Microsoft and Yahoo [Archive]

Quang

01-02-2008, 08:39 PM

AP
Microsoft Offers $44.6B for Yahoo
Friday February 1, 8:23 am ET
By Michael Liedtke, AP Business Writer
Microsoft Makes Unexpected $44.6B Offer for Internet Icon Yahoo

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Microsoft Corp. has pounced on slumping Internet icon Yahoo Inc. with an unsolicited takeover offer of $44.6 billion in its boldest bid yet to challenge Google Inc.'s dominance of the lucrative online search and advertising markets.
ADVERTISEMENT

The surprise offer of $31 per share, made late Thursday and announced Friday, comes with Sunnyvale-based Yahoo in a vulnerable position.

With its profits steadily sliding, Yahoo's stock slipped to a four-year low earlier this week and a new management team has been trying to steer a turnaround but sees more turbulence through 2008.

The announcement sent Yahoo's share price up 60 percent in premarket trading, while Google fell 8 percent.

In a letter to Yahoo's board of directors, Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer indicated the world's largest software maker is determined to bring the two companies together.

To underscore its resolve, Microsoft is offer a 62 percent premium to Yahoo's closing stock price Thursday.

Since reaching a 52-week high of $34.08 in October, Yahoo shares have fallen 46 percent. Yahoo climbed $11.47 a share, or 59.8 percent, to $30.65 in premarket trading. Microsoft shares fell $1.95, or 6 percent, to $30.65.

Ballmer revealed in the letter that Yahoo had rebuffed a previous overture a year ago, saying it had a turnaround in the works. But he pointedly noted Yahoo has instead deteriorated significantly.

"A year has gone by, and the competitive situation has not improved," Ballmer added.

Microsoft's previous offer was rebuffed by Terry Semel, who stepped aside last year as chief executive under shareholder pressure.

Microsoft sent its latest takeover offer to Yahoo late Thursday, shortly after Semel resigned as the company's chairman. The letter is addressed to Semel's successors, new Chairman Roy Bostock and the current CEO, co-founder Jerry Yang, who is one of Yahoo's largest shareholders.

"Microsoft's consistent belief has been that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! clearly represents the best way to deliver maximum value to our respective shareholders, as well as create a more efficient and competitive company that would provide greater value and service to our customers," Ballmer wrote.

Yahoo didn't immediately respond for requests for comment.

Under terms of the proposed deal, Yahoo shareholders could choose to receive cash or Microsoft common shares, with the total purchase consisting of 50 percent cash and 50 percent stock.

Microsoft said it sees at least $1 billion in cost savings generated by the combination, and intends to offer significant retention packages to Yahoo engineers, key leaders and employees. The software giant said it believes the takeover would receive regulatory clearance and close in the second half of 2008.

Signaling Microsoft doesn't intend to take no for an answer, Ballmer wrote that the company "reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo's shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal."

Google shares fell $46.55, or 8.3 percent, to $517.95 in premarket trading after the Mountain View-based company reported fourth-quarter earnings that missed analyst estimates.

While Yahoo is struggling, Microsoft is thriving. The Redmond, Wash.-based company last week forecast a rosy 2008 -- despite broader economic worries -- after it blew by Wall Street's expectations for a second consecutive quarter.

ncmkhoa

01-02-2008, 09:00 PM

Bọn Microsoft định cô lập Google đây mà. Dùng Yahoo + MSN để đánh Google thì còn có khả năng. Nếu Yahoo bị bọn khác mua, thị phần đó sẽ nhiều khả năng rơi vào tay google hơn là MSN.

Quang

01-02-2008, 09:43 PM

AP

Signaling Microsoft doesn't intend to take no for an answer, Ballmer wrote that the company "reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo's shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal."

Mình khoái câu này. Y như trong The God Father "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse" :D. Kiểu này bác Jerry Yang mất chức CEO chắc rồi. Với tiềm lực MS nếu Yahoo board không đồng ý thì a hostile take over không thành vấn đề nhỉ.

Longatum

01-02-2008, 11:20 PM

Bọn Microsoft định cô lập Google đây mà. Dùng Yahoo + MSN để đánh Google thì còn có khả năng. Nếu Yahoo bị bọn khác mua, thị phần đó sẽ nhiều khả năng rơi vào tay google hơn là MSN.

=) bác Khoa nói cứ như thấy rồi... bây giờ mua được Google với giá đấy chắc cũng chỉ có Microsoft hoặc là Google làm được.

ncmkhoa

01-02-2008, 11:23 PM

Bọn PE nó cũng có thể mua chú Yahoo lại rồi chia nhỏ ra bán lại mà.

Longatum

01-02-2008, 11:36 PM

Nếu bác nói thế thì PE nó có thể mua được nhiều thứ... để mua được 1 thằng như Yahoo thì cần nhiều tiền. Credit như thế này thì leverage thế nào được mà làm deal 40 với 50 tỷ? MSF có thể mua được vì nó cash rich và có stock để làm đạn. Nếu bây giờ có bidding war thì chắc cũng chỉ là corporate bid với nhau thôi chứ còn chắc không có cái vụ như Equity Office năm ngoái nữa.

ncmkhoa

01-02-2008, 11:52 PM

Anh nghĩ là nếu MSF mua thì nó dùng stock là nhiều chứ cash thì chả bao nhiêu đâu, dại gì. Thị trường dạo này không ổn định, giữ cash làm việc khác tốt hơn.

Mấy thằng corporate khác thì nó không dại gì theo cái deal này vì chưa đủ tầm về công nghệ.

Mà bây giờ chuyển hướng đi: Yahoo say NO hay YES???

Longatum

01-02-2008, 11:58 PM

Cái bid này không/chưa được management của Yahoo support... nói về hướng nào đấy thì đây giống như một cái hostile takeover. Nếu như BoD của Yahoo quyết định ủng hộ thì coi như tốt còn nếu không thì MSF nó vẫn tiến hành mua thôi.

Cái deal này dự kiến có tỷ lệ cash/equity là 50/50.

Thư của anh Ballmer gửi Yahoo đây:
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc2008021_590106.htm

ncmkhoa

02-02-2008, 12:02 AM

...62% premium above the closing price of Yahoo! common stock of $19.18 on January 31, 2008.

Đúng là hostile take over. Mà cũng khó mà từ chối nhỉ. Thằng Yahoo đang đà lao xuống dưới đáy thế kia mà. Cái này không đồng ý thì bọn shareholders cũng làm ầm ĩ cho xem.

Long: anh bảo đảm là cash/equity ít nhất phải là 40/60 (cash không hơn 40%). Chú dám cá không?

Quang

02-02-2008, 12:24 AM

chude

02-02-2008, 08:10 AM

Longatum

02-02-2008, 02:34 PM

Anh nghĩ Long nói đúng rồi. Năm trước cái offer đã bị reject một lần rồi. Xong bác CEO của Yahoo ra đi. Bác Jerry Yang thay vào bảo cho tao 100 ngày tao lên kế hoạch turnaround. Giờ 200 ngày and counting rồi mà vẫn chưa thấy kế hoạch gì ra hồn. Vừa weak về market position vừa weak về strategy thì kiểu gì cũng đứt. PA thay mặt cổ đông bảo bác Yang giải quyết sớm đi thôi.

Anh nghĩ các bác Yahoo board resist chắc là vì nếu take over thì chắc các bác ấy ra đi hết nhỉ. Ai có insight vụ này chỉ điểm thêm cái.

Thông thường thì process là thế này. BoD đánh giá cái bid không phải dựa trên việc được hay mất job mà dựa trên cơ sở lợi ích của shareholders. Do họ là người có thể nắm được thông tin của Yahoo 1 cách rõ ràng nhất, họ có thể xác định được fair value của cty và do đó là per share value một cách tương đối chính xác. Đem so giá trị đó giá trị của cái bid từ MSFT... nếu như BoD cho là giá trị của cty đáng $30 mà MSFT trả cho shareholders là $31 thì về lý là nên bán (fair value ở đây coi như incorporate được hết tất cả risk + expectation rồi).

Tất nhiên về mặt thực tế thì còn có nhiều cái khác nữa... politics chắc là đóng vai trò khá quan trọng nhưng nếu BoD mà từ chối thì MSFT có thể tiến hành thực hiện proxy contest để replace các directors. Yahoo, giống như các cty lớn khác chắc đều có một số takeover defense strategies kiểu như poison pills cho nên nếu bị từ chối thì proxy contest chắc là cách duy nhất để MSFT tiến hành vụ này.

thai

02-02-2008, 03:53 PM

Business kể cũng vui thật: kiểu như thấy một chú die, chú bán quan tài mừng như bắt được vàng. Ví dụ: chú Societe Generale vừa móm một cái, anh BNP Paribas đã nhăm nhe đòi xơi tái.

"Biết đợi" quả là một chiến lược sâu sắc.

Có ai có tài liệu phân tích kỹ tại sao MSFT lại có ý định thế này nhỉ? Tò mò quá!

Quang

02-02-2008, 08:48 PM

Tự phân tích đi chứ còn đợi tài liệu gì nữa. Chẳng phải đây là một case study hay sao.

Business kể cũng vui thật: kiểu như thấy một chú die, chú bán quan tài mừng như bắt được vàng. Ví dụ: chú Societe Generale vừa móm một cái, anh BNP Paribas đã nhăm nhe đòi xơi tái.

"Biết đợi" quả là một chiến lược sâu sắc.

Có ai có tài liệu phân tích kỹ tại sao MSFT lại có ý định thế này nhỉ? Tò mò quá!

Quang

03-02-2008, 01:42 AM

Bài này hay:

Yahoo's Joyful, Difficult Journey
The beloved Internet icon's buoyant beginning gave way to missed acquisitions, an inferior understanding of the Web's evolution, and Google's shadow

http://images.businessweek.com/story/08/600/0201_yahoo.jpg

From left, Yahoo! co-founder David Filo, former CEO Terry Semel, and Jerry Yang. Spencer Platt/Getty Images

by Robert Hof

For a company whose very name is a joyous exclamation, it's almost unbelievable that Yahoo! may end up going out with a whimper. Yahoo's possible purchase by Microsoft, which launched an unsolicited $44.6 billion bid on Feb. 1, would end one of the technology world's iconic fairy tales. If the deal happens, the company that put a friendly face on the wild and woolly Internet would be reduced to nothing more than a brand within the bowels of an old-guard technology titan.

That would be a huge comedownand an object lesson in how easily a tech company can lose its way in the industry's treacherous rapids. What shocks many people about Yahoo's decline is that this is no shell of a company. Yahoo (YHOO) has seemingly unmatched assets: a global base of 500 million monthly visitors, leadership in key online content categories such as finance, sports, and e-mail, and even a new search ad system that's managed to win some kudos from advertisers in a market dominated by Google.

But after years of watching promising projects get mangled in a convoluted corporate bureaucracy, both shareholders and many employees have been giving up on the once-loved company. Matters came to a head on Jan. 29, when Yahoo issued another disappointing quarterly report and an even more troubling outlook, announcing 1,000 job cuts (BusinessWeek.com, 1/29/08). When Yahoo executives essentially said a turnaround was another year away, investors reached a boiling point, knocking the stock to its lowest level in four years. "Management has no credibility," fumed Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Sandeep Aggarwal.

At the same time, even some longtime Yahoo executives and employeesthose not among the hundreds who departed for greener pastures in the past two yearswere getting close to throwing in the towel. "I just don't see things changing," says one angry executive who has worked at Yahoo almost six years and is looking elsewhere now. "I don't see people making really tough decisions. There's been a lot of talking but not a lot of walking."

Comeback Options
When a company spirals this low, it's often impossible to stage a comeback. And in Yahoo's case, the company has few options left. Microsoft's (MSFT) offer, a whopping 62% higher than Yahoo's market value before the announcement, seems crafted to ward off potential rival bids. Yahoo could swallow a poison pill of sorts, seeking an alliance with Google (GOOG) in which its rival would run its search and ad businesses, a strategy some analysts had suggested even before the Microsoft bid. Alternatively, Yahoo could look for a private equity firm to take it private, though the credit crunch has made raising such a huge sum more difficult.

With shareholders unlikely to show much patience for stalling, Yahoo's best bet may be to force Microsoft to pay more by courting a cable TV company like Comcast (CMCSA) or a media company like News Corp. (NWS). Either way, most analysts think Yahoo's fate is sealed and that the deal will go through. And at this early stage, it's entirely unclear which parts of Yahoo would survive inside a company often dubbed the Borg, after the race of human-robot hybrids from Star Trek.

Mergers, of course, are part and parcel of every industry, most of all the fast-moving technology business. But this tale is particularly poignant because it's about Yahoo, the little company started by two Stanford guys who shelved their pursuit of engineering degrees in 1994 to create the first widely used Internet directory in a campus trailer.

Quang

03-02-2008, 01:44 AM

After Netscape Communications' pioneering Web browser helped usher in the commercial Internet, Yahoo emerged as the original Internet iconthe one with the famous yodel in its television ads, the trademark yellow-and-purple hues that extended even to the sprinkler heads at company headquarters, the warm-and-fuzzy image that made the Internet almost cozy.

Not Tech-Savvy Enough
Yahoo's decline is all the more surprising because the business opportunities on the Web are now bigger than ever. But those opportunities still require cutting-edge technology much more than the traditional-media skills Yahoo had veered toward in the last five years. The company that pioneered online media failed to keep up with waves of change still crashing onto the Internet's shores, from new technologies to the ways people use the Web.

Yahoo dominated when new Internet users needed the comfort and guidance of a familiar starting point from which to find resources on the rest of the Netliterally, a home page. Through the 1990s, Yahoo thrived as it signed deals with content providers and became the one go-to place for advertisers seeking to reach lucrative online consumers. But after a series of stumbles, Yahoo brought in former Warner Bros. (TWX) studio boss Terry Semel as CEO in May, 2001, and the company's direction began to change. To his credit, Semel cleared out bloated organizations and brought Yahoo back to prosperity for several years. By mid-2003, Semel's magic had returned Yahoo's market value close to its all-time high of $127 billion, reached in early 2000 at the peak of the dot-com boom.

