6 ms·

Holy cow. This is a big deal. There is no reason why TV networks need to exist the way they do. Hulu, Netflix and Amazon all produce original content and are p

Holy cow. This is a big deal. There is no reason why TV networks need to exist the way they do. Hulu, Netflix and Amazon all produce original content and are perfectly positioned to disrupt them as their distribution volume increases. Even the current distribution channel is being disrupted by Aereo. Hulu is a a huge asset. If Yahoo gets in this game, they have a massive number of users, photos (flickr), blogposts (tumblr), mail, content... they're rivaling the reach and diversity of Amazon and Google as content owners (though without their respective cash cows of b2c sales and ads). What's next? Is there some sort of connection that I'm missing between flickr, tumblr, the existing yahoo platform and hulu? Do they buy vimeo from IAC, or buy/merge with IAC? What's the strategy behind all the acquisitions?

freehunter 13y ago
Yahoo has always been a content portal. The strategy? To have a diverse range of offerings in the hopes that everything you use will be be on the Yahoo network. That's been the winning strategy since AOL, but success in the area has proven fleeting.
nolok 13y ago
They tried to buy a majority share from dailymotion from Orange a couple of weeks ago, but it was blocked by the french governement (a big shareholder in Orange). Yahoo really wants a video service. I guess they want to come back to having a modern set of active services.
- Terretta 13y ago
  From the article's third paragraph: Yahoo had previously tried to buy a large stake in French video site DailyMotion, but that bid was stymied by the French government.
- pvnick 13y ago
  >but it was blocked by the french governement Governments screw everything up
  - FuzzyDunlop 13y ago
    They were probably right on the money considering Yahoo's reputation.
    - pvnick 13y ago
      I would say we're already screwed if we're allowing governments to get in situations where they "consider Yahoo's reputation." That's none of their damn business.
      - steveklabnik 13y ago
        Given that they own a bunch of stock in Orange, yes, it literally is their business.
        nraynaud 13y ago
        a bunch like in biggest shareholder. I still don't know if I agree with the action made in my name tho. I'm not in this anti-state crap, I just wonder how to make efficient militant shareholder decisions. To their credit they are trying something.
smegel 13y ago
Think how google has sprinkled G+ across all their properties - I'm guessing Yahoo's next big announcement will be some kind of social layer bringing it all together. I would be most surprised if Yahoo did not already have 1000 monkeys coding away on some secret black ops social product that will launch in some form before the end of the year.
- benwerd 13y ago
  They've already said it: they want their homepage to be all about you. Think about what that means in this wider context, where they operate as an alternative way to discover content across all kinds of different verticals. They want to take over the space currently occupied by traditional media. For better or for worse, they're the most "human" of Silicon Valley's big web companies, and I think they might actually succeed.
  - smegel 13y ago
    I would argue though that social isn't about "you" - its about "them", your friends, your social network. Currently I'm not sure it its possible to "friend" or "circle" someone on any Yahoo page (excluding now tumblr), and "sharing" on Yahoo is just a series of exit links to every other social network. That must make Marissa mad.
criley 13y ago
>Hulu, Netflix and Amazon all produce original content and are perfectly positioned to disrupt them as their distribution volume increases. Uhh, as a Hulu subscriber, I'll just let you know: If I only had "Hulu" content to pick from, I'd cancel my subscription immediately. It's not great stuff, barely worth paying for and CERTAINLY not worth both paying for and sitting through the same 4 advertisements over-and-over-and-over again for. Basically, I don't care who owns Hulu, but if Hulu isn't getting next-day network television + back catalogs, then I'm not going to subscribe. That's what I want it for, and I imagine I'm not the only one.
- vivin 13y ago
  Yeah Hulu-specific content is not that great. The main reason I watch it is for specific TV shows that I want to watch after they air on cable. I canceled my cable two years ago and I haven't looked back since.
- glhaynes 13y ago
  sitting through the same 4 advertisements over-and-over-and-over again for What is it I don't understand about the online video business that causes this to happen? They can't get enough advertisements from their partners to allow them to be less repetitive? Advertisers don't want to provide variety? (Maybe advertisers specifically want the monotony? Surely not, else they'd follow the same scheme on network TV.) The endless repetition sucks to watch and it makes the whole thing seem amateurish.
  - untog 13y ago
    I think this might be one of the areas that Yahoo could really help. They've got a lot of advertising experience, and would hopefully improve Hulu's ad performance. Both Hulu and Tumblr have proved that ads can work in their product, but haven't really brought them to any meaningful scale. Maybe that's what attracts Yahoo to them?
  - criley 13y ago
    Honestly, I'm just glad someone took that Gangnam Style pistachio commercial out back and shot it finally. I'm scared to even mention the commercial though, in fear that I will go home and be subjected to another 20-30 plays of it :(
hello_newman 13y ago
"What's the strategy behind all the acquisitions?" I think yahoo finally got their shit together. Yahoo! has always been a surprisingly healthy company from a strict financial standpoint. They are a strong stock that a lot of blue-collar investors have loved; consistent, slightly innovative (enough to meet projections, but not too crazy that might have resulted in major losses [even though they have stumbled]) and they offer the basic pillars of a healthy tech company i.e. mail, search, content etc. Yahoo has a nice amount of cash, and they are finally using it in a beneficial way, which is funny because it took someone from Google to realize that (remember yahoo trying to position itself as a "media" company). I think the strategy is to do what you described above; be able to compete with the likes of Google and Amazon. They have mail, content, a social network (Tumblr and Flickr), healthy advertising etc and if they can pull off Hulu they would be able to have an end-to-end solution for users. I don't think they would buy Vimeo, from my perspective I couldn't see why that would be beneficial and IAC would probably want a hefty price for it. If I was going long on a tech stock (say 36-60 months) I would put my money on Yahoo. I think Marissa Mayer is finally getting it right.
Androsynth 13y ago
>users, photos (flickr), blogposts (tumblr), mail, content Other than content, arent those second rate internet properties though? Maybe thats their plan in order not to compete with google/amazon. (i know flickr is used by professionals, but instagram probably has more users)
- drgath 13y ago
  Flickr has an estimated 87 million users [1], and Instagram has 100 million. Note sure what your definition of "second rate" is (quality or quantity?) but Flickr is much better quality than Instagram, especially after the recent update. Regarding email, Outlook, GMail, and Y! Mail are pretty much all tied at 290'ish million users worldwide, but Y! owns the top spot in the US [3]. Most of Y!'s media properties are #1 in their respective areas as well (News, Sports, OMG, etc). [1] http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/20/4121574/flickr-chief-markus-spiering-talks-photos-and-marissa-mayer http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/20/4121574/flickr-chief-marku... [2] http://instagram.com/press/# http://instagram.com/press/# [3] http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57543177-93/gmail-edges-hotmail-as-worlds-top-e-mail-service/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57543177-93/gmail-edges-hot...
  - Androsynth 13y ago
    I stand corrected
  - trhtrsh 13y ago
    Most of those Flickr users are dormant accounts, like mine.

