9 ms·

Yahoo got all cash, which is nice as it gives them more flexibility, the last thing they'd want after the Alibaba spin off fiasco is to have to try and sell 4.8

Yahoo got all cash, which is nice as it gives them more flexibility, the last thing they'd want after the Alibaba spin off fiasco is to have to try and sell 4.83 Billion in Verizon stock. Bloomberg just put up a head line saying that Yahoo will return all the cash, minus Operating Costs to the share holders. If anyone has any guess as to how much "operating costs" will be, please email:) So I guess queue Alibaba and SoftBank now to come in and divvy up the rest of the company? From Matt Levine: > "Marissa Mayer, Yahoo’s chief executive, is not expected to join Verizon, but she is due to receive a severance payout worth about $57 million," bringing her total compensation for about four years of work at Yahoo to $218 million. Wow! So I guess the now decade old valley trick off spending a "few" years at google to start your career and leveraging the google name to get another job really is the way to go:)

Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
I find it hard to parse "not expected to join Verizon" against Mayer's explicit statement that "For me personally, I’m planning to stay. I love Yahoo, and I believe in all of you. It’s important to me to see Yahoo into its next chapter": http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/147941613134/verizon-to-acquire-yahoos-operating-business http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/147941613134/verizon-to-a...
- shortformblog 10y ago
  She can "plan to stay" all she wants. If she's forced out, then the best-laid plans are for naught.
  - 086421357909764 10y ago
    Unless there's still a Yahoo (with the patents, Alibaba stake, and whatever else is left over), which in that case she could technically stay. I'd imagine most of that is going onto the block too.
    - Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
      AIUI Verizon is buying the brand, so although there'll be corporate continuity from today's Yahoo! to Lucky Internet Investments Inc. (or whatever the China/Japan/patents vehicle is called), "staying at Yahoo" means "moving to Verizon".
      - cptskippy 10y ago
        I believe it's "#1 Lucky Internet Investments Inc." Also that's racist.
        Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
        Had genuinely not thought of that angle: I simply meant they were lucky investments.
- empath75 10y ago
  Well, when she says she plans to 'stay', does she mean she's going to Verizon or staying with what's left of the original company (alibaba, etc)
existencebox 10y ago
There has been a lot of debate as to whether she succeeded or failed at her job, but at the end of the day all I can say: I really chose the wrong career path, as I can't imagine a scenario where a dev's comparative performance results in a 218m$ payout. (In more direct terms, I would gladly take the internet-hate-firehose in the face if it means making even single digit millions.) To make some more reasonable statement to try and add value to this non-comment, more than anything of yahoo's fall, every time it gets brought it it just makes me shake my head at the current state of compensation. For the same reason I can't comprehend what freedom and power $10m+ buys you, I can't comprehend how we change the system such that more of us get more of that.
- moinnadeem 10y ago
  Soon-to-be a freshman in college. If you don't mind me asking, what career path do you wish you took?
  - existencebox 10y ago
    Hahaha. I'm sorry if I was unclear, the statement was _slightly_ tongue in cheek. I'm not sure I could have made it in any field other than dev and I do mostly like that I chose it. Bio-engineering maybe? PERHAPS finance, but I don't play too well in that sandbox. The gist I was going for was more that even in a dev's greatest successes, they will likely never see most of the returns they generate for others without taking on some sort of "other" role (founder, CTO, etc), while to the other side of that coin, we do often get hit by the fallout of a failure (slipping a deadline, etc) and certainly don't get a payout that I would consider MASSIVE. I've heard many arguments that this is aligned with the respective risk we take, but as my original statement, I'd take a hell of a lot more risk if it meant never working again a day in my life, but that's not even a choice us normal schmucks can really make :) (I'm also not convinced the risk argument is even sound, as that one MONTH's pay at a top exec salary essentially frees me from financial risk for the rest of my life, whereas I'll be working for decades even at a top eng salary to achieve the same)
    - 10y ago
fleaflicker 10y ago
Why does everyone keep pointing out Mayer's compensation on this deal? Nobody said a word about the $200M that went Tim Armstrong's way in the Aol deal. [1] Can't help but think that if Yahoo had a male ceo nobody would be making these comments. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2015/05/12/tim-armstrongs-aol-stock-worth-200-million-after-verizon-deal/#4db0cc8543e6 http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2015/05/12/tim-armst...
- epmatsw 10y ago
  I think that's probably true, but I bet not directly. People know her name because she is a woman who is a CEO (which unfortunately is still noteworthy), and people note her compensation because they know her name. Who has even heard of Tim Armstrong?
  - TillE 10y ago
    Tim Armstrong was in the news a couple years ago, but the only reason I remember his name is because he shares it with the lead singer of Rancid. And yeah, if you haven't noticed the widespread backlash against executive compensation in the past few years, you really haven't been paying attention.
  - no1ne 10y ago
    People know her name only because the media forced it down our throats since she is a woman.
- _delirium 10y ago
  People complain about golden parachutes all the time, e.g. the executive payouts in the Blackberry and Nokia acquisitions were also heavily criticized. One of thousands of articles: http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/how-golden-parachutes-for-ceos-are-still-full-of-holes http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/how-golden-...
- intoverflow2 10y ago
  Did anyone care what happened to AOL though? Yahoo had several well loved properties that they bought and ran into the ground. You're comparing someone selling a truckload of junk for decent profit to someone who keeps buying expensive stuff, actively breaking it or leaving it to fester then selling it for a loss and being paid off for doing so.
colmvp 10y ago
I just find it odd that so many people on HN give Mayer a pass for failing to turn it around because no one could turn it around. I suggest reading the various articles that were written about her in 2015. From what I've read of her tenure, this isn't a case of an MVP who didn't have enough support. Mayer being a bad hire / performing poorly AND Yahoo being at a point of no return can certainly co-exist with one another.
- thegayngler 10y ago
  I know people who worked like just a few levels under here and they seemed to think some of your criticism of Mayer is true. However, she at least sold the company and will learn from this and will be a better CEO for the next company she joins.
- peeters 10y ago
  > Mayer being a bad hire / performing poorly AND Yahoo being at a point of no return can certainly co-exist with one another. Sure they can, but if Yahoo really was at the point of no return, then it ultimately being sold for parts can't (in isolation) be used as an indicator of her performance. I remember when she took the helm thinking that it would take an unbelievable feat from anybody to turn that company around. She's similar to John Chen (Blackberry) in the task they seemed to be given. Both brought on to captain a ship that was taking on water.
  - basch 10y ago
    I think it is crazy to say Yahoo was a sinking ship unable to be made buoyant. The number one thing they have going for them is Name/Legacy Habit. People still yahoo just because they still do. You could have let 90% off the company go, destroyed all the technology (but not the data, always import it into the new systems to not alienate long term customers) and started over. Instead she decided she wanted to be a newspaper/tv channel, instead of a tech company. Look at the trajectory Medium.com has taken, or wordpress, even atavist. Vox Chorus and Gawker Kinja. Instead yahoo chose to continue to compete with about.com as a crappy content mill / 2nd layer newswire. Yahoo Fantasy and Yahoo Finance and Yahoo Messenger and Flickr were all basically left to die. There was really no reason NOT to clone FBMessenger/Line/WeChat/QQ/WhatsApp. They should have been adding features to Finance and Messenger every week.
ep103 10y ago
wait, so they sold off billions worth of the company, but then instead of re-investing any of it to keep the remaining company afloat, or give them any competitive advantage, they're just going to give it all to stock holders, and move on to the next piece?
- phamilton 10y ago
  The only remaining pieces are holdings in Yahoo Japan and AliBaba. There's no operating company left.
  - rsyntax 10y ago
    Yahoo Japan is a different company.
    - phamilton 10y ago
      Yes. That's what "Holdings in Yahoo Japan" mean. It's a different company but Yahoo proper has a stake in it.