But Semel's big-media background ultimately backfired. It pushed Yahoo and its culture in a new direction that ultimately proved fruitless, if not ruinous. In 2004, Semel began building a large operation with posh offices in Santa Monica, Calif., near Hollywood, for Yahoo's media activities, such as video-heavy Web sites. "Santa Monica was a huge and costly distractionat a time when they needed to focus on other things," most of all search technology, says one former Yahoo executive.

Perhaps just as important, Semel never meshed with the engineering culture of Silicon Valley that drives innovation more than anyone at the top. Famously spending weekday evenings in a San Francisco hotel suite, then flying home to Southern California on many weekends, Semel was seen by some as too aloof, uninterested in the technology that Yahoo needed to keep pace with a fast-rising Google and a raft of startups. "He doesn't have a core understanding of technology, and he never did," says a former senior executive.

All the Right Moves?
It's not that Yahoo had no clue. Indeed, it seemed to be making the right moves on the technology front after Semel arrived. It bought search engine Inktomi in late 2002 to bolster its effort to catch Google. The next year, it snapped up Overture, which had come up with the novel idea of placing paid ads on other Web sites. But a year earlier, Google had also seized on that idea as its business modelbut with a critical twist: The ads people clicked on more often, not just those for which advertisers paid more, would get higher placement on the page. With that key change and a search engine that produced much more relevant results for users, advertisers got much better returns on ads placed with Google.

Then, on Aug. 19, 2004, Google went public. According to some former Yahoos, that was a turning point for the company's culture as well. Yahoo became a company obsessed with Google rather than one looking to make the next leap on the Net. "Yahoo became super-paranoid," says one former search manager. "We switched from charting our own course to looking over our shoulder."

By the end of 2005, Yahoo realized the search ad operation it created out of Overture was foundering and started a crash program called Panama. But throughout 2006, it kept running into delays.

Quang

03-02-2008, 01:45 AM

When Panama finally launched last February, it got some good reviews but struck many as too little, too late (BusinessWeek.com, 2/26/07). Google not only kept growing at many times the rate of Yahoo, it even launched a deal last April to buy DoubleClick, which if approved would give Google a huge foothold in Yahoo's mainstay, online display ads.

Missed Opportunities
Meantime, Yahoo missed one huge opportunity after another. In 2005, it was said to be interested in buying the popular social network MySpace, but lost out to News Corp. In 2006, Google snatched up the hot video-sharing site YouTube, which had quickly grown in popularity even as people within Yahoo were pushing for the company to create much the same kind of service from its large stable of video resources and properties. The same year, Yahoo offered around $1 billion for another hot social network, Facebook, but was spurned. Last year, Microsoft swooped in with a $240 million purchase of a small stake that valued Facebook at a stunning $15 billion.

Yahoo has made some mildly successful Web service acquisitions, such as buying the popular photo-sharing site Flickr; and some promising ones on the advertising side, purchasing ad exchange Right Media and targeted-ad network BlueLithium last year. But none of them halted Yahoo's decline. As profits plummeted last year and executive after executive fled, it was becoming clear that Semel's days were numbered. He stepped down last June (BusinessWeek.com, 6/19/07), replaced by co-founder Jerry Yang and new President Susan Decker.

Ultimately, what Yahoo missed, says Silicon Valley strategy consultant Sramana Mitra, is "a visceral understanding of how the Web is going to evolve." In particular, the quintessential Web 1.0 company failed to make the transition to Web 2.0, which involves creating services that tap the talents and efforts of users themselves: the volunteer-written encyclopedia Wikipedia, video-sharing sites like YouTube, and even Google, whose very search results are based on algorithms that track the links people make from their Web sites to others.

But despite all the missteps, few people would have imagined that Yahoo would become nothing more than a pawn in the titanic struggle between Google and Microsoft to define and dominate the future of the Internet. Indeed, one former senior executive who knows Yang said at the time he took over as CEO: "This is not a flip for him. He really does want the company back on the right track." But after failing to do that in his first six months at the top, his chance to save the company he co-founded may have passed.

1u29

03-02-2008, 03:27 AM

Đề nghị bác Quang đổi cái title nhé. Ngày nào vào cũng phải trả lời câu hỏi PA giàu rồi à. Mệt quá. Mà giờ đến tiền trả nợ cũng có đâu.

Quang

03-02-2008, 03:35 AM

Đã đổi title theo yêu cầu.

Đính chính: PA vẫn chưa giàu nhưng rất có tiềm năng :D

Longatum

03-02-2008, 12:07 PM

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc2008021_885192.htm

Microsoft and Yahoo!: Happily Ever After?
If the No. 2 and No. 3 Web search titans tie the knotvia Microsoft's multibillion-dollar bid for Yahoothey may only just keep up with No. 1, Google

Having spent north of $10 billion buying and building a Web business, Microsoft (MSFT) finally acknowledged its best efforts have done nothing to stall Internet leader Google (GOOG). On Feb. 1, the software giant took its most audacious step yet, announcing an unsolicited $44.6 billion bid for online rival Yahoo! (YHOO).

The deal would combine the second- and third-largest players in Web search. For Microsoft, it may be something of a Hail Mary pass, a last best attempt to catch Google while it still can. "We have been making good progress," says Microsoft CEO Steven Ballmer. "We're in this game, and we're going to be in this game. But the market leader is getting stronger."

Microsoft offered a 62% premium on a share price that's been sliding for the better part of a year amid five consecutive quarters of profit declines. So the overture will be hard to resist and a rival bid is unlikely. Some analysts said the deal makes strategic and financial sense, especially for Yahoo. The company's stock surged 48% to $28.38.

Still, whether and how quickly a combined Microsoft and Yahoo can mount a meaningful counteroffensive against Google is by no means clear. The cost savings won't be easy to achieve in an economy veering toward recession, the companies will struggle to elegantly combine disparate operations, and Google can be expected to use the time to lengthen its lead in the quickly growing online ad market. Regulators will probably approve the deal, but not before a lengthy review that could involve imposing conditions aimed at ensuring competition.
Microsoft vs. Dominant Competitor

Microsoft believes it can eke out $1 billion a year in cost savings from the combined operations. Anant Sundaram, a professor at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business who has studied mergers and acquisitions, says that may be ambitious. "With the economy looking increasingly wobbly, it is not clear that the revenue synergies will start to happen any time soon," Sundaram says.

Ballmer's keen awareness of that deterioration was evident in a Jan. 31 letter to Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang. Ballmer noted the two had discussed partnerships in late 2006 and early 2007 but that in light of Yahoo's worsening outlook, "the only alternative now is the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! that we are proposing." Yang even rejected merger overtures in February, 2007, Ballmer wrote, hoping a new ad strategy and reorganization would brighten prospects. "A year has gone by, and the competitive situation has not improved," Ballmer wrote.

There's little doubt that Microsoft's interest in Yahoo has grown more fervent as Google's lead has increased. The battle to catch Google grows harder by the day. "I think Microsoft is desperate," says Forrester Research (FORR) analyst Charlene Li.

In Google, Microsoft sees a foe that is very much like the one it was in the early days of personal computing. Back in the 1980s and '90s, Microsoft created what's known as a network effect, whereby a service becomes more valuable as more people use it, with its Windows operating system. The more people used it, the more applications got written for it. That made Windows ever more appealing to computer users, ultimately helping the company garner more than 90% of the operating system business.
Benefit to Advertisers Unclear

In online search and advertising, Google is having a comparable impact. As more people search the Web using Google, its search results become more relevant. That in turn makes advertising through Google all the more appealing to marketers. Google not only sells ads to accompany search results, but it is also becoming an online ad network, serving as the go-between for advertisers and site publishers across the Web. Web publishers increasingly turn to Google's network to sell ad space because the company has the largest collection of advertisers interested in buying.

Microsoft hopes to diminish Google's advantage through the Yahoo acquisition. If Microsoft can smoothly mesh Yahoo into its MSN and Windows Live Internet businesses, it could create a network that approaches Google's size. Google accounted for 56.3% of all Web searches in December, compared with a combined 31.5% for Microsoft and Yahoo, according to Nielsen Online. A combined Microsoft and Yahoo would "bring together critical mass," Ballmer says, and "we'll build off that strength."

It's unclear, though, whether advertisers prefer a single strong rival to Google or two lesser companies fighting for their business. Increasingly, advertisers are looking at smaller sites to target their ads, says Jarvis Coffin, co-founder and CEO of Burst Media (BRST.L), an ad network that helps place ads for such brands as Alamo, Disney (DIS), and ESPN. Getting together won't make Microsoft and Yahoo "more responsive to what the market is looking for and what consumers are looking for online," Coffin says. "It isn't going to make it any more relevant and powerful for advertisers."

What's more, smoothly integrating operations will be difficult for two such large companies with disparate businesses and clashing cultures. Microsoft and Yahoo have been gobbling up online businesses, including online ad firms aQuantive, bought by Microsoft, and Right Media, acquired by Yahoo. "They've really bitten off quite a bit to digest," says Kevin Lee, executive chairman of Didit, a digital marketing firm. "It would be quite an undertaking to combine all those pieces."
Messy Overlap of Businesses

Then, Microsoft will also have to figure out how to meld the Yahoo brand into its own stable of online businesses. "There's no doubt that Yahoo, the brand, lives," Ballmer says. Microsoft has already stumbled trying to operate its two online brandsMSN and Windows Live. Now it will need to add a third brand that's arguably stronger.

And then there's the challenge of figuring out what to do with overlapping Web sites and servicesfrom the companies' automotive buying pages to their portals to their Web-based e-mail programs to their instant messaging services. "It's a mess," says Forrester's Li. "Users are notoriously fickle. One change and they're gone."

And, of course, Google won't be sitting idly as Microsoft addresses those challenges. "They're going to be doing this in the face of a very aggressive competitor," Li says.

A merger between Microsoft and Yahoo made much more sense three years ago, before Microsoft built and bought its online empire, says SearchEngineLand.com editor Danny Sullivan. Now, there's so much overlap that the cost has grown exponentially. And Microsoft will have its hands full figuring out how to put the businesses together. "It probably still makes sense now, but it's a much more challenging process," Sullivan says.

The deal would eclipse Microsoft's largest acquisitionthe August, 2007, purchase of online ad firm aQuantiveby sevenfold. And it would drain the $21.1 billion that Microsoft had in cash as of Dec. 31, since Microsoft plans to pay for half of the deal with cash and the remainder in stock. Microsoft generates more than $1 billion a month in free cash, so its coffers could be restored in short order.

While Microsoft shares dipped on the news, falling 6.6% to $30.45 on Feb. 1, Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Charles Di Bona believes shareholders will come around. Microsoft built assets like its adCenter online advertising platform to compete with Google. But it wasn't able to leverage those offerings with the relative smattering of users it had. "What they are admitting is that they can't monetize those assets without a sizable community," Di Bona says.

Regulatory and Cultural Hurdles

Yahoo executives still might balk at the deal. They have been cool to the idea of selling out because they believe they have the pieces in place, such as a base of 500 million monthly visitors, improved search-advertising technology with the year-old Panama project, and new display-ad targeting technology from last year's acquisitions of Right Media and BlueLithium, to return to some semblance of its former glory. But after a fourth quarter in which it announced a muted outlook for 2008, knocking its stock down 8.5% on Jan. 30, its leverage was fading. In a statement, Yahoo said it would "evaluate this proposal carefully and promptly in the context of Yahoo's strategic plans and pursue the best course of action to maximize long-term value for shareholders."

Assuming Yahoo agrees, Microsoft will still need to get the deal past regulators. The company believes the acquisition will stand up to the regulatory scrutiny. The House Judiciary Committee said on Feb. 1 it will hold a hearing to discuss the proposed merger on Feb. 8. While congressional leaders don't have the power to block planned acquisitions, their attention to such matters can influence the regulatory bodies that do.

In a statement, the antitrust division of the U.S. Justice Dept. said it is "interested in looking at the competitive effects of the proposed transaction." Given the DOJ and Federal Trade Commission's recent history of approving billion-dollar ad network deals, many believe the merger will ultimately be approved.

Maybe the biggest challenge Microsoft will face is cultural. Yahoo's 14,300 employees come largely from the Silicon Valley world that loves to hate Microsoft. "Yahoo has always considered itself a bit of an upstart," says a former Yahoo employee who asked to remain anonymous. "Most Yahoo employees will feel that, A., we lost, and B., there is no way in hell that I am going to work for Microsoft."

Quang

03-02-2008, 11:46 PM

Some insight as to why MS wants to acquire Yahoo for thai.

Microsoft's Ballmer on the Yahoo Bid
The software giant's CEO explains why he's trying to acquire the Internet portal. (Hint: It has a lot to do with Google.)

In recent months, Microsoft (MSFT) executives dismissed the prospect of a tieup with Yahoo (YHOO) even as rumors swirled that a deal was in the works. Microsoft, they explained, was strong enough on its own to compete with Google (GOOG).

As it happens, Microsoft CEO Steven Ballmer had been talking with executives at Yahoo on and off since late 2006 about working together, possibly through a merger. After more than a year of spurned overtures, Redmond (Wash.)-based Microsoft went public on Feb. 1 with an unsolicited $44.6 billion offer. Sunnyvale (Calif.)-based Yahoo said in a statement it would "evaluate this proposal carefully and promptly in the context of Yahoo's strategic plans and pursue the best course of action to maximize long-term value for shareholders."

Ballmer spoke briefly with BusinessWeek Seattle bureau chief Jay Greene after the proposal was announced, saying that Google's increasing dominance of online advertising makes that competition ever more challenging.

Google's Virtuous Cycle
"We have been making good progress" in the online advertising arena, Ballmer says. "We're in this game and we're going to be in this game. But the market leader is getting stronger."

Like Microsoft in the early days of the operating system software wars, Google continues to consolidate its position through what Microsofties like to call a virtuous cycle. Internet companies sell online ads through auctions, and Google has become more effective at selling and placing ads by amassing a larger network of would-be bidders for those ads than Microsoft or Yahoo. That in turn creates a bigger market for advertisers, who flock first to Google. The company's lead has only widened, leaving Microsoft and Yahoo unable to catch up.

