Then it's important to you.

    And I'm not biting on the "old" bait... :D  Not gonna work on me.
  • 0 Hide
    killerclick , October 21, 2011 6:38 PM
    amk-aka-phantomThe hell?! How is my data safer on the cloud?! Besides, I don't mind cloud-based services. I just want the software that runs fine locally - OS, games, etc. - to remain local.


    Well it's safer on the cloud because it's encrypted, there is redundant storage, backups, backup power and links, etc. On the other hand it's easy for someone to torch your house or to grab your laptop - and it happens way more often than irretrievable loss of data in cloud based services.

    As for the local software, the whole idea of web-based software is that it should work on any machine with a web browser. It may seem like an attempt to keep taking money from consumers through subscriptions rather than selling the software once, but consider that there's never been more free software, especially web based services.

    Also, if your data is somewhere "in the cloud" (if you're using multiple devices, collaborate with off-site colleagues,etc), what would be the advantage of having a desktop application that needs web based data to work? Especially with HTML 5, you can make all kinds of advanced interfaces.

    The whole negative hysteria about cloud based computing is based on faulty risk assessment.
  • -1 Hide
    killerclick , October 21, 2011 6:45 PM
    amk-aka-phantomI just don't see why a consumer needs it.


    For example my dad had his laptop stolen twice in London (once by burglars, the other time by a mugger). All his business correspondence was in his Outlook inbox and his documents folder. He had backups but they weren't up to date and it took a while to set everything up. The cost of the hardware was miniscule compared to the time he wasted and the data he lost.

    The average consumers don't even make backups and why should they? That's so '90s. Today my dad has a laptop with a browser and LibreOffice. He uses Gmail for business, has all the same capabilities and data on his smartphone and if he were to lose his laptop and smartphone tomorrow, he'd be up and running in literally 10 minutes (he lives 3 minutes from a store that sells laptops and smartphones).

    That's more convenient than having and maintaining backups and the price for that convenience for him? $0.00 Making backups yourself costs time and money for the media.
  • -1 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , October 21, 2011 6:51 PM
    killerclickWell it's safer on the cloud because it's encrypted, there is redundant storage, backups, backup power and links, etc. On the other hand it's easy for someone to torch your house or to grab your laptop - and it happens way more often than irretrievable loss of data in cloud based services.As for the local software, the whole idea of web-based software is that it should work on any machine with a web browser. It may seem like an attempt to keep taking money from consumers through subscriptions rather than selling the software once, but consider that there's never been more free software, especially web based services.Also, if your data is somewhere "in the cloud" (if you're using multiple devices, collaborate with off-site colleagues,etc), what would be the advantage of having a desktop application that needs web based data to work? Especially with HTML 5, you can make all kinds of advanced interfaces.The whole negative hysteria about cloud based computing is based on faulty risk assessment.


    No one will grab my laptop or torch my house; I guarantee that. I'm paranoid and my house has evil canine security xD Besides, I do not keep any data on internal hard drives. I have my external drives which I connect to whatever of my machines I want to view the data on and it eliminates all synchronization needs. (That's why I want a phone with USB-on-the-Go, too!)

    There's a ton of free software out there.

    I don't need multiple devices apart from a few computers, and if I would, they would be all doing a different thing instead of 5 devices that do the same thing (think Apple), and I wouldn't need to sync any data.

    Forget that collaboration example; I'm talking consumer computing here. We use cloud services at work and that's fine, they actually kick ass, but please keep them away from my home PCs.

    The negative hysteria about cloud based computing is based on the software developers' attempts to take away our locally ran software in order to make more money. OnLive? Cloud storage? It's all BS.
Display more comments