Doctor_Fegg 10y ago

I find it hard to parse "not expected to join Verizon" against Mayer's explicit statement that "For me personally, I’m planning to stay. I love Yahoo, and I believe in all of you. It’s important to me to see Yahoo into its next chapter": http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/147941613134/verizon-to-acquire-yahoos-operating-business http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/147941613134/verizon-to-a...

shortformblog 10y ago
She can "plan to stay" all she wants. If she's forced out, then the best-laid plans are for naught.
- 086421357909764 10y ago
  Unless there's still a Yahoo (with the patents, Alibaba stake, and whatever else is left over), which in that case she could technically stay. I'd imagine most of that is going onto the block too.
  - Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
    AIUI Verizon is buying the brand, so although there'll be corporate continuity from today's Yahoo! to Lucky Internet Investments Inc. (or whatever the China/Japan/patents vehicle is called), "staying at Yahoo" means "moving to Verizon".
    - cptskippy 10y ago
      I believe it's "#1 Lucky Internet Investments Inc." Also that's racist.
      - Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
        Had genuinely not thought of that angle: I simply meant they were lucky investments.
empath75 10y ago
Well, when she says she plans to 'stay', does she mean she's going to Verizon or staying with what's left of the original company (alibaba, etc)

existencebox 10y ago

There has been a lot of debate as to whether she succeeded or failed at her job, but at the end of the day all I can say: I really chose the wrong career path, as I can't imagine a scenario where a dev's comparative performance results in a 218m$ payout. (In more direct terms, I would gladly take the internet-hate-firehose in the face if it means making even single digit millions.) To make some more reasonable statement to try and add value to this non-comment, more than anything of yahoo's fall, every time it gets brought it it just makes me shake my head at the current state of compensation. For the same reason I can't comprehend what freedom and power $10m+ buys you, I can't comprehend how we change the system such that more of us get more of that.