That's why scale is so important, Ballmer says. A combined Microsoft and Yahoo would "bring together critical mass" and create an ad network that could come close to rivaling Google, Ballmer says.

Microsoft has a lot of thinking to do as to how it will integrate Yahoo, but Ballmer says consumers would continue to have access to Yahoo tools and features, even as behind-the-scenes functions, such as search, get combined. "There's no doubt that Yahoo, the brand, lives," Ballmer says.

Awaiting Yang's Reply
Ballmer was less specific about what other parts of the Yahoo operations would continue. Clearly, Microsoft likes the idea of increasing the capacity of the search network. "The ability to do more, that's fantastic," Ballmer says.

Microsoft will get added computing and storage heft from Yahoo's server farms around the globe to dish up all that content to Web surfers, Ballmer says. He was vague, though, on where the company would eliminate the "redundant infrastructure" outlined in a Jan. 31 merger letter to Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang.

Ballmer called Yang last night to notify him of the offer. Ballmer gave no hint that the conversation was acrimonious. "He let me have a chance to have a few words," Ballmer says. Now, Ballmer will await Yang's reply.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc2008021_820348.htm

thai

04-02-2008, 07:44 AM

Google Criticizes Microsoft-Yahoo Deal
Sunday February 3, 7:33 pm ET
By Michael Liedtke, AP Business Writer
Google Criticizes Microsoft's Proposed Acquisition of Yahoo!, Calling It 'Troubling'

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Google Inc. raised the specter of Microsoft Corp. using its proposed $42 billion acquisition of Yahoo Inc. to gain illegal control over the Internet, underscoring the online search leader's queasiness about its two biggest rivals teaming up.

The critical remarks, posted online Sunday by Google's top lawyer, represented the Mountain View-based company's first public reaction to Microsoft's unsolicited bid for Yahoo since the offer was announced Friday.

"Microsoft's hostile bid for Yahoo raises troubling questions," David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer, wrote. "This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It's about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation."

Google's opposition isn't a surprise, given that Microsoft views Yahoo as a crucial weapon in its battle to gain ground on Google in the Internet's booming search and advertising markets.

Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft has been trying to depict a Yahoo takeover as a boon for both advertisers and consumers because the two companies together would be able to compete against Google more effectively.

But Google is painting a starkly different picture, asserting that Microsoft will be able to stifle innovation and leverage its dominating Windows operating system to set up personal computers so consumers are automatically steered to online services, such as e-mail and instant messaging, controlled by the world's largest software maker.

To help make its point, Google pointed to the way Microsoft previously used Windows to help extend the reach of its Web browser and other applications -- a strategy that triggered a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit alleging the software maker illegally used its operating system to stifle competition. The dispute ended with a 2002 settlement that required Microsoft to abandon some of its past practices.

"Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC?" Drummond wrote.

Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, said preventing Microsoft from buying Yahoo would undermine competition by allowing Google to become even more dominant than it already is on the Internet

"Microsoft is committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy on the Internet," Smith said. "We believe that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! will advance these goals."

If they get together, Microsoft and Yahoo would have about 16 percent of the worldwide Internet search market -- still far behind Google's 62 percent share, according to comScore Media Metrix. But Microsoft and Yahoo already are far bigger in than Google in e-mail and instant messaging, and conceivably would be in a better position to squash rival services if they combined.

Illustrating the enormous stakes involved in a deal that could reshape the technology and media industries, Google and Microsoft are already debating the pros and cons before Yahoo has responded to the offer.

Yahoo so far has little to say except that its board will carefully examine Microsoft's bid -- a process that "can take quite a bit of time," according to a message posted on the Sunnyvale-based company's Web site.

The review "will include evaluating all of the company's strategic alternatives, including maintaining Yahoo as an independent company," Yahoo said on its Web site.

Most analysts believe Yahoo will have little choice but to sell to Microsoft, with its stock price near a four-year low at the time of the bid and its profits falling since late 2006. When it was first announced, Microsoft's offer was 62 percent above Yahoo's market value -- a premium analysts doubt any other suitor will be able to top.

If Yahoo accepts, antitrust regulators in both the United States and Europe are expected to begin an exhaustive review that some experts think could last a year. Microsoft believes it could get the necessary approvals to take over Yahoo late this year.

If nothing else, Google probably will try to raise enough alarms about the Microsoft-Yahoo deal to delay its approval for as long as possible. By doing so, Google would have more time to draw up plans to counteract the combination.

Google also is borrowing a page from Microsoft's book by urging antitrust regulators to take a hard look at the proposed marriage between its two rivals.

Just days after Google struck a $3.1 billion deal to buy online ad service DoubleClick Inc. last year, Microsoft began lobbying regulators to block the transaction. U.S. regulators blessed Google's DoubleClick acquisition late last year after an eight-month review, but the antitrust inquiry in Europe remains open.

thai

04-02-2008, 11:39 AM

Google Offers to Help Yahoo
Fight Off Microsoft
By KEVIN J. DELANEY and MATTHEW KARNITSCHNIG
February 4, 2008

Google Inc. Chief Executive Eric Schmidt called Yahoo Inc. CEO Jerry Yang to offer his company's help in any effort to thwart Microsoft Corp.'s unsolicited $44.6 billion bid for Yahoo, say people familiar with the matter.

The approach Friday from Google -- Microsoft's chief rival on the Internet -- came as Yahoo is assessing its options for responding to Microsoft's aggressive "bear hug" bid, which has sent aftershocks through the media and technology industries since its announcement three days ago. People familiar with the matter say Yahoo's board, which conferred by telephone Friday, hasn't taken a position so far and no rival bids have emerged yet, though it remains possible some will.
[complete coverage]

It is considered unlikely that Google would itself bid for Yahoo because of regulatory concerns related to their large shares of the search and online advertising markets. But the people familiar with the matter say Google could play a role in attempts by others to outbid Microsoft, or by Yahoo to remain independent. Google could potentially offer money, or guaranteed revenue in return for a Yahoo advertising outsourcing pact, under that scenario, say people familiar with the matter. Even such involvement by Google would likely attract antitrust scrutiny because of concerns that competition between the two Silicon Valley Internet companies could be reduced.

A Google spokesman declined to comment on any interest in Yahoo or contact between the two companies. Google in a blog post yesterday said Microsoft's pursuit of Yahoo "raises troubling questions" about whether it would give Microsoft too much power that could be abused. Microsoft responded by saying the deal would "create a more competitive marketplace by establishing a compelling No. 2 competitor for Internet search and online advertising."

One person familiar with the matter said that a number of technology, media and financial companies have since Friday discussed with Yahoo and its advisers their possible interest in participating in a bid for the company. But so far no serious rival bids have emerged from that, said people familiar with the matter.

AT&T Inc., News Corp. (owner of Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal) and Time Warner Inc. -- all considered candidates to do such a deal -- aren't preparing rival bids for Yahoo, according to people familiar with the matter. It remains possible, though unlikely, that could change, the people say.

Yahoo has said its directors would weigh the Microsoft offer and any alternatives, including keeping Yahoo independent, "and pursue the best course of action to maximize long-term value for shareholders." In a statement on its Web site, the company said "a review process like this is fluid, and it can take quite a bit of time."

Yahoo already had been in negotiations in recent weeks to outsource its Web-search advertising in Europe to Google, say people familiar with the matter. Since last year, investors have called for Yahoo to abandon its own search advertising system, which generates significantly less ad revenue for each consumer search, and use ads from Google in return for a majority share of the revenue.

The discussions with Google, which could potentially be a first step to a broader search-ad outsourcing deal, are expected to continue despite Microsoft's approach, says one of the people familiar with the matter. Another person said the two sides recently hit a disagreement on the revenue split between them.

Citigroup Global Markets analyst Mark Mahaney in a Friday research note estimated that Yahoo could boost its cash flow more than 25% annually by outsourcing all its search advertising to Google. Yahoo executives had considered such a maneuver as part of a strategic review last year, according to people familiar with the matter, but Mr. Yang in October had signaled that it had decided against it.

"We believe having a principal position in both search and display advertising is critical to creating...long-term shareholder value," Mr. Yang told analysts during Yahoo's earnings conference call in October. Yahoo's recent poor performance, including a sinking share price prior to Microsoft's bid and a tepid 2008 revenue outlook announced Tuesday, heightened calls for bolder moves by Mr. Yang, possibly spurring the change of heart toward Google.

Rival bids, including any with Google's support, could be crucial to efforts by Yahoo to at least secure a higher price for the company. Some investors believe Microsoft's offer of $31 a share -- a 62% premium to Yahoo's Thursday 4 p.m. trading on the Nasdaq -- is low, given that Yahoo shares traded at $33.63 as recently as Oct. 26.

In addition, they contend that the premium Microsoft is offering is insufficient because Yahoo holds cash and shares in publicly traded companies, including Yahoo Japan Corp. and Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., with a total market value of more than $12 per Yahoo share.

"We've got a very fair offer in front of the Yahoo shareholders," said Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive, in an interview yesterday.

Microsoft's determination to do the deal, and its deep pocketbook, could well deter rival acquirers. Another factor in whether a bidder emerges could be the prospects for regulatory review of a Microsoft purchase of Yahoo, says one person familiar with the matter.

Google and Microsoft exchanged barbs yesterday related to that issue. Google Senior Vice President David Drummond in a blog post asked whether Microsoft could "now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC."

Mr. Drummond accused Microsoft, which has been targeted by antitrust regulators in the U.S. and Europe for years, of "frequently [seeking] to establish proprietary monopolies -- and then [leveraging] its dominance into new, adjacent markets." (Read the full blog post.)

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith responded in a statement that "The combination of Microsoft and Yahoo will create a more competitive marketplace by establishing a compelling No. 2 competitor for Internet search and online advertising." Mr. Smith added that "the alternative scenarios only lead to less competition on the Internet."

Google identified instant messaging and Web email accounts as areas where a Microsoft-Yahoo combination would have "an overwhelming" market share. In the blog post, Google also questioned whether Microsoft could use its "PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors' email, [instant messaging] and Web-based services."

Microsoft had clearly identified competition from Google as a key reason behind its bid for Yahoo. In a letter to Yahoo's board making the offer on Thursday, Mr. Ballmer said the online advertising market is "increasingly dominated by one player," a reference to Google. "Together, Microsoft and Yahoo can offer competitive choice while better fulfilling the needs of customers and partners," he added. The two have been largely unsuccessful in their intensive efforts to narrow the gap with Google in Web-search market share and to challenge its growing lead in Internet ad sales.

While Google and Yahoo are intense rivals in those areas, they share deep roots in Silicon Valley, whereas Microsoft is a plane ride away in Redmond, Wash. Mr. Yang, a Yahoo cofounder, has been opposed to a sale to Microsoft in the past, and some at Google believe it should try to help, say people familiar with the matter.

Google also has a potential interest in trying to thwart Microsoft, or at least make it pay more for Yahoo, given that the two compete in a growing number of areas ranging from search and online ads to consumer email, word processing and spreadsheet offerings. Google's Mr. Schmidt and some other top executives are veterans of competitive battles with Microsoft, both while at Google, and from previous posts at Sun Microsystems Inc. and Netscape Communications Corp., later purchased by Time Warner's AOL.

--Robert A. Guth, Jessica E. Vascellaro and Merissa Marr contributed to this article.

thai

04-02-2008, 02:58 PM

This is a partial, alphabetized list of websites and services owned by Yahoo! Inc.

* Yahoo! 360°

Yahoo! 360° is a social networking site and blog host. Since its launch on 29 March 2005, it has gained over 2 million members. It was invite-only until 24 June 2005, and is currently available only to users above 13.

* Yahoo! Advertising

A combination of advertising services owned by Yahoo!.

* Yahoo! Answers –

Yahoo! Answers is a service that allows users to ask and answer questions other users post. It competes with Ask MetaFilter. Yahoo! Answers uses a points system whereby points are awarded for asking and answering questions, and deducted for deleting a question or answer, or getting reported.

* Yahoo! Assistant

Yahoo! Assistant is a browser helper object for Internet Explorer. It was developed by Beijing 3721 Technology and originally called 3721 Internet Assistant, but was renamed Yahoo! Assistant after Yahoo! acquired Beijing 3721 Technology. Yahoo! Assistant blocks pop-ups and removes Internet history information. However, it is regarded as spyware or malware by Microsoft AntiSpyware, Panda AntiVirus and similar security programs.

* Yahoo! Briefcase

Yahoo! Briefcase is a free file hosting service.

* Yahoo! Buzz Log –

Yahoo! Buzz Log tracks and analyses trends in searches made through Yahoo! Search, and is updated weekly. It is similar to Google Zeitgeist, which tracks trends in searches made on Google search.

* Yahoo! Developer Network

Yahoo! Developer Network offers resources for software developers which use Yahoo! technologies and Web services.

* Yahoo! Directory

Yahoo! was first formed as a web directory of web sites, organized into a hierarchy of categories and subcategories, which became the Yahoo! Directory. Once a human-compiled directory, Yahoo! Directory now offers two methods of inclusion: Standard, which is free and only available for non-commercial categories, and Express, which charges over US$300 for a quick inclusion in the directory.

* Yahoo! Finance

Yahoo! Finance offers financial information, including stock quotes and stock exchange rates.

* Yahoo! Gallery

Yahoo! Gallery is a directory of applications built by third-party developers using Yahoo! technologies.

* Yahoo! Games

Yahoo! Games allows users to play games, such as chess, billards, checkers and backgammon, against each other. Users can join one of various rooms and find players in these rooms to play with. Most of the games are Java applets, although some require the user to download the game, and some games are single-player. Yahoo! acquired a one person effort called ClassicGames.com in 1997, which became Yahoo! Games. [citation needed]

* Yahoo! Geocities

Yahoo! GeoCities is a web hosting service which offers 15 MB of web space. It was formed in late 1994 as Beverly Hills Internet and allowed users to select a "city" to place their site in, based on the site's content. It was purchased by Yahoo! in 1999. Yahoo! implemented changes which proved unpopular with users, such as changing the Terms of Service, introducing advertisements on GeoCities pages and introducing a premium hosting service.

