I'd focus on revenue: - Reduce the number and variety of ad formats. - Kill products which are revenue sinks. - Focus on products which can generate reve

I'd focus on revenue: - Reduce the number and variety of ad formats. - Kill products which are revenue sinks. - Focus on products which can generate revenue "out the gate"[0]. This gets operating expenditures down, which buys time. That's pretty much all it does, though. Then I'd sit back and ask the company[1] "what do we do?" Depending upon the answer, those are the products, strategies, and revenue opportunities we pursue next. My personal feelings here probably wouldn't matter much, because no matter how intelligent I, or anybody else is, the top 100 creative producers at a company like Yahoo would probably be more creative, intelligent, in-touch, etc than I just by stint of sheer numbers[2]. So, take the best of their ideas[3], and execute on them. Then, after building up a business which can sustain itself again, I'd start pursuing longer term goals. These goals would be aligned with what the company is capable of: large-scale, software-driven, media operations on the web. During all of this, of course, there'd need to be a lot of firing and hiring. It'd suck. I'd hate it. But, knowing the tech industry, the people who were fired would find better jobs, and the new people would want to prove themselves. The trick is making sure you didn't waste effort on Sisyphean tasks. Yahoo is not a research company. Yahoo takes existing innovations and brings them to a mass market. Focusing on that would be a strength. [0] A rodeo term, believe it or not. [1] Or, say, the top 100 creative people there. [2] Finally noticed me stealing plays from the Apple playbook? [3] By which I mean, "ideas which can make lots of cash in the short term".