3 ms·

> By any reckoning, Jerry Yang should be out of a job. > The Yahoo CEO spent a good part of the year fighting off an unsolicited bid by Microsoft which valued

> By any reckoning, Jerry Yang should be out of a job. > The Yahoo CEO spent a good part of the year fighting off an unsolicited bid by Microsoft which valued his company at about three times what it's worth today. That seems pretty clear cut to me. In terms of share holder value, that's pretty catastrophic.

jrockway 18y ago
What's good today might not be good a year from now. Not that I necessarily believe that that applies to Yahoo's decision... but it is something to consider.
raganwald 18y ago
I don't want to defend Mr. Yang, but I appeal to everyone to remember that people said exactly the same thing when Apple rejected Sun's offer of $24 a share, a 50% premium over their stock price (at the time) of $16. And soon thereafter, if memory serves me, AAPL fell even lower as the arbitrageurs cut their losses.
- jeroen 18y ago
  A fair point, until you figure in this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081106/bs_afp/usitinternetyahoomicrosoft;_ylt=Ak353aBaQ5QtJZVYpAY0xWKIzdAF http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081106/bs_afp/usitinternetyaho... "'To this day, I would say the best thing for Microsoft is to buy Yahoo,' Yang said" If he wanted to sell, he should have done it then, not now.
  - raganwald 18y ago
    You're so right about Jerry that I regret not saving my entire week's allowance of upmods for you. But I think we're in violent agreement on the point. There is a difference between wanting to sell all along and wanting to stay independent. If he wanted to sell all along and he was just playing negotiating games, I have no sympathy for him and his board. They should face the full wrath of the shareholders. On the other hand, if he wanted to make a go of it independently and it's a case of things falling apart to the point where he's going back to Ballmer on his knees... I have sympathy for him. In Apple's case, after rejecting the buyout they went with Plan B, engaging in one of the greatest "HR Acquisitions" in history. Jerry's Plan B hasn't worked out quite so well.
- indiejade 18y ago
  Jerry gets an unfair rap. I really hope Yahoo can make it through this rough patch without succumbing to the fangs of the big M. First of all, Yahoo is still a young company, relatively speaking. There are a multitude of far worse examples in stock-price fluctuation and company valuations over time. For those who disagree, I'll point you to one of the pioneering (and free!) resources for such information: Yahoo! Finance at http://finance.yahoo.com/ http://finance.yahoo.com/ Second, how can anyone blame him for wanting to keep Yahoo independent from Microsoft? It's Microsoft, for the sake of Pete. The number and types of stakeholders (which are technically different from shareholders, but still important) are a different breed. There was a time I had a stock portfolio, and I owned shares of both Microsoft and Yahoo! -- for very different reasons: I admired the formidable online presence of Yahoo, and I thought (at the time, in early 2005) that Microsoft had a great business in its console gaming business with the X-Box. Third, Microsoft's bid for Yahoo is a reactive to the shift to changes in the market. And one of the (highly intangible) advantages of being a first-mover is bargaining power over distribution channels. Yahoo, being in its more formidable online position (as interest switches from desktops to the web) operates in an entirely different sphere than Microsoft and should be able to reap the rewards of their investment in the online sphere. If shareholders don't see it now, they will someday -- if they allow Yahoo! to continue independent. Short-term greed kills innovation.

jrockway 18y ago

What's good today might not be good a year from now. Not that I necessarily believe that that applies to Yahoo's decision... but it is something to consider.

raganwald 18y ago

I don't want to defend Mr. Yang, but I appeal to everyone to remember that people said exactly the same thing when Apple rejected Sun's offer of $24 a share, a 50% premium over their stock price (at the time) of $16. And soon thereafter, if memory serves me, AAPL fell even lower as the arbitrageurs cut their losses.

jeroen 18y ago
A fair point, until you figure in this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081106/bs_afp/usitinternetyahoomicrosoft;_ylt=Ak353aBaQ5QtJZVYpAY0xWKIzdAF http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081106/bs_afp/usitinternetyaho... "'To this day, I would say the best thing for Microsoft is to buy Yahoo,' Yang said" If he wanted to sell, he should have done it then, not now.
- raganwald 18y ago
  You're so right about Jerry that I regret not saving my entire week's allowance of upmods for you. But I think we're in violent agreement on the point. There is a difference between wanting to sell all along and wanting to stay independent. If he wanted to sell all along and he was just playing negotiating games, I have no sympathy for him and his board. They should face the full wrath of the shareholders. On the other hand, if he wanted to make a go of it independently and it's a case of things falling apart to the point where he's going back to Ballmer on his knees... I have sympathy for him. In Apple's case, after rejecting the buyout they went with Plan B, engaging in one of the greatest "HR Acquisitions" in history. Jerry's Plan B hasn't worked out quite so well.
indiejade 18y ago
Jerry gets an unfair rap. I really hope Yahoo can make it through this rough patch without succumbing to the fangs of the big M. First of all, Yahoo is still a young company, relatively speaking. There are a multitude of far worse examples in stock-price fluctuation and company valuations over time. For those who disagree, I'll point you to one of the pioneering (and free!) resources for such information: Yahoo! Finance at http://finance.yahoo.com/ http://finance.yahoo.com/ Second, how can anyone blame him for wanting to keep Yahoo independent from Microsoft? It's Microsoft, for the sake of Pete. The number and types of stakeholders (which are technically different from shareholders, but still important) are a different breed. There was a time I had a stock portfolio, and I owned shares of both Microsoft and Yahoo! -- for very different reasons: I admired the formidable online presence of Yahoo, and I thought (at the time, in early 2005) that Microsoft had a great business in its console gaming business with the X-Box. Third, Microsoft's bid for Yahoo is a reactive to the shift to changes in the market. And one of the (highly intangible) advantages of being a first-mover is bargaining power over distribution channels. Yahoo, being in its more formidable online position (as interest switches from desktops to the web) operates in an entirely different sphere than Microsoft and should be able to reap the rewards of their investment in the online sphere. If shareholders don't see it now, they will someday -- if they allow Yahoo! to continue independent. Short-term greed kills innovation.