* Yahoo! Groups – mailing lists,

Yahoo! Groups is a free groups and mailing list service which competes with Google Groups. It was formed when Yahoo! acquired eGroups in August 2000. Groups are sorted in categories similar to the Yahoo! Directory. Yahoo! Groups also offers other features such as a photographic album, file storage and a calendar.

* Yahoo! HotJobs

Yahoo! HotJobs provides tools and advice to job seekers.

* Yahoo! Local

Find local businesses and services and view the results on a map. Refine and sort results by distance, topic, or other factors. Read ratings and reviews. Uses hCalendar and hCard microformats, so that event and contact details can be downloaded directly into calendar and address-book applications.

* Yahoo! Mail web-based email,

Yahoo! acquired Four11 on 8 October 1997, and its webmail service Rocketmail became Yahoo! Mail. Since Google released Gmail on 1 April 2004, Yahoo! Mail has made several improvements to keep ahead of the competition, which also includes MSN Hotmail and AIM Mail. Yahoo! Mail offers 1 GB of storage for free members and 2 GB of storage for Yahoo! Mail Plus subscribers. On 9 July 2004, Yahoo! acquired an e-mail provider named Oddpost and used its technology to create Yahoo! Mail Beta, which uses Ajax to mimic the look and feel of an e-mail cilent.

* Yahoo! Maps

Yahoo! Maps offers driving directions and traffic.

* Yahoo! Messenger

Yahoo! Messenger is an instant messaging service first released on 21 July 1999, which competes with AOL Instant Messenger, MSN Messenger, Google Talk, ICQ and QQ. It offers several unique features, such as IMvironments, custom status messages, and custom avatars. On 13 October 2005, Yahoo! announced that Yahoo! Messenger and MSN Messenger would become interoperable.

* Yahoo! Mobile

Yahoo! Mobile is a mobile website used predominantly in the UK. It offers mobile downloads such as ringtones.

* Yahoo! Movies

Yahoo! Movies offers showtimes, movie trailers, movie information, gossip, and others.

* Yahoo! Music

Yaho! Music offers music videos and internet radio (LAUNCHcast), a for-fee service known as Yahoo! Music Unlimited, and the Yahoo! Music Engine.

* Yahoo! News news updates and top stories at Yahoo! News, including world, national, business, entertainment, sports, weather, technology, and weird news.
* Yahoo! OMG

OMG is a Yahoo! Entertainment online tabloid with most content provided by Access Hollywood and X17.

* Yahoo! Personals –

Yahoo! Personals is an online dating service with both free and paid versions. However, the free service is limited, as only paying users can contact users they meet through Yahoo! Personals and exchange contact information.

* Yahoo! Photos –

Yahoo! Photos is a photo sharing service similar to Flickr, which Yahoo! acquired. Users have unlimited storage, but only JPG photographs are allowed. Users can categorize and upload their photographs to albums they have created. Users can set various access levels for albums, ranging from public to private. Yahoo! Photos is closing in 2007. Photos can be moved with other photo hosts, including Flickr.

* Yahoo! Pipes –

Yahoo Pipes is a free RSS mashup visual editor and hosting service.

* Yahoo! Podcasts –

Yahoo! Podcasts is a beta service that allows users to search for and view podcasts.

* Yahoo! Publisher Network – advertising network,

Yahoo! Publisher Network is an advertising program, which is currently in beta and only accepts US publishers.

* Yahoo! Real Estate –

Yahoo! Real Estate offers real estate-related information and allows users to find rentals, mew houses, real estate agents, mortgages and more.

* Yahoo! Search

Yahoo! Search is a search engine which competes with MSN Search and market leader Google. Yahoo! relied on Google results from 26 June 2000 to 18 February 2004, but returned to using its own technology after acquiring Inktomi and Overture (which owned AlltheWeb and AltaVista). Yahoo! Search uses a crawler named Yahoo! Slurp.

* Yahoo! Search Marketing (Overture)

Yahoo! Search Marketing is based on Overture, which Yahoo! acquired. The service is the pioneer of pay-based inclusion in search engines, and also delivers targeted ads similar to Google AdSense.

* Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo! Shopping is which competes with eBay and Amazon. It allows users to search for, compare and buy products online.

* Yahoo! Small Business

Yahoo! Small Business offers web hosting, domain names and e-commerce services for small businesses.

* Yahoo! Sports

Yahoo! Sports offers sports news, including scores, statistics, and fixtures. It includes a "fantasy team" game.

* Yahoo! Tech

Yahoo! Tech offers reviews and advice for buying and using electronics.

* Yahoo! Telemundo

A Spanish service of Yahoo! affiliated with The Telemundo Network (Owned by NBC Universal)

* Yahoo! Travel

Yahoo! Travel offers travel guides, booking and reservation services.

* Yahoo! TV

Yahoo! TV offers TV listings and scheduled recordings on Tivo box remotely.

* Yahoo! Video – Video sharing site

Yahoo! Video is a video sharing site.

* Yahoo! Widgets

Yahoo! Widgets is a cross-platform desktop widget runtime environment. It used to be a widget program called Konfabulator for Mac OS X until Yahoo! bought it.

* Yahoo! Kids

Yahoo! Kids is a children's version of the Yahoo! portal. It also offers some online safety tips.

* Bix

Bix is a contest website acquired by Yahoo!.

* Kelkoo

Kelkoo is a shopping search engine which operates in 10 European countries. It was acquired by Yahoo! in 2004.

* del.icio.us – popular social bookmarking site,

del.icio.us is a social bookmarking website which allows users to store and share bookmarks online. Yahoo! bought it on 9 December 2005.

* blo.gs – a directory of recently updated weblogs,

blo.gs is a directory of recently updated weblogs, purchased by Yahoo! in June 2005.

* Dialpad

Dialpad is a phone company. Now Yahoo! Voice.

* Flickr

Flickr is a popular photo sharing service which Yahoo! purchased on 29 March 2005.

* upcoming.org

upcoming.org is a social event calendar which Yahoo! acquired on 5 October 2005.

thai

04-02-2008, 03:00 PM

Advertising Panama · Search Marketing · Yahoo! Publisher Network
Developer Networks/Resources Yahoo! Gallery · Yahoo! Developer Network
Search blo.gs · Directory · Flickr · Groups · HotJobs · Kelkoo · LAUNCHcast · Maps · Movies · News · Podcasts · Sports · Video · WWW
Communication & Publishing Flickr · del.icio.us · Answers · Mail · GeoCities · Messenger · Voice · Yahoo! 360° · Yahoo! Mash · Mobile · Go · Photos · Pipes · Upcoming · Jumpcut.com · Rivals.com
Computer Applications Widget Engine · Desktop Search · Messenger · Music Jukebox · The All-Seeing Eye · Games · Yahoo! Toolbar

thai

04-02-2008, 03:02 PM

http://www.microsoft.com/msft/acquisitions/history.mspx#EV

This is a list of companies acquired by Microsoft Corporation sorted by the year of purchase. Entries are: Company title, place, date of acquisition, product and amount of payment.

2007

* Jellyfish.com Middleton, Wisconsin, USA - October 2007 - Online discount shopping site. [1]
* Parlano Chicago, IL, USA - August 2007 - maker of MindAlign - a leading application for enterprise group chat that enables people to carry on topic-specific, multiparty instant messaging discussions that persist over time. Parlanos group chat functionality is expected to be added as a new feature of Microsoft® Office Communications Server and Microsoft Office Communicator [2]
* AdEcn Santa Barbara, CA, USA - July 2007 - Advertising Exchange Platform Company where advertising networks can come together for buying and selling display advertising. [3]
* Stratature, Atlanta, USA - June 2007 - Unified Master Data Management Solution which will become part of Microsoft's Business Intelligence efforts. [4]
* Dundas, Toronto, Canada - June 2007 - Charting controls for SQL Server. People and technology acquisition, but not the whole company. [5]
* Engyro Cincinnati, OH, USA - June 2007 - Interoperability software for Systems Center and Operations Manager. [6]
* aQuantive, Inc, Seattle, USA - May 2007 - Global digital marketing and advertising solutions. Microsoft's largest acquisition in history so far, valued at $6 billion. [7]
* SoftArtisans OfficeWriter Watertown, MA, USA - Reporting authoring in Microsoft Office. People and technology acquisition, but not the whole company. [8]
* ScreenTonic SA, Paris, France - May 2007 [9] - Mobile advertising solutions
* devBiz Business Solutions, Izmir, Turkey - March 2007 [10] - Web interface for Microsoft Team Foundation Server
* Tellme Networks, Inc., California, USA - March 2007 - Voice services, Estm. $800 million [11]
* Medstory, Inc, California, USA - February 2007 [12] - Health care search technology
* Secured Dimensions, Israel - January 2007 - Secured Software Provisioning, $10M[citation needed].

2006

* Colloquis Inc. New York, New York and Sunnyvale, California - October 2006 [13] - Intelligent agents
* DesktopStandard Corporation, Portsmouth, New Hampshire - September 2006 [14] - Group policy-based enterprise desktop management
* Gteko, Raanana, Israel - September 2006 [15] - Networking and support software manufacturer
* Azzyxi, Washington - July 2006 [16]
* Winternals, Austin, Texas - July 2006 - System recover and data protection tools, Sysinternals freeware tools provider [17]
* Softricity, Inc. Boston, Massachusetts, USA - July 2006, Application Virtualization and Application Streaming
* iView Multimedia, London, England - June 2006 - Digital Asset Management software for Macintosh and Windows [18]
* Whale Communications - May 2006 - Firewall-Specialist, $75 million [19]
* DeepMetrix Corporation, Quebec, Canada - May 2006 - Business intelligence solutions
* Massive Inc. - May 2006 - Ingame-Advertising [20]
* AssetMetrix Corporation, Ontario, Canada - April 2006 - Asset-management and Business intelligence
* Lionhead Studios - April 2006 - Games Developer [21]
* ProClarity - April 2006 - Business-Intelligence-Specialist [22]
* Vexcel, Boulder, Colorado - March 2006 - Satellite Imaging [23]
* Apptimum, Inc, Florida, USA - March 2006 - PC Settings/User State Migration Software [24]
* StringBean Target, Maryland, USA - March 2006 - iSCSI SAN solution [25]
* Onfolio, Massacheussets, USA - March 2006 - Internet search and information management provider
* MotionBridge, Paris, France - February 2006 - Search technology for mobile operators & the mobile Internet
* DynaComm i:filter product from FutureSoft, Houston, Texas - February 2006 - Only the web filtering product

Additional acquisitions listed here by product group: http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/05/microsoft_vc_su.html

2005

* GeoTango, Toronto, Canada - December 23, 2005 - 3D mapping and visualization GeoTango
* UMT, New York, USA - December 2005 - Project & portfolio management software
* FolderShare, Austin, Texas - November 4 2005 - Remote Access and Synchronization Software [26]
* MediaStreams, Switzerland - November 3 2005 - VoIP Software [27]
* Certain technologies from Unveil Technologies Inc., October 2005 - For Microsoft Speech Server
* Alacris, Ottawa, Canada - September 2005 - Identity and Access Management Solutions Provider
* Teleo - VoIP [28]
* FrontBridge Inc., California - July 2005 - Email Protection Services [29]
* MessageCast Inc. May 2005 - Automated alerting and messaging services
* Groove Networks Inc., Beverly, Massachusetts - March 10 2005 - Collaboration software , $120 million [30]
* ContentGuard (jointly acquired) - March 2005 - DRM technologies
* FRx Software Corporation - March 2005 - Financial analytic applications
* Sybari Software Inc., East Northport, New York - February 8 2005 - Anti-virus, anti-spam, and content-filtering add-ons - between $163 million and $182 million [31]
* Certain technology from En'tegrate Software LLC - February 2005 - Axapta-related technology

2004

* GIANT Company Software, Inc., New York City, New York - December 16 2004 - Spyware protection, detection and removal tool[32]
* Lookout Software LLC, Palo Alto, California July 19 2004 - E-mail and desktop search - $10 million [33]
* Accounting products from Encore Business Solutions, Inc. - April 2004
* ActiveViews Inc. - April 2004 - Ad hoc reporting product

2003

* Creature House Ltd., Hong Kong November 6 2003 - Natural media drawing software
* RAV Antivirus technology from Romanian company GECAD - June 11 2003 [34]
* PlaceWare Inc., Mountain View, California May 1 2003 - Online Web conferencing service - $200 million [35]
* Connectix, San Mateo, California - February 2003 - Virtual PC and Virtual Server [36]

2002

* Vicinity Corp., Palo Alto, California- October 2002 - Internet-based marketing infrastructure services - $105 million [37]
* Rare Ltd., United Kingdom - September 29 2002 - Video games - $375 million [38]
* Sales Management Systems, USA - May 2002 - Provider of point-of-sale software. [39]
* Navision Software A/S, Vedbaek, Denmark May 21 2002 - Business applications, ERP - $1.45 billion [40]

2001

* iCommunicate, Alexandria, Virginia -- May, 2001 -- Business application for bCentral and later Microsoft CRM [41]
* Ensemble Studios, Dallas, Texas- May 3 2001 Video games [42]
* NCompass Labs Inc., Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada - April 30 2001- Web content-management solutions - $36 million [43]
* Great Plains Software Inc., Fargo, North Dakota - April, 2001 - Business applications, accounting - $1.4 billion [44]

2000

* Digital Anvil Inc., Austin, Texas - December 5 2000 Video games [45]
* Pacific Microsonics Inc., Union City, California - September 18 2000 - Digital music software [46]
* MongoMusic, San Mateo, California - September 13 2000 - Online service with advanced music-searching capabilities- $65 million [47]
* NetGames USA, Overland Park, Kansas - July 12 2000 - Scoring, matchmaking and other enhancements for retail and Web-based games [48]
* Bungie Software Products Corp., Chicago, Illinois - June 19 2000 - Action oriented computer and video games - Approx. $38 million[49]
* Driveoff.Com, Littleton, Colorado - June 12 2000 Online car sales [50]
* Peach Network LLC, Tel Aviv, Israel- February 29 2000 - Enhanced television services for digital television [51]

