3 ms·
That scheme isn't necessarily zero sum. If Yahoo simply didn't have the inventory to show certain ads but AOL did and vice versa then it would be a mutually ben
by mertd 4y ago
That scheme isn't necessarily zero sum. If Yahoo simply didn't have the inventory to show certain ads but AOL did and vice versa then it would be a mutually beneficial deal that fills ad slots that would otherwise go unfulfilled.
Say Yahoo gets a lot of queries for plumbers but plumbers for whatever reason were using AOL to run their campaigns.
- not2b 4y agoThat's an argument for two companies to show ads on each other's platforms, but not an argument for the vastly inflated prices they were pretending to charge each other. At least for public companies, regulators should crack down on that kind of thing.
- robertlagrant 4y agoPresumably this only affects top line revenue of each company.
- not2b 4y agoYes, but big artificial revenue growth coupled with equally big artificial expense growth can look like a growing company and hide the fact that non-bogus revenue is actually shrinking. I don't think sophisticated investors will be fooled by this, but with a public company many potential investors might be deceived.