freehunter 13y ago

Yahoo has always been a content portal. The strategy? To have a diverse range of offerings in the hopes that everything you use will be be on the Yahoo network. That's been the winning strategy since AOL, but success in the area has proven fleeting.

nolok 13y ago

They tried to buy a majority share from dailymotion from Orange a couple of weeks ago, but it was blocked by the french governement (a big shareholder in Orange). Yahoo really wants a video service. I guess they want to come back to having a modern set of active services.

Terretta 13y ago
From the article's third paragraph: Yahoo had previously tried to buy a large stake in French video site DailyMotion, but that bid was stymied by the French government.
pvnick 13y ago
>but it was blocked by the french governement Governments screw everything up
- FuzzyDunlop 13y ago
  They were probably right on the money considering Yahoo's reputation.
  - pvnick 13y ago
    I would say we're already screwed if we're allowing governments to get in situations where they "consider Yahoo's reputation." That's none of their damn business.
    - steveklabnik 13y ago
      Given that they own a bunch of stock in Orange, yes, it literally is their business.
      - nraynaud 13y ago
        a bunch like in biggest shareholder. I still don't know if I agree with the action made in my name tho. I'm not in this anti-state crap, I just wonder how to make efficient militant shareholder decisions. To their credit they are trying something.

smegel 13y ago

Think how google has sprinkled G+ across all their properties - I'm guessing Yahoo's next big announcement will be some kind of social layer bringing it all together. I would be most surprised if Yahoo did not already have 1000 monkeys coding away on some secret black ops social product that will launch in some form before the end of the year.