1999

* Entropic Research Laboratory Inc., Cambridge, UK and Washington DC - October 29 1999 - Speech recognition software - $90 million [52]
* Softway Systems Inc. San Francisco, California - September 17 1999 Customer interoperability solutions [53]
* Visio Corp., Seattle, Washington - September 15 1999 Enterprise-wide business diagramming and technical drawing software - $1.4 billion [54]
* STNC Enterprises, Suffolk, UK - July 21 1999 - Internet access solutions for wireless products [55]
* Sendit AB, Stockholm, Sweden - July 1 1999 - Mobile Internet solutions - $130 million [56]
* OmniBrowse Inc. Bellevue, Washington, - June 15 1999 - Applications for wireless handheld devices - $400 million [57]
* ShadowFactor Software Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada - June 7 1999 Video games - $120 million [58]
* Jump Networks Inc., Ithaca, New York - April 26 1999 - Web-based calendar services [59]
* Access Software Inc. Hialeah, Florida - April 19 1999 - sports simulation software and adventure games [60]
* CompareNet Inc., San Francisco, California - March 4 1999 - Online comparison-shopping service [61]
* Numinous Technology, Inc., Seattle, Washington March 29 1999 - Internet graphics, digital video management and traditional printing applications [62]
* FASA Interactive Technologies, Chicago, Illinois January 7 1999 - Video game division of long-ailing board game and role-playing game vendor
* ZOOMIT Corp, Toronto - July 7 1999 - meta-directory products [63]

1998

* LinkExchange Inc., San Francisco, California - November 5 1998 - advertising network - $250 million [64]
* Valence Research Inc., Beaverton, Oregon - August 25 1998 - Advanced clustering software [65]
* MESA Group Inc., Newton, Massachusetts - April 28 1998 - Messaging and applications migration products [66]
* Firefly Network Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts - April 9 1998 - Personalization software - $40 million [67]
* Flash Communications - February 23 1998 - Messaging client/server product [68]

1997

* Vxtreme Inc., Sunnyvale, California - August 5 1997 - Web Theater technology - $75 million [69]
* LinkAge Software Inc. Toronto, Ontario, Canada - June 30 1997 - Connectivity solutions for e-mail software - $30 million [70]
* Cooper & Peters Inc., Boulder, Colorado - June 13 1997 - Object-oriented user-interface frameworks and applications - $20 million [71]
* Dimension X, San Francisco, California - May 7 1997 - Multimedia technology [72]
* WebTV Networks Inc. Mountain View, California- April 6 1997 - Enhanced TV services using Internet and digital technologies - $425 million [73]
* Intersé Corp., Huntington, West Virginia - March 4 1997 - Software for analyzing user activity on World Wide Web sites [74]
* Hotmail Corp., Sunnyvale, California, - January 3 1997 - Webmail service - $395 million [75]

1996

* NetCarta Corp., Scotts Valley, California - December 10 1996 - Web-site management software - $20 million [76]
* ResNova Software Inc., Huntington Beach, California - November 20 1996 - Web server products [77]
* eShop Inc., San Mateo, California - June 11 1996 - Internet commerce software [78]
* EXOS Inc., Woburn, Massachusetts - April 15 1996 - Force feedback technology for game control devices [79]
* Vermeer Technologies Inc, Cambridge, Massachusetts - January 16 1996 - Visual, standards-based Web publishing tools - $130 million [80]
* Colusa Software Inc., Berkeley, California - March 12 1996 - Object-oriented programming software for the Internet [81]

1995

* Bruce Artwick Organization Ltd., formerly subLOGIC Corporation, Champaign, Illinois, - December 12 1995 - Entertainment software (Flight Simulator), 3-D graphics packages - [82]
* Blue Ribbon Soundworks Ltd, Atlanta, Georgia - October 16 1995 - Interactive music software for games [83]
* RenderMorphics Ltd. - February 23 1995 - RealityLab software for 3d graphics, later rebadged by Microsoft as "Direct3D 3.0" [84]

1994

* One Tree Software. - November 15 1994 - Version Control software, SourceSafe [85]
* Softimage Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada - June 28 1994 - High-end 3-D animation software - sold later to Avid Technology Inc. on June 15 1998 [86]

1992

* Fox Software, Perrysburg, Ohio 1992 Database software - $173 million

1991

* Consumers Software Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada - April 1 1991 - The Network Courier

1987

* Forethought Inc., Sunnyvale, California - August 3 1987 - Presentation and graphics software

1986

* Dynamical Systems Research Ltd, Berkeley, California 1986 - Multitasking operating system - $1.5 million[87]

thai

04-02-2008, 03:06 PM

Investments

Since 1994, Microsoft has invested in about 140 companies world-wide, including:

* @Home Solutions (1999)
* Accel Partners (1998)
* Akamai Technologies Inc. (1999)
* Ameranth (2000)
* American City Business Journals (2001)
* Amicore (2001)
* Apple Computer Inc (1997)
* Ardent Communications Inc. (2000)
* Asia Global Crossing Ltd. (1999)
* AT&T (1999)
* Audible (1999, 2001)
* Avanade (2000)
* Avid Technology (1998)
* Banyan Systems (1999)
* BayStar Capital (2003)
* Best Buy (1999)
* Big Huge Games (2000)
* Borland (1999)
* Black Entertainment Television (BET) (1996)
* Blackboard Inc. (2001)
* Blixer (Italy, 2000)
* BroadBand Office Inc (2000)
* Bungie Studios (2000)
* CareerBuilder (1999)
* Chyron Corporation (2000)
* CMG Plc (UK, 1996)
* CMGI Inc (1998)
* Comcast Corporation (1997)
* Commerce One Inc (2001)
* CommTouch Software Inc (1999)
* CommVault Systems Inc (2000)
* CompUSA Inc (2000)
* Concentric Network Corporation (1999)
* ContentGuard (2000)
* Corel Corporation (Canada, 2000)
* Corio Inc (2000)
* CPA2Biz (2001)
* CSI, Inc (2000)
* Data Return LLC (1999)
* Dialogic (1999)
* Digital Anvil (1997)
* Digital Entertainment Network (DEN) (1999)
* Digital Equipment Corp (1995)
* Digital Island (2000)
* Digital Sound Corporation (1997)
* DiscoverMusic.com (1999)
* DreamWorks SKG (1995)
* DSL.net Inc (1999)
* eFusion (1997)
* eLabor (2000)
* Encompys (2001)
* ENDFORCE Inc (2002)
* Entex (1996)
* Equinix Inc (1999)
* Evoke Software Corp (2000)
* Expedia.com (1999)
* Extreme Logic (2001)
* FairMarket Inc (1999)
* First Data Corporation (1997)
* FutureLink Corporation (2000)
* General Magic (1998)
* GigaMedia Ltd (Taiwan, 1999)
* Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd (Israel, 2000)
* Google (2004)
* Groove Networks Inc (2001)
* Helicon Publishing Group PLC (UK, 1996)
* Hitachi Ltd (Japan, 2000)
* HomeAdvisor Technologies (2000)
* Hutchison Global Crossing Ltd (Hong Kong) (2000)
* i-Deal (2001)
* Immersion Corporation (2003)
* Individual Inc (1995)
* Infolibria Inc (2001)
* Interland Inc (2000)
* Interliant (2000)
* Intertainer (2000)
* ITRAN Communications Ltd (Israel, 2000)
* Jato Communications (2000)
* Keen.com (1999)
* Korea Thrunet Co. Ltd (1999)
* KT Corporation (Korea) (2001)
* Lernout & Hauspie (Belgium, 1997)
* MEASAT Broadcast Network Systems (Malaysia, 2000)
* MediaWave Inc (UK, 2001)
* MyPlant.com (2000)
* Navitel Communications Inc (1997)
* NBC Television Network (1995)
* Net Serviços de Comunicação S.A (Brazil, 1999)
* Nextel Communications Inc (1999)
* NorthPoint Communications Group Inc (1999)
* Novell, Inc (2006)
* NTL Inc (UK, 1999)
* OpenPort (1998)
* Plural Inc (2000)
* Pluto Technologies (Norway, 1998)
* Portugal Telecom, SGPS, S.A. (1999)
* Proginet Corporation (1996)- sold circa 2002
* Qwest Communications (1998)
* Radiant Systems (2000)
* RadioShack Corporation (1999)
* RealNames (2000)
* RealNetworks (1997)
* Reciprocal Inc (1999)
* Reservation Works LLC (1998)
* Rhythms NetConnections Inc (1999)
* Road Runner (1998)
* Rogers Communications (Canada) (1999)
* SCO (Santa Cruz Operation)
* SeaChange International (2000)
* Sendo Holdings PLC (UK, 2001)
* SingleTrac Entertainment Technologies (1996)
* SkyTel (1996)
* SMART LLC (Mexico, 2001)
* SRS Labs (2000)
* Stamps.com Inc (1997)
* Tandem (1996)
* TCI International Inc (1994)
* Telecom New Zealand (2001)
* Telewest Group Inc 22.9% (2000 [1] - 2003[2])
* Grupo Televisa, S.A. — A Mexican television company
* Teligent Inc (1999)
* Telmex (Mexico, 1999)
* ThingWorld.com (1999)
* Ticketmaster (1999)
* TITUS Communications (Japan, 2000)
* TRADOS Incorporated (1997)
* Tut Systems Inc (1998)
* UGC Europe (1999)
* UnitedGlobalCom Inc (1999)
* Usinternetworking Inc (2000)
* USWeb (1999)
* UUNET (1995, Divested)
* Vanstar(1995)
* VDOnet (1996)
* VenturCom (2000)
* VeriSign (1996)
* VerticalNet (2000)
* Wang (1995)
* WebMD (1999)
* Wildfire Communications (1997)
* Wink Communications (1999)
* WirelessKnowledge (1998)
* Yam Digital Technology (Taiwan, 2000)

1u29

10-02-2008, 01:58 AM

Yahoo to Reject Microsoft Bid: Reports

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Finance

In a bid to remain independent, Yahoo plans to reject Microsoft Corp.’s unsolicited takeover offer, according to reports on the Wall Street Journal’s web site.

Quoting sources familiar with the situation, the Journal reports that Yahoo’s board feels the offer of $31 per share “massively undervalues” the company. A letter spelling out the position is expected to be sent Monday. Yahoo also expressed concern that Microsoft’s offer does not account for risks to Yahoo should the deal be overturned by regulators.

The Journal source said the company would be unwilling to consider an offer below $40 per share, which would represent a $12 billion increase over Microsoft’s original $44.6 billion bid. It is unclear if Microsoft would be willing to increase its bid by such a significant amount.

A Yahoo representative said the company would not comment on rumor or speculation and reiterated that the board is evaluating all its strategic options.

The two companies have been in discussions about an alliance or merger for more than a year. Yahoo has long hoped to remain independent, believing it can reverse its fortunes and lift its flagging stock price.

In the summer of 2007, investors believed it was possible as well. Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang replaced Terry Semel as CEO and announced he would unveil a new strategic plan for the company within 100 days.

“There will be no sacred cows and we need to move quickly,” he said. But, after the 100 days – and then some – passed, investor patience wore thin, driving the stock lower.

In late January, the slumping Internet pioneer reported a fifth-consecutive quarter of lower profits and warned of “headwinds” for 2008. Yahoo’s battered stock fell to a four-year low, below the $20 per share level, and Microsoft pounced.

Yahoo shares are currently 51 percent above their pre-bid value. In contrast, Microsoft shares have dropped about 13 percent since the bid was announced, far worse than the Standard & Poor’s 500’s loss of 4 percent.

The second-guessing about Microsoft's unsolicited bid is typical for large acquisitions. Investors are debating whether the benefits outweigh the potential management distractions, sagging employee morale and other headaches that can arise after the deal is done.

Should Microsoft decide to increase its offer, it could still turn up the pressure by drawing upon its $21 billion in cash and lofty market value of $265 billion to raise the bid.

Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said the software company may issue some debt to finance the cash portion of its 50-50 stock and cash offer for Yahoo, instead of drawing down its entire $21 billion cash pile.

"It's likely we're actually going to borrow for the first time," said Liddell in an annual strategy meeting with analysts before Yahoo’s apparent decision. "It's going to be a mixture of the cash we have on hand plus debt.”

Since Microsoft’s initial bid, there has been a significant amount of discussion about antitrust concerns. Google’s chief legal officer David Drummond, writing on the company’s blog, said “Microsoft's hostile bid for Yahoo raises troubling questions. This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It's about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation."

Microsoft made similar comments when Google CEO Eric Schmidt reached out to Yahoo about a potential partnership following the bid.
While some investors held out hope for a white knight bidder, none surfaced after Microsoft’s initial bid. News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch ruled out a bid during a Feb. 4 conference call. Other potential suitors, such as Comcast and AT&T, opted against going against Microsoft’s deep pockets, as well.

Additional reporting by the Associated Press and Reuters

Source: Yahoo Finance http://biz.yahoo.com/special/release020808.html

1u29

10-02-2008, 01:59 AM

Board chưa họp mà WSJ đã có báo cáo, he he.

thquangvn

10-02-2008, 09:59 AM

Tay trong tay ngoài, thật ra phản ứng của board cũng có thể đoán được, vì chuyện này đã được MS đề nghị từ lâu với board, chắc board đã bàn nhiều.

Board từ chối thì có 2 cơ hội ( có giá cao hơn, có khả năng giữ được độc lập, tìm options khác.... i.e. buying more time). Chắc với offer hiện tại MS có đưa ra shareholders cũng chưa chắc win.

thai

12-02-2008, 04:37 PM

Theo dự đoán của T, hiện tại MS nói chung rất khó tăng giá bởi trong nội bộ lãnh đạo muốn tăng nhưng không được sự ủng hộ của các bác lâu nhâu khác. Thành ra, sắp tới MS chỉ nói khỏe thôi, đang có vận động ngầm nhưng chưa ra hành động cụ thể.

