3 ms·

I think the diffs are Instagram hasn't attempted to monetize so their potential is unknown; while Tumblr already did and it doesn't look very bright.

by tuananh 13y ago

hkmurakami 13y ago
Also, mobile-based photosharing was deemed a "major threat" to Facebook's existence and relevance, whereas Tumblr is a much less mobile-centric and is deemed more of an "asset acquisition" and doesn't carry the urgency that Instagram carried for FB.
- onedev 13y ago
  Exactly this. Buying Instagram was a preventive measure, and it seemed to work out really really well for both parties involved. Buying Tumblr though? It's not so much of a preventive measure. It would be more for the integration potential and userbase than anything else and I think most people are saying Tumblr lacks potential as a standalone service. However, if it could help augment the Yahoo brand then it could potentially be worth it for Yahoo. I think there are multiple angles to look at, and we shouldn't focus too much on the price as much as the motivations behind such a deal and what the outcome could potentially be. Perhaps Yahoo could build services around Tumblr? Or maybe they'd elect to integrate Tumblr into Yahoo itself. Or perhaps use it add to their portfolio of companies to strengthen the Yahoo brand. I could also see a Yahoo ecosystem consisting of a tag-team of Flickr, Tumblr, and their News aggregations. So the question remains; what is their strategic motivation for Tumblr?
  - eclipticplane 13y ago
    On the flip side, we have other successful media conglomerate companies that let their media acquisitions remain semi-independent. Notably AOL and Advanced Publications/Condé Naste. Yahoo made it crystal clear that they own Flickr, for example. Do AOL or Advanced Publication make it clear they own Huffington Post, Tech Crunch, or Reddit? Not really. Sure, it's in black and white on their 'about' pages or via Wikipedia, but they generally had a hands-off approach. Huffpo and Reddit are still growing; Flickr not so much (except in some demographics or countries). Maybe Yahoo will keep a hands off approach. That also helps create a firewall for Yahoo stockholders who might balk at Tumblr's questionable content.
- goronbjorn 13y ago
  I would argue that, in this case, long term irrelevance is a "major threat" to Yahoo!'s existence, and this is one of few ways to circumvent that. There's going to be the same seemingly irrational price pinned on this acquisition because it's a long term life or death situation.
  - hkmurakami 13y ago
    Sure, but "Tumblr" is not an existential threat to Yahoo!. That kind of dynamic where you're such a pain in the ass to some big company that they have to buy you to maintain their status quo business as usual is one of the best ways to get acquired. When you don't have that dynamic, Yahoo! doesn't have to buy Tumblr. Maybe they have to buy something but it doesn't have to be Tumblr and it doesn't have to be now, right this moment.
    - justincormack 13y ago
      Irrelevance is the existential threat. At that point buying anything that people like and use becomes valid.
marcamillion 13y ago
Lest we forget, the early days of Google monetization attempts were relatively poor - before AdSense came along. Heck, other monetization attempts have been poor ever since too....soo....

I think the diffs are Instagram hasn't attempted to monetize so their potential is unknown; while Tumblr already did and it doesn't look very bright.

by tuananh 13y ago

I think the diffs are Instagram hasn't attempted to monetize so their potential is unknown; while Tumblr already did and it doesn't look very bright.

hkmurakami 13y ago

Also, mobile-based photosharing was deemed a "major threat" to Facebook's existence and relevance, whereas Tumblr is a much less mobile-centric and is deemed more of an "asset acquisition" and doesn't carry the urgency that Instagram carried for FB.

onedev 13y ago
Exactly this. Buying Instagram was a preventive measure, and it seemed to work out really really well for both parties involved. Buying Tumblr though? It's not so much of a preventive measure. It would be more for the integration potential and userbase than anything else and I think most people are saying Tumblr lacks potential as a standalone service. However, if it could help augment the Yahoo brand then it could potentially be worth it for Yahoo. I think there are multiple angles to look at, and we shouldn't focus too much on the price as much as the motivations behind such a deal and what the outcome could potentially be. Perhaps Yahoo could build services around Tumblr? Or maybe they'd elect to integrate Tumblr into Yahoo itself. Or perhaps use it add to their portfolio of companies to strengthen the Yahoo brand. I could also see a Yahoo ecosystem consisting of a tag-team of Flickr, Tumblr, and their News aggregations. So the question remains; what is their strategic motivation for Tumblr?
- eclipticplane 13y ago
  On the flip side, we have other successful media conglomerate companies that let their media acquisitions remain semi-independent. Notably AOL and Advanced Publications/Condé Naste. Yahoo made it crystal clear that they own Flickr, for example. Do AOL or Advanced Publication make it clear they own Huffington Post, Tech Crunch, or Reddit? Not really. Sure, it's in black and white on their 'about' pages or via Wikipedia, but they generally had a hands-off approach. Huffpo and Reddit are still growing; Flickr not so much (except in some demographics or countries). Maybe Yahoo will keep a hands off approach. That also helps create a firewall for Yahoo stockholders who might balk at Tumblr's questionable content.
goronbjorn 13y ago
I would argue that, in this case, long term irrelevance is a "major threat" to Yahoo!'s existence, and this is one of few ways to circumvent that. There's going to be the same seemingly irrational price pinned on this acquisition because it's a long term life or death situation.
- hkmurakami 13y ago
  Sure, but "Tumblr" is not an existential threat to Yahoo!. That kind of dynamic where you're such a pain in the ass to some big company that they have to buy you to maintain their status quo business as usual is one of the best ways to get acquired. When you don't have that dynamic, Yahoo! doesn't have to buy Tumblr. Maybe they have to buy something but it doesn't have to be Tumblr and it doesn't have to be now, right this moment.
  - justincormack 13y ago
    Irrelevance is the existential threat. At that point buying anything that people like and use becomes valid.

marcamillion 13y ago

Lest we forget, the early days of Google monetization attempts were relatively poor - before AdSense came along. Heck, other monetization attempts have been poor ever since too....soo....