benwerd 13y ago
They've already said it: they want their homepage to be all about you. Think about what that means in this wider context, where they operate as an alternative way to discover content across all kinds of different verticals. They want to take over the space currently occupied by traditional media. For better or for worse, they're the most "human" of Silicon Valley's big web companies, and I think they might actually succeed.
- smegel 13y ago
  I would argue though that social isn't about "you" - its about "them", your friends, your social network. Currently I'm not sure it its possible to "friend" or "circle" someone on any Yahoo page (excluding now tumblr), and "sharing" on Yahoo is just a series of exit links to every other social network. That must make Marissa mad.

criley 13y ago

>Hulu, Netflix and Amazon all produce original content and are perfectly positioned to disrupt them as their distribution volume increases. Uhh, as a Hulu subscriber, I'll just let you know: If I only had "Hulu" content to pick from, I'd cancel my subscription immediately. It's not great stuff, barely worth paying for and CERTAINLY not worth both paying for and sitting through the same 4 advertisements over-and-over-and-over again for. Basically, I don't care who owns Hulu, but if Hulu isn't getting next-day network television + back catalogs, then I'm not going to subscribe. That's what I want it for, and I imagine I'm not the only one.

vivin 13y ago
Yeah Hulu-specific content is not that great. The main reason I watch it is for specific TV shows that I want to watch after they air on cable. I canceled my cable two years ago and I haven't looked back since.
glhaynes 13y ago
sitting through the same 4 advertisements over-and-over-and-over again for What is it I don't understand about the online video business that causes this to happen? They can't get enough advertisements from their partners to allow them to be less repetitive? Advertisers don't want to provide variety? (Maybe advertisers specifically want the monotony? Surely not, else they'd follow the same scheme on network TV.) The endless repetition sucks to watch and it makes the whole thing seem amateurish.
- untog 13y ago
  I think this might be one of the areas that Yahoo could really help. They've got a lot of advertising experience, and would hopefully improve Hulu's ad performance. Both Hulu and Tumblr have proved that ads can work in their product, but haven't really brought them to any meaningful scale. Maybe that's what attracts Yahoo to them?
- criley 13y ago
  Honestly, I'm just glad someone took that Gangnam Style pistachio commercial out back and shot it finally. I'm scared to even mention the commercial though, in fear that I will go home and be subjected to another 20-30 plays of it :(

hello_newman 13y ago

"What's the strategy behind all the acquisitions?" I think yahoo finally got their shit together. Yahoo! has always been a surprisingly healthy company from a strict financial standpoint. They are a strong stock that a lot of blue-collar investors have loved; consistent, slightly innovative (enough to meet projections, but not too crazy that might have resulted in major losses [even though they have stumbled]) and they offer the basic pillars of a healthy tech company i.e. mail, search, content etc. Yahoo has a nice amount of cash, and they are finally using it in a beneficial way, which is funny because it took someone from Google to realize that (remember yahoo trying to position itself as a "media" company). I think the strategy is to do what you described above; be able to compete with the likes of Google and Amazon. They have mail, content, a social network (Tumblr and Flickr), healthy advertising etc and if they can pull off Hulu they would be able to have an end-to-end solution for users. I don't think they would buy Vimeo, from my perspective I couldn't see why that would be beneficial and IAC would probably want a hefty price for it. If I was going long on a tech stock (say 36-60 months) I would put my money on Yahoo. I think Marissa Mayer is finally getting it right.

Androsynth 13y ago

>users, photos (flickr), blogposts (tumblr), mail, content Other than content, arent those second rate internet properties though? Maybe thats their plan in order not to compete with google/amazon. (i know flickr is used by professionals, but instagram probably has more users)

drgath 13y ago
Flickr has an estimated 87 million users [1], and Instagram has 100 million. Note sure what your definition of "second rate" is (quality or quantity?) but Flickr is much better quality than Instagram, especially after the recent update. Regarding email, Outlook, GMail, and Y! Mail are pretty much all tied at 290'ish million users worldwide, but Y! owns the top spot in the US [3]. Most of Y!'s media properties are #1 in their respective areas as well (News, Sports, OMG, etc). [1] http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/20/4121574/flickr-chief-markus-spiering-talks-photos-and-marissa-mayer http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/20/4121574/flickr-chief-marku... [2] http://instagram.com/press/# http://instagram.com/press/# [3] http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57543177-93/gmail-edges-hotmail-as-worlds-top-e-mail-service/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57543177-93/gmail-edges-hot...
- Androsynth 13y ago
  I stand corrected
- trhtrsh 13y ago
  Most of those Flickr users are dormant accounts, like mine.