Vụ này xem ra có nhiều bất ngờ đây!
(1. Hỏa sơn lữ, 1; 2. Thủy địa tỷ,4)

Longatum

12-02-2008, 06:03 PM

Bác thquangvn sao lại nghĩ là offer như thế này là chưa tốt? Premium thế cơ mà? CNBC hôm trước nó có bảo là ngày xưa hồi thương lượng hậu trường thì MSFT offer $35/share nhưng sau khi Yahoo share đâm đầu xuống thì nó offer thấp hơn... hiện giờ bao nhiêu share của Yahoo nằm trong tay bọn hedge fund sau đợt hốt hàng vừa rồi. Không bán nó kiện cho bỏ mẹ.

Em thì đoán là trong tình hình hiện nay, do chẳng có thằng nào bid vào nên bọn MSFT nó sẽ không tăng giá ngay mà sẽ lobby hậu trường tí, dùng bọn short-term shareholders để tạo áp lực rồi sau đấy sẽ tăng giá một ít chứ không làm go completely hostile (tender offer, proxy contest...)

thai

17-02-2008, 01:05 AM

(Lôi hỏa 1) Xem ra vụ này mỗi lúc một khó! Trong tháng 1 và tháng 2 âm lịch 2008 mà MSFT không deal xong thì vụ này cơ bản là hỏng! Thêm nữa, nếu MSFT tăng giá thì khả năng tăng trong khoảng 2 đến 4 giá.

Longatum

18-02-2008, 04:51 PM

Em đọc bài này trên Dealbook thấy hay hay, gửi các bác đọc chơi.

Video Games and Valuations
February 15, 2008, 2:07 pm

Earlier this week, we covered Yahoos brief, polite rejection of Microsofts bear-hug letter. In making the determination that Microsofts bid substantially undervalues its assets, Yahoo had the benefit of advice from three investment banks.

They likely provided Yahoo with a valuation of the company, one that presumably asserted that Yahoo was worth a lot more. But how reliable is such valuation information? The understanding and pricing of assets is a relatively young discipline that has made revolutionary strides in the past four decades. However, there are still substantial problems with valuation practices that make them a useful tool, but one that should be viewed with a wary eye.

First, there are a number of different valuation methods. Two common and accepted techniques in the context of mergers and acquisitions are discounted cash-flow analysis and a comparable-companies analysis.

A discounted cash-flow analysis calculates the present value of the future free cash flows of a corporation by discounting the cash flows at a specific discount rate.

A comparable-company analysis typically compares the corporation being valued against selected, similarly situated, publicly-traded companies. These companies are compared using price multiples of each corporations stock against selected benchmarks, such as price to future earnings, price to forecasted sales, or price to book value.

Both are prone to subjectivity.

For example, a discounted cash-flow analysis is conducted by discounting back at a chosen discount rate the projected future free cash flows and terminal value of an asset. In performing this analysis, there are three central choices to make, each of which can significantly affect the final valuation. These are the correct forecasted free cash flows to utilize, the appropriate discount rate and the terminal value of the asset. There is substantial leeway to determine each of these, and any change can markedly affect the discounted cash-flow value.

Keep in mind that an increase of one percentage point in the discount rate on a stream of cash flows in the billions of dollars can decrease the discounted cash-flow value by tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

In the case of a comparable-company analysis, the subjectivity arises in choosing the comparable companies.

The highly subjective nature of valuations rears its head most acutely with fairness opinions. A fairness opinion is an opinion typically provided by an investment bank to an acquisition target that the price being paid by an acquirer is fair from a financial perspective. The opinion is often prepared using the valuation techniques above.

But investment banks are usually under pressure from their clients to come to the right answer on fairness. Moreover, investment banks are often conflicted in providing theses opinions, because their compensation is often contingent upon completion of a transaction (and, by extension, their finding of fairness) or they may want to preserve a future stream of business. The subjectivity of valuation and the conflicted nature of banks makes the process vulnerable to manipulation to arrive at fairness.

To illustrate these issues, lets look at the recent disclosure made by Activision, the video game maker, concerning the fairness opinion provided to it by Allen & Company.

Activision is acquiring Vivendi Games based upon a valuation of Vivendi Games at $8.12 billion and a per-share price for Activision common stock of $27.50. Simultaneously with this acquisition, Vivendi is purchasing from Activision 62.9 million newly issued shares of Activision common stock, at $27.50 per share. After the closing of the transaction, the new Activision will commence a cash tender offer for up to about 50 percent of its shares not owned by Vivendi.

If the tender offer is fully subscribed, Vivendi and its subsidiaries are expected to end up owning about 68 percent of Activision.

This is a complicated transaction, made more so by the fact that Activision will remain a public company and Vivendi Games is a private company, making its valuation difficult. Nonetheless, Allen & Company has opined that these transactions are fair, from a financial point of view, to Activision and its shareholders.

Activision shareholders are required to approve this transaction, and the analyses underlying Allen & Companys fairness opinion are disclosed in the proxy statement for this vote.

First, lets look at the disclosure concerning the discounted cash flow performed by Allen & Company on Activision.

Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. Allen & Companys DCF approach was based upon certain financial projections and estimates for Activision derived from Wall Street analyst reports. Allen & Company used a DCF analysis to identify a range of present values for Activisions common stock based upon terminal forward P/E multiples ranging from 21x - 25x and discount rates ranging from 12% - 13%. Allen & Company determined that the per share transaction price [$27.50] exceeded the range of values indicated by its DCF analysis.

There are a couple of interesting things here. First, Allen & Company did not use Activisions internal projections but rather Wall Street estimates. This occurs sometimes; if Allen had used Activisions own projections, they would have been required to be disclosed. Activision may not have wanted this to happen. In addition, sometimes useful internal projections simply dont exist. In such circumstances, the bank will take guidance from their client as to which estimates are the best. But Allen & Company has not disclosed the estimates utilized, so we cannot ascertain whether they are appropriate.

Moreover, in presenting its discounted cash flow, Allen & Company has not disclosed how it derived its discount rate, the number of years of projections used or what its calculated per-share price ranges were. In short, the description of the discounted cash flow is not particularly helpful if you wanted to make your own assessment of Allen & Companys calculation.

A bigger potential problem with this disclosure is revealed when we look at Allen & Companys discounted cash flow disclosure for Blizzard Entertainment, which makes the popular Web-based tame World of Warcraft and is the main component of Vivendi Games:

Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. Allen & Company estimated the after-tax unlevered free cash flow for Blizzard Entertainment beginning with the second quarter of 2008 through year-end 2012. Projections for 2008 and 2009 were obtained from Vivendi Games management, and Allen & Company extrapolated from these projections Blizzards results for 2010 through 2012. Allen & Company discounted the free cash flows back to a present value as of December 1, 2007 using discount rates ranging from 10.5% to 12.5%. In addition, Allen & Company assumed perpetuity growth rates ranging from 4.0% to 6.0% in order to calculate a terminal value. Using the midpoint for the range of discount rates of 11.5% and a range of perpetuity growth rate assumptions from 4.5% to 5.5%, the DCF analysis indicated an enterprise value for Blizzard Entertainment ranging from $7.7 billion to $8.8 billion.

This disclosure here is more fulsome. Unlike in the case of Activision itself, the proxy details more specifically how Allen & Company calculated its terminal value, the number of years of projections used and actually provides a range of values. Not surprisingly, the values are quite close to the actual price being paid by Activision to acquire Vivendi Games, since Blizzard is the primary component of this division.

But there are some odd things here. First, the discount rate here (11.5%) is lower than the range used for Activision (12%-13%). The lower the discount rate, the higher the value of the company. Since these two companies are in the same business, you would expect them to be assigned the same discount rates or at least see a calculation using the same ranges.

The odder thing is the perpetuity growth rate assumption. This assumption is used to calculate the terminal value of the asset. It projects the cash flows out for the terminal value using an estimated future stable growth rate for the company.

This perpetuity growth rate figure cannot exceed the growth rate of the national economy, generally a real figure of 3 percent to 4 percent. Otherwise, the company would eventually become bigger than the whole economy a clear impossibility. And the higher the rate, the more the company will be worth. Based on the numbers above, I estimate that a 3 percent perpetuity growth rate would reduce the discounted cash-flow value by about $1.35 billion.

There may be an explanation for this use of a nominal rather than a real number perhaps but without the comparable numbers for Activision, it is hard to make a determination.

And again, one has to wonder about why Allen & Company used a different method to calculate terminal value for Activision a multiple method rather than a perpetuity growth rate. Why?

The lack of full disclosure and the use of different numbers and methods raises more questions than answers. We asked Allen & Company to comment on the fairness opinion Friday, but they declined.

The Activision opinion gets at a broader problem with fairness opinions and valuation generally. There are no guidelines or standards for valuation, and the banks often do not disclose enough information in proxy statements to make any meaningful comparison or assessment. In other words, the problems above with Allen & Companys disclosure are quite common with proxy-statement disclosure of fairness opinions and valuation. Occasionally, the Securities and Exchange Commission will crack down on this and require greater disclosure, but they havent been successful in the longer term.

Because of all this, many believe that fairness opinions are not worth the paper they are printed on. Marc Wolinsky, a partner at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, seemed to suggest as much when he quipped in October: A fairness opinion you know, the Lucy sitting in the box: Fairness Opinions, 5 cents.

At this point, Id have to agree.

Fairness opinions are effectively required in M&A transactions by the Delaware courts, but the courts would do well to end this requirement so that fairness opinions can be assessed and obtained on their merits. Then this whole game of half-disclosure can stop. In the meantime, rely upon them at your risk.

thai

20-02-2008, 11:53 AM

SAN FRANCISCO -- Microsoft(MSFT - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr) is taking a hard-line approach in its quest to reel in Yahoo!(YHOO - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr).

Microsoft will launch a fight for control of Yahoo!'s board this week, according to a report Tuesday in The New York Times.

Intending to pressure Yahoo! directors to negotiate with the Redmond, Wash., software company, which made a $31-a-share bid Feb. 1, Microsoft will nominate a slate of directors to Yahoo!'s board.

Running a proxy battle is viewed as a far less costly way to buy the Internet company than raising its initial bid of $44.6 billion, which Yahoo! rejected. The value of that half-cash/half-stock bid has fallen since Microsoft's share price dropped 13% to close at $28.31 on Friday. Yahoo! reportedly is holding out for $40 a share.

Shares of Microsoft were up 35 cents, or 1.2%, to $28.66 in recent trading. Yahoo! was down 63 cents, or 2.1%, to $29.03.

In a proxy battle, institutional investors will back Microsoft's move. With most top fund managers holding larger stakes in Microsoft than in Yahoo!, they would be motivated to see the deal close at a lower rather than a higher price.

Yahoo!'s board "should take a hard look" at Microsoft's original offer, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates told the Associated Press Monday.

*********************

(Sơn địa, 4; hỏa địa tấn) Vụ proxy fight này khả năng thành công rất cao đây.

ncmkhoa

20-02-2008, 08:42 PM

Đương nhiên là MS không dễ dàng bỏ qua vụ này vì bây giờ là thời điểm thuận lợi nhất để acquire Yahoo!, lần này không được thì làm sau mà có lần sau nữa. Anh đoán là proxy fighting chưa đủ để MS thành công đâu. Yahoo Board trước khi reject offer đã phải tính đến trường hợp này rồi. MS làm thế này để gây sức ép và tạo dư luận thôi. Chắc chắn là vẫn phải nâng offer lần nữa trừ phi Google phải bỏ tiền vào để bảo vệ Yahoo và đó cũng là ý muốn của MS, chả làm gì mà phải khiến cả 2 anh lao đao.

Thái: nếu em muốn learning thì phải bày tỏ ý kiến của em chứ post cả bài viết lên chả ăn thua gì đâu. Ý kiến có thể đúng có thể sai, nhưng ít nhất mình cũng sẽ học hỏi được ít nhiều. Cứ sợ sai không nói thì chả bao giờ nói đúng. Em nghĩ là deal này có thành công không? và mất bao lâu để close it?

Quang

20-02-2008, 10:02 PM

Bác Khoa dựa vào cái gì để đoán proxy fight chưa đủ để thành công?

Có bác nào biết về cái poison pills các công ty dùng để chống lại proxy fight không nhỉ?

Đương nhiên là MS không dễ dàng bỏ qua vụ này vì bây giờ là thời điểm thuận lợi nhất để acquire Yahoo!, lần này không được thì làm sau mà có lần sau nữa. Anh đoán là proxy fighting chưa đủ để MS thành công đâu. Yahoo Board trước khi reject offer đã phải tính đến trường hợp này rồi. MS làm thế này để gây sức ép và tạo dư luận thôi. Chắc chắn là vẫn phải nâng offer lần nữa trừ phi Google phải bỏ tiền vào để bảo vệ Yahoo và đó cũng là ý muốn của MS, chả làm gì mà phải khiến cả 2 anh lao đao.

Thái: nếu em muốn learning thì phải bày tỏ ý kiến của em chứ post cả bài viết lên chả ăn thua gì đâu. Ý kiến có thể đúng có thể sai, nhưng ít nhất mình cũng sẽ học hỏi được ít nhiều. Cứ sợ sai không nói thì chả bao giờ nói đúng. Em nghĩ là deal này có thành công không? và mất bao lâu để close it?

Quang

20-02-2008, 10:06 PM

Poison Pills:

A strategy used by corporations to discourage a hostile takeover by another company. The target company attempts to make its stock less attractive to the acquirer. There are two types of poison pills:

1. A "flip-in" allows existing shareholders (except the acquirer) to buy more shares at a discount.

2. The "flip-over" allows stockholders to buy the acquirer's shares at a discounted price after the merger.

1. By purchasing more shares cheaply (flip-in), investors get instant profits and, more importantly, they dilute the shares held by the competitors. As a result, the competitor's takeover attempt is made more difficult and expensive.

2. An example of a flip-over is when shareholders have the right to purchase stock of the acquirer on a 2-for-1 basis in any subsequent merger.

This is similar to the macaroni defense, except it uses equity rather than bonds.

1u29

20-02-2008, 11:02 PM

Các bác cho em góp ý kiến còm của người ngoài cuộc nhé, chứ không phải là người tại Yahoo. Em cũng đọc báo đọc chí vào khe khẽ tâm sự với các bác là em nghĩ thế này:
- proxy fighting chỉ là cách cuối cùng của Msft thôi, giờ các bác ấy cứ hét lên thế để dọa nhau đã. Vì sao, vì mua xong thì còn phải tính làm gì với nó chứ có phải cứ mua cho bằng được đâu. Mà hostile takeover thì là cách để ghét nhau rồi. Trừ phi Msft đếch thèm quan tâm thằng nào đi thằng nào ở ở Yahoo, chúng mày có đi hết thì ông cũng không cần.
- Với 1 công ty như Yahoo where workers are purely knowledgeable (they don't manufacture a thing), thì people là assets. Không thể phủ nhận Yahoo có 1 huge brand và broad audience, nhưng riêng trong trường hợp này thì không thể bỏ qua its people. Thế mà giờ chưa mua đã định làm theo cách đuổi nhân viên thế thì mua về xong ngắm với nhau à. Có nhiều trường hợp công ty mua 1 công ty khác chỉ vì its products or its brand, trong trường hợp này không chỉ thế.
- Yahoo employees are not stuck in Silicon Valley. Many other companies are wide open for Yahoo employees. Khác với vụ merger của HP và Compaq khi mà emlopyees của Compaq có limited choice, Yahoo employees can find a job anywhere in Silicon Valley. Thời buổi người khôn kẻ khó thế này mà lại mất công đi recruit 1 đống thằng về thì mệt quá.
Đấy em vài lời qua đọc báo đọc chí thôi. Ở trường em đã already started 1 group cho employers tìm Yahoo employees, và khá nhiều công ty đã lên tiếng họ sẽ nhận Yahoo employees.

Quang

21-02-2008, 12:21 AM

Nàng ơi. Điều nàng nghĩ đến cũng may là bác Steve Ballmer cũng nghĩ đến rồi. Hôm nọ anh có đọc một bài, giờ quên mất ở đâu rồi, trong đó bác Steve addressed this issue.

1. MS đã gửi thông điệp đến Yahoo employee là we value you, not just the brand name Yahoo.
2. MS sẽ offer generous retention package
3. Yahoo đứng độc lập thì tốt hơn hay là merge với MS thì tốt hơn? Cho đến nay thì industry nghiêng về phía merger chủ yếu vì không thấy ánh sáng từ phía management của Yahoo (bác Yang vẫn chưa là được gì significant cả mặc dù promise khá nhiều). Như vậy kiểu gì cũng merge. Vấn đề là merge với giá nào. Merge với giá cao thì chỉ lợi các bác top executive như bác Yang. Còn employee và institutional shareholders thì thiệt. Thế nên cuối cùng quay lại thì hostile takeover là nhắm vào Yahoo Board thôi, nếu không nói là có thể còn làm lợi cho Yahoo employee. Còn những bác employee đã take it personal là không muốn làm cho MS rồi thì kiểu gì cũng leave, hostile or non hostile take over doesn't matter.

Các bác cho em góp ý kiến còm của người ngoài cuộc nhé, chứ không phải là người tại Yahoo. Em cũng đọc báo đọc chí vào khe khẽ tâm sự với các bác là em nghĩ thế này:
- proxy fighting chỉ là cách cuối cùng của Msft thôi, giờ các bác ấy cứ hét lên thế để dọa nhau đã. Vì sao, vì mua xong thì còn phải tính làm gì với nó chứ có phải cứ mua cho bằng được đâu. Mà hostile takeover thì là cách để ghét nhau rồi. Trừ phi Msft đếch thèm quan tâm thằng nào đi thằng nào ở ở Yahoo, chúng mày có đi hết thì ông cũng không cần.
- Với 1 công ty như Yahoo where workers are purely knowledgeable (they don't manufacture a thing), thì people là assets. Không thể phủ nhận Yahoo có 1 huge brand và broad audience, nhưng riêng trong trường hợp này thì không thể bỏ qua its people. Thế mà giờ chưa mua đã định làm theo cách đuổi nhân viên thế thì mua về xong ngắm với nhau à. Có nhiều trường hợp công ty mua 1 công ty khác chỉ vì its products or its brand, trong trường hợp này không chỉ thế.
- Yahoo employees are not stuck in Silicon Valley. Many other companies are wide open for Yahoo employees. Khác với vụ merger của HP và Compaq khi mà emlopyees của Compaq có limited choice, Yahoo employees can find a job anywhere in Silicon Valley. Thời buổi người khôn kẻ khó thế này mà lại mất công đi recruit 1 đống thằng về thì mệt quá.
Đấy em vài lời qua đọc báo đọc chí thôi. Ở trường em đã already started 1 group cho employers tìm Yahoo employees, và khá nhiều công ty đã lên tiếng họ sẽ nhận Yahoo employees.

thai

21-02-2008, 01:00 AM

ncmkhoa

21-02-2008, 01:16 AM

...3. Yahoo đứng độc lập thì tốt hơn hay là merge với MS thì tốt hơn? Cho đến nay thì industry nghiêng về phía merger chủ yếu vì không thấy ánh sáng từ phía management của Yahoo (bác Yang vẫn chưa là được gì significant cả mặc dù promise khá nhiều). Như vậy kiểu gì cũng merge. Vấn đề là merge với giá nào. Merge với giá cao thì chỉ lợi các bác top executive như bác Yang. Còn employee và institutional shareholders thì thiệt. Thế nên cuối cùng quay lại thì hostile takeover là nhắm vào Yahoo Board thôi, nếu không nói là có thể còn làm lợi cho Yahoo employee. Còn những bác employee đã take it personal là không muốn làm cho MS rồi thì kiểu gì cũng leave, hostile or non hostile take over doesn't matter.

Chỉ với câu đó của anh là biết proxy fight khó mà thành công.

Thái: you have to give your explanation. Em không thể nói là em đoán là thành công vì bói toán bảo thế.

thai

21-02-2008, 04:34 AM

Chỉ với câu đó của anh là biết proxy fight khó mà thành công.

Thái: you have to give your explanation. Em không thể nói là em đoán là thành công vì bói toán bảo thế.

Bài trích mà em đưa ra đã nêu rõ nguyên do: do institutional investors nắm cổ phiếu của MSFT còn nhiều hơn là nắm Yahoo nên họ ủng hộ proxy fight.

Em dùng Mai hoa để kiểm chứng lại thông tin đã có. Có gì đáng bận tâm?

Longatum

21-02-2008, 07:59 AM

Bác Thái nói thế vẫn cứ thiếu thiếu sao ấy nhỉ. Institutional investors thì sao? Bao giờ institutions chả là bọn cầm nhiều share?

Quang

21-02-2008, 09:28 AM

Ý thai đơn giản thế này thôi.

Institutional investors nắm share của cả Y! lẫn MS. Tuy nhiên đa số nắm share của MS nhiều hơn của Y!. Do đó nếu MS lợi -> lợi nhiều hơn, nếu MS thiệt -> thiệt nhiều hơn. Mà proxy fight là cách có lợi hơn cho MS (về mặt tài chính), thế nên họ ủng hộ proxy fight.

Bác Thái nói thế vẫn cứ thiếu thiếu sao ấy nhỉ. Institutional investors thì sao? Bao giờ institutions chả là bọn cầm nhiều share?

Longatum

21-02-2008, 09:42 AM

Quang

21-02-2008, 09:54 AM

1. Có. Nguồn Long tự check nhé.
2. Là approach rẻ nhất. Còn tốt nhất hay không thì chưa biết.

Em vẫn không hiểu. Các bác nói cứ thế nào ý nhỉ :D

1. Institutions mà cầm Yahoo với bọn cầm MSFT có phải là 1 bọn không?

2. Làm sao các bác cho là institutions nghĩ là proxy fight là approach tốt nhất cho vụ này của MSFT? Ai làm gì thì cũng có reasoning riêng của mình, proxy fight, theo như em hiểu, không phải là cách làm hay nhất cho vụ này, theo ý của nhiều người.

Quang

21-02-2008, 10:07 AM

1u29

21-02-2008, 12:51 PM

Hứng chí lên ngồi suy nghĩ về cái point PA nói là các bác talent của Y! sẽ có thể ra đi nếu MS takeover.

Số lượng employee của Y! là:
- U.S. employees 7,915
- Employees outside U.S. 4,601

Cứ $1 MS raise cái bid thì MS tốn thêm $1.4 Bln. Nếu MS thay vì bỏ tiền để tăng offer thì cứ làm proxy fight. Tiền chi phí để thực hiện proxy fight chỉ vài chục triệu USD quá nhỏ coi như không tính.

MS thực hiện proxy fight sau đó lấy tiền chênh lệch giữa chi phí cho proxy fight và chi phí raise bid chia cho employee thì trung bình một người sẽ được $111,857. Đấy là số trung bình, còn tất nhiên key talents sẽ được nhiều gấp mấy lần số ấy. Lại đỡ phải trả bác Yang vì lúc ấy thể nào bác cũng đã giận bỏ đi rồi.

Như vậy $100K bonus cho PA cho năm đầu thì PA có bỏ Y! đi không? MS chỉ cần giữ lại 1 năm thôi. Sau đó thì người nào thích công ty mới sẽ ở lại, người nào không thích sẽ ra đi. Lúc ấy thì không còn phụ thuộc take over bằng cách nào nữa.

Thậm chí nếu $100K bonus không đủ thì MS cũng có thể dễ dàng nâng lên $200K (về mặt tài chính, vì lúc này có khi nhân viên MS bỏ đi vì giận MS cho bọn Y! nhiều tiền quá :D). Lúc đấy cũng chỉ bằng MS raise bid thêm $2 nữa.

Trong khi đó, bác Yang và đồng bọn đang muốn MS trả khoảng $40/share tức là thêm $9 tương đương với $12.6 Bln nữa. Số tiền này nếu có thì bác ấy sẽ benefit nhiều nhất :D. Nếu mình là Y! employee thì mình ủng hộ proxy fight thôi.

Nghe ổn thế nhở, thế thì làm quả hostile take over đi chứ.:p:p
Cái argument của bác bị 1 lỗi nghiêm trọng là bác đang giả sử là Msft sẽ trả tiền 1 đống thế, và mọi nhân viên của Yahoo sẽ "tối mắt" vì tiền mà ở lại. Điều này không chính xác ở Silicon Valley khi mà các đồng chí đã talented thì bỏ đi công ty khác signing bonus 25k là chuyện thường. Thêm nữa ở Silicon Valley vấn đề corporate culture cực kỳ quan trọng. Thế nên nhiều key staff bác làm không khéo họ bỏ đi cả, vậy thì lúc đó Yahoo cũng chả worth nổi cái tiền mà giờ Msft offer (cổ phiếu của Msft hiện nay là trên 28 đô), mà khéo lúc đó cổ phiếu của Msft tụt thẳng 10 đô vì investors nó đếch tin vào cái hiệu quả merger nữa. Thế lúc đấy thì chưa biết thằng nào thiệt hơn bác ạ.
Trong vụ này Yahoo employees không còn quan tâm đến tiền nhiều nữa, thứ nhất là họ vốn được các công ty ở đây chào đón, thứ 2 là bác Jerry mới ra cái severance benefit package, theo đó thì đồng chí nào lấy Yahoo mà định layoff thì ăn đủ. Còn Yahoo employees có ít nhất 4 tháng cho đến cao nhất là 24 tháng cover lương. Thế nên bác nên nghĩ đến chuyện khác chứ không phải chuyện tiền thiệt hại thế nào bác ạ.

1u29

21-02-2008, 12:54 PM

Em vẫn không hiểu. Các bác nói cứ thế nào ý nhỉ :D

1. Institutions mà cầm Yahoo với bọn cầm MSFT có phải là 1 bọn không?

2. Làm sao các bác cho là institutions nghĩ là proxy fight là approach tốt nhất cho vụ này của MSFT? Ai làm gì thì cũng có reasoning riêng của mình, proxy fight, theo như em hiểu, không phải là cách làm hay nhất cho vụ này, theo ý của nhiều người.

1. 4 trong số 5 instutionals lớn nhất của Yahoo và Microsoft là 1

2. Chỉ có các cổ đông lau nhau thì yêu cầu proxy fight thôi. Hiện tại investor nắm cổ phiếu lớn nhất của cả Yahoo và Msft chưa thấy phát biểu gì cả.

Longatum

21-02-2008, 02:01 PM

Chính là vì cái mà chị PA nói cho nên nhiều người cho là proxy fight không phải là approach tốt nhất cho vụ này. Rẻ nhất nếu tính về giá trị tiền bạc ngay tức thời nhưng nếu vì vậy mà alienate Yahoo's current employees thì hậu quả nói chung là khó mà lường hết được.

Cái vấn đề của các bác (Thái + Quang) khi nói về institutional investors ở đây là thế này: có 2 loại ii.

Loại 1 là short-term holders vdụ như hedge funds hoặc các prop trading desks. Hội này, nếu là hội cầm nhiều Yahoo để chờ arbitrage thì tất nhiên sẽ muốn cái deal này thành công (ideally là càng sớm càng tốt) - proxy fight đối với hội này là 1 option nhưng tất nhiên nó vẫn thích MSFT tăng giá thêm để mua.

Loại 2 là long-term holders: kiểu như pension/mutual funds. Hội này thì cầm lâu dài và đánh giá giá trị 1 khoản đầu tư dựa theo chiến lược. Với hội này, cho dù họ là Yahoo hay MSFT shareholders thì làm proxy fight hay up the friendly bid tốt hơn là chưa rõ. Mỗi người sẽ có một đánh giá riêng... nếu nói đơn giản là vì 1 thằng nó cầm nhiều cả Yahoo với MSFT nên nó muốn cái deal này xong và càng rẻ càng tốt là logically flawed. Vì sao:

Một investor nắm cả 2 cty chỉ được trong trường hợp MSFT mua Yahoo thành công khi giá cổ phiếu của cả 2 cty này đều tăng post-merger. Nếu MSFT mua Yahoo ở giá cao mà để cho share của MSFT sụt giá sau đó thì nói chung là cái gain từ Yahoo share sẽ bị diluted và minimized nếu không nói là eliminated. Nếu MSFT làm proxy fight, mua được Yahoo ở giá rẻ rồi sau đó MSFT sụt giá thì chúng nó lại càng thiệt....

