3 ms·
your argument is to weaken and possible kill 100 small units. while Yahoo is now killing itself by having divisions fight for the same money, your argument wil
by gcb0 11y ago
your argument is to weaken and possible kill 100 small units.
while Yahoo is now killing itself by having divisions fight for the same money, your argument will only make them die faster. as they will lose their only advantage.
what they need to do is to see the profit as a whole.
it's peanut butter manifest STILL.
another example is how the team showing native ads (click bait ads disguised as news items) is making a killing... buy they don't realise it is the exact money that left their regular ad business while costing them 1. maintaining yet another ad platform and sales 2. driving away users with words ads.
in the end, they probably gave lots of bonuses to the team in the new product that is making them lose money, and probably layd off a few people in the old ad business that's would keep giving them the exact same money without the new costs.
- andy_ppp 11y ago>>> your argument is to weaken and possible kill 100 small units. Er, sink or swim? >>> while Yahoo is now killing itself by having divisions fight for the same money, your argument will only make them die faster. as they will lose their only advantage. They will never make their properties good enough while relying on network effects. They need organic traffic by being the best of breed not by being just another part of Yahoo! >>> what they need to do is to see the profit as a whole. I don't agree. Split them up and let each division stand on it's own or die. They can still live on Yahoo.com, just all profits and divisions are separate and smaller. >>> it's peanut butter manifest STILL. Years old, I can't even remember what this was about. >>> another example is how the team showing native ads (click bait ads disguised as news items) is making a killing... buy they don't realise it is the exact money that left their regular ad business while costing them 1. maintaining yet another ad platform and sales 2. driving away users with words ads. in the end, they probably gave lots of bonuses to the team in the new product that is making them lose money, and probably layd off a few people in the old ad business that's would keep giving them the exact same money without the new costs. Not sure about any of this?
- gcb0 11y ago> >>> your argument is to weaken and possible kill 100 small units. > Er, sink or swim? i expressed badly. what i meant was no Yahoo piece can survive alone. splitting them will kill them all. it's like separating Gmail, search and ads from Google. all you gonna do is kill it. read "kill all smaller units" on my original comment pls. Yahoo only strength is it's size and what it can pull off because of it. which is not being used at all, because they keep running after their tail for month by month revenue. now ask yourself: why investor would push so hard for month by month revenue on a stock that don't pay dividend?? doesn't it smell bad for you? it should. if they weren't trying to crash Yahoo, they would be 1. driving the company to make bold bets and win big on share valorization; or 2. accepting the buy back Jerry was driving a while ago. but no, the investors want 3: crash and burn to get BABA free money.
- argonaut 11y ago> it's like separating Gmail, search and ads from Google. all you gonna do is kill it. No, Gmail would almost certainly survive if split off from Google. Search and ads are basically the same product, so splitting those would weaken both but not kill either. Google search has some of the strongest engineers at Google and a near monopoly on the market, their engineers could easily build an ad system for search from scratch. Ads would be weakened but not killed - they also have some of the strongest engineers at Google; they still serve ads on mobile and AdWords.
- yuhong 11y ago