moinnadeem 10y ago
Soon-to-be a freshman in college. If you don't mind me asking, what career path do you wish you took?
- existencebox 10y ago
  Hahaha. I'm sorry if I was unclear, the statement was _slightly_ tongue in cheek. I'm not sure I could have made it in any field other than dev and I do mostly like that I chose it. Bio-engineering maybe? PERHAPS finance, but I don't play too well in that sandbox. The gist I was going for was more that even in a dev's greatest successes, they will likely never see most of the returns they generate for others without taking on some sort of "other" role (founder, CTO, etc), while to the other side of that coin, we do often get hit by the fallout of a failure (slipping a deadline, etc) and certainly don't get a payout that I would consider MASSIVE. I've heard many arguments that this is aligned with the respective risk we take, but as my original statement, I'd take a hell of a lot more risk if it meant never working again a day in my life, but that's not even a choice us normal schmucks can really make :) (I'm also not convinced the risk argument is even sound, as that one MONTH's pay at a top exec salary essentially frees me from financial risk for the rest of my life, whereas I'll be working for decades even at a top eng salary to achieve the same)
  - 10y ago

fleaflicker 10y ago

Why does everyone keep pointing out Mayer's compensation on this deal? Nobody said a word about the $200M that went Tim Armstrong's way in the Aol deal. [1] Can't help but think that if Yahoo had a male ceo nobody would be making these comments. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2015/05/12/tim-armstrongs-aol-stock-worth-200-million-after-verizon-deal/#4db0cc8543e6 http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2015/05/12/tim-armst...

epmatsw 10y ago
I think that's probably true, but I bet not directly. People know her name because she is a woman who is a CEO (which unfortunately is still noteworthy), and people note her compensation because they know her name. Who has even heard of Tim Armstrong?
- TillE 10y ago
  Tim Armstrong was in the news a couple years ago, but the only reason I remember his name is because he shares it with the lead singer of Rancid. And yeah, if you haven't noticed the widespread backlash against executive compensation in the past few years, you really haven't been paying attention.
- no1ne 10y ago
  People know her name only because the media forced it down our throats since she is a woman.
_delirium 10y ago
People complain about golden parachutes all the time, e.g. the executive payouts in the Blackberry and Nokia acquisitions were also heavily criticized. One of thousands of articles: http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/how-golden-parachutes-for-ceos-are-still-full-of-holes http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/how-golden-...
intoverflow2 10y ago
Did anyone care what happened to AOL though? Yahoo had several well loved properties that they bought and ran into the ground. You're comparing someone selling a truckload of junk for decent profit to someone who keeps buying expensive stuff, actively breaking it or leaving it to fester then selling it for a loss and being paid off for doing so.

colmvp 10y ago

I just find it odd that so many people on HN give Mayer a pass for failing to turn it around because no one could turn it around. I suggest reading the various articles that were written about her in 2015. From what I've read of her tenure, this isn't a case of an MVP who didn't have enough support. Mayer being a bad hire / performing poorly AND Yahoo being at a point of no return can certainly co-exist with one another.

thegayngler 10y ago
I know people who worked like just a few levels under here and they seemed to think some of your criticism of Mayer is true. However, she at least sold the company and will learn from this and will be a better CEO for the next company she joins.
peeters 10y ago
> Mayer being a bad hire / performing poorly AND Yahoo being at a point of no return can certainly co-exist with one another. Sure they can, but if Yahoo really was at the point of no return, then it ultimately being sold for parts can't (in isolation) be used as an indicator of her performance. I remember when she took the helm thinking that it would take an unbelievable feat from anybody to turn that company around. She's similar to John Chen (Blackberry) in the task they seemed to be given. Both brought on to captain a ship that was taking on water.
- basch 10y ago
  I think it is crazy to say Yahoo was a sinking ship unable to be made buoyant. The number one thing they have going for them is Name/Legacy Habit. People still yahoo just because they still do. You could have let 90% off the company go, destroyed all the technology (but not the data, always import it into the new systems to not alienate long term customers) and started over. Instead she decided she wanted to be a newspaper/tv channel, instead of a tech company. Look at the trajectory Medium.com has taken, or wordpress, even atavist. Vox Chorus and Gawker Kinja. Instead yahoo chose to continue to compete with about.com as a crappy content mill / 2nd layer newswire. Yahoo Fantasy and Yahoo Finance and Yahoo Messenger and Flickr were all basically left to die. There was really no reason NOT to clone FBMessenger/Line/WeChat/QQ/WhatsApp. They should have been adding features to Finance and Messenger every week.

ep103 10y ago

wait, so they sold off billions worth of the company, but then instead of re-investing any of it to keep the remaining company afloat, or give them any competitive advantage, they're just going to give it all to stock holders, and move on to the next piece?

phamilton 10y ago
The only remaining pieces are holdings in Yahoo Japan and AliBaba. There's no operating company left.
- rsyntax 10y ago
  Yahoo Japan is a different company.
  - phamilton 10y ago
    Yes. That's what "Holdings in Yahoo Japan" mean. It's a different company but Yahoo proper has a stake in it.