All in all thì bảo là vì institutional investors nắm cả 2 cty mà chúng nó muốn cái merger này thành công thông qua proxy fight là thiếu cơ sở. Bởi vì bản thân họ có tin tưởng vào hiệu quả của cái merger này không cũng còn chưa rõ

verbena

23-02-2008, 12:49 PM

Em vẫn không hiểu. Các bác nói cứ thế nào ý nhỉ :D

1. Institutions mà cầm Yahoo với bọn cầm MSFT có phải là 1 bọn không?

Trả lời cho câu hỏi của anh Long ạ

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/2/10/largest_yhoo_shareholders.png

Source: http://seekingalpha.com/article/63975-lots-of-overlap-between-top-yahoo-microsoft-shareholders

ncmkhoa

24-02-2008, 06:08 AM

Source của em Thảo là từ đâu thể?

thai

24-02-2008, 02:50 PM

Lý giải của người trong cuộc sẽ phần nào thỏa mãn một số băn khoăn của chúng ta về khả năng MSFT manage thành công vụ sáp nhập này dưới góc độ quản lý, văn hóa, và business.

Email from Kevin Johnson to Microsoft Employees
February 22, 2008 5:07 p.m.

The following is text of an email sent by Kevin Johnson, head of Microsoft's Platforms & Services Division, updating employees on the Feb. 1 proposal to combine with Yahoo.

From: Kevin Johnson
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:48 PM
To: Platforms & Services Division
Subject: Update on Yahoo! Proposal

I want to provide all employees in the Platforms & Services Division with an update on our February 1 proposal to combine with Yahoo!, and answer a few common questions that have been asked.

As we've discussed, the online advertising industry is growing rapidly and is expected to be an $80B industry by 2010. We believe our proposal is a compelling one and that the combination of Yahoo! and Microsoft creates a more credible alternative to an increasingly dominant player in the advertising industry. We are committed to building great services for consumers while delivering great value to advertisers and publishers. We have been very thoughtful about this combination, and are excited about what our two companies can do together to collectively target growth opportunities in online services, search, and advertising.

It is important to remember that, while we have made what we believe to be a very compelling proposal for Yahoo! shareholders and employees, we do not have an agreement in place with Yahoo! at this time. While Yahoo!'s Board and management consider our proposal, let me share a perspective on the process going forward:

While Yahoo! has issued a press release rejecting our proposal, we continue to believe we have a full and fair proposal on the table. We look forward to a constructive dialogue with Yahoo!'s Board, management, shareholders, and employees on the value of this combination and its strategic and financial merits.

If and when Yahoo! agrees to proceed with the proposed transaction, we will go through the process to receive regulatory approval, and expect that this transaction will close in the 2nd half of calendar year 2008. Until this proposal is accepted and receives regulatory approval, we must continue to operate our business as we do today and compete in this rapidly changing online services and advertising marketplace.

It is important to note that once Yahoo! and Microsoft agree on a transaction, we can begin the integration planning process in parallel with the regulatory review. We can create the integration plan but we cannot begin to implement it until we have formal regulatory approval and have closed the transaction. Because the integration process will be critical to our success as a combined company, we are taking this very seriously. We have recent and successful - experience in this arena, including our integration planning with aQuantive and Tellme, both of which led to successful combinations of talent, assets, and infrastructure.

Our proposal includes a thoughtful integration planning process for a Microsoft-Yahoo! combination. It is important to me that this process includes leaders from Yahoo! and Microsoft and is done in a way that enables us, together, to make decisions in a collaborative way. Importantly, this will be an inclusive process with Yahoo! employees as they are a key part of our success as a combined company.

With the above process and timeline in mind, I want our teams to stay focused on existing commitments and goals. We should continue to make progress against our plans for online services.

There has been a lot written about various aspects of our proposal. And there are compelling opportunities and tough challenges ahead. While it's hard to predict the future, I want to convey my sense of where things are by responding to a set of common questions that have come up from employees:

Q: What are the benefits of a Microsoft-Yahoo! combination?

A: First, the industry needs a more compelling alternative in search and online advertising. I have personally met with top executives of the major media companies, and I know there is a desire for more competition in search and online advertising. Without this, there's less innovation, less competition, and less value being generated for consumers, advertisers, and publishers. Together, Microsoft and Yahoo! would have an opportunity to change and evolve the experiences and value we deliver to all of these groups.

For consumers and developers, our expanded R&D capacity would allow us to drive innovation in emerging user experiences in areas such as search, video, mobile, commerce, and social media. Already, our collaborative work with Yahoo! on interoperability between our instant messaging services has benefited consumers and made it easier for them to stay connected with friends and family.

For advertisers and publishers, scale economics would allow us to deliver more value to this customer base. By combining search and non-search advertising inventory on a single ad platform, yield is also improved. The other benefits and opportunities may include improving return on investment and decreasing the cost and complexity of running multiple campaigns. We also believe in an extensible ad platform. From my discussions with top advertising agency executives, they share this belief and want to play a key role in extending this ad platform for incremental value to advertisers.

For shareholders, a successful combination would provide superior value and an opportunity to participate in the upside of the combined company. There are expected operating efficiencies driven by synergies from eliminating redundant operating expenses, redundant capital expenses, and ensuring appropriate headcount allocation by function.

The focus of our combined company will be to build great experiences and platforms for our joint consumers, advertisers, and publishers. I am confident in the collective engineering & business talent we have at Microsoft and Yahoo! to drive towards this vision.

Q: What impact would this combination have on staffing? Would there be any reductions?

A: People are the single most important asset in this combination. We want the very best talent at the combined company, and we will demonstrate this to Yahoo! and Microsoft employees at each step of the deal. There's no question we will dedicate significant rewards and compensation to Yahoo! and Microsoft employees.

While some overlap is expected in any combination of this size, we should remember that Microsoft is a growth company that has hired over 20,000 people since 2005, and we would look to place talented employees throughout the company as a whole. We have no shortage of business and technical opportunities, and we need great people to focus on them.

Q: How should we view the two cultures at Microsoft and Yahoo!? How would we bring the two cultures together?

A: Both companies share a passion for great engineering, creativity, and development of services and technologies that truly can change the world. Respect for both the creative and analytical aspects of advertising is core to both companies, along with recognition that advertising is an industry that represents opportunity and growth. We would have an opportunity to bring together the best of both companies Microsoft's culture of innovation, and long-term commitment to tough R&D problems, with Yahoo!'s blend of Web-centric DNA and innovative engineering, 21st century media expertise, and advertising talent. Some aspects of the two cultures will naturally merge quickly and some will remain unique in the near-term and merge more slowly over time. At Microsoft today, we have a corporate culture, but individual teams develop, nurture, and retain a culture of their own as well. The culture of the combined entity will be shaped by individuals and teams from both Yahoo! and Microsoft.

Q: How would we address the multiple brands and technologies within Live, MSN, and Yahoo!? Which brand would we keep?

A: Both Microsoft and Yahoo! have great brands and technologies. Yahoo! has a very strong consumer brand and we are committed to build on the Yahoo! brand as a major part of the combined products and services we deliver to customers. The Yahoo! brand is one of the reasons the combination of the two companies would create so much value. It is premature to say which aspects of the brands and technologies we would use in our combined offerings. As part of the integration planning effort, it is important that we enable a joint team of leaders from Microsoft and Yahoo! to make thoughtful decisions about brands and technologies. How we integrate Microsoft and Yahoo!'s brands, products, and services are the types of decisions that would be made during this integration planning processby leaders from both companiesand implemented over time after the transaction closes.

Q: If we move forward with a combination, what's our plan for addressing Yahoo!'s technology infrastructure, since it's non-Windows based?

A: Services we've acquired over the years have been based on both Windows and open source technologies. Although Windows is our strategic platform and in some cases the teams ultimately migrated their products to Windows for a variety of reasons, in other cases we have prioritized continuity and have used open interoperability mechanisms to achieve effective systems integration. Yahoo! has made significant investments in both its skills and technologies, so we would work closely with Yahoo! engineers to make pragmatic platform and integration methodology decisions as appropriate, prioritizing above all how those decisions would impact customers.

Q: Would we maintain locations in both Silicon Valley and Redmond?

A: Absolutely. Silicon Valley is one of Microsoft's largest presences outside our Redmond headquarters, with nearly 1,800 employees in a variety of key engineering and business roles. Yahoo!'s campus houses over 10,000 employees and plays a key part in their innovative culture. In bringing the companies together, we would be committed to maintaining Yahoo!'s significant presence in Silicon Valley, and we anticipate that there would be exciting opportunities for a combined Microsoft and Yahoo! talent base in Silicon Valley, Redmond, and many other cities worldwide.

Q: How should we interact with Yahoo! employees?

A: It's important that Microsoft employees not speculate with Yahoo! employees about the proposal or about what a deal would mean for the combined company. Prior to close of the transaction, no Microsoft employee should reach out to Yahoo! employees for the purpose of integration planning unless specifically instructed to do so by the integration team and its LCA advisors.

Prior to the close, we must continue to compete with Yahoo! as before. At the same time, there are areas where we partner with Yahoo!. If you have questions about what is permissible, please contact your team's LCA leader.

Q: How does this impact our relationship with customers and partners?

A: Our commitment to customers and partners remains paramount. While this proposed combination is exciting, Microsoft and Yahoo! remain separate companies and will continue to compete in the marketplace.

Q: What can I expect going forward?

A: It's business as usual and, as such, your commitments remain unchanged. Please stay focused on your key priorities, whether it's a technical product roadmap, serving our advertiser or publisher customers, or connecting with users of our services. It's important that we stay focused on our business commitments and let the process for the transaction take its course.

At the appropriate times, we will update you further on progress and news regarding this proposed transaction.

Thanks again for your continued focus on our business and customers during this period.

Regards,

Kevin Johnson, President
Microsoft Platforms & Services Division

1u29

25-02-2008, 12:38 PM

Hay nhở, mình cứ tưởng mấy cái thư này thì chỉ có employees được biết thôi chứ?

ncmkhoa

25-02-2008, 08:37 PM

Hay nhở, mình cứ tưởng mấy cái thư này thì chỉ có employees được biết thôi chứ?

Mass email thì đến tay báo chí ngay thôi. Ngay cả cái mail của bác Howard (Starbuck) gửi riêng cho Board of Directors mà bọn WSJ còn có nữa là.

thanhnc1316

04-03-2008, 05:18 PM

Các bác đọc ý kiến của thầy em nhé

By Jessica Hall Reuters

PHILADELPHIA: Microsoft's $44.6 billion offer to buy the Internet company Yahoo is not an aberration but part of a broader trend in which suitors make bold unsolicited bids during a time of weak stock prices and tight credit markets.

So far this year, more than 25 percent of all announced bids in the United States have been unsolicited or hostile offers, according to the research company FactSet MergerMetrics. That figure is up from 16 percent in the same period a year ago.

"It's not a random phenomenon," said Allen Michel, professor of finance and economics at Boston University's School of Management. "It's a reflection of what's happening in the market."

Although the Dow Jones industrial average has slumped 10 percent since its high in October 2007, companies have yet to acclimate to the new lower valuations that their stocks command, bankers and analysts said.

"A company is not going to be interested in being bought for a premium that just returns their value to what it was trading at six months ago," Michel said.
Today in Business with Reuters
Investors' flight to oil pushes price to record
Buffett says U.S. is in recession, but stocks still are 'not cheap'
Asian shares slide on concerns over demand and commodity prices
Click here...

"Companies and management might like to believe they have a higher value than they do. So they aren't interested in the offers they're getting, so friendly negotiations aren't happening," Michel said.

Earlier this month, Japan's Sumitomo Heavy Industries announced a $532 million unsolicited offer to buy Axcelis Technologies, which had rebuffed requests for merger talks for about 18 months.

Axcelis rejected the offer, saying it undervalued the company and failed to acknowledge Axcelis's "prospects for reclaiming its market share and creating value for its shareholders."

"There's a disconnect between what companies think they are worth and what they are actually worth now," said the head of global banking at a U.S. investment bank, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity involved with potential merger deals. "It often takes about six months for companies to accept the new reality and new valuation levels, because they are still thinking about the golden days."

The tight credit markets and inability to raise cheap money to finance acquisitions also has reduced the number of potential suitors who can bid for companies. As private equity firms find it more difficult to fund large deals, there is less competition for potential acquirers.

Unsolicited bids can eventually turn into friendly, negotiated transactions.

For example, Oracle, the software maker, won a three-month-long campaign in January to buy BEA Systems by raising its bid for the company by 14 percent to $8.5 billion.

BEA's largest shareholder, the activist investor Carl Icahn, said he had helped get the two companies talking and brokered a new deal after BEA initially rejected Oracle.

BEA had said that Oracle's original offer had undervalued the company, but no other buyers emerged, even after BEA's investment bank, Goldman Sachs, solicited bids from other software makers.

With fewer potential bidders, companies have less ability to ignore unsolicited offers, bankers said.

Of course, not all unsolicited bids succeed. Some suitors must bypass management and take their offers directly to a company's shareholders. Such hostile bids have a risk.

In a study of 50 hostile offers since 2003, FactSet MergerMetrics found that 65 percent of those bidders had increased their original offers and 31 percent of the deals with sweetened bids had been accepted by the target's boards.

Of the remaining 35 percent of suitors that did not sweeten their bids, only 10 percent of those were eventually recommended by the target's boards, FactSet MergerMetrics said.

According to media reports, Microsoft may open a proxy fight to persuade Yahoo's shareholders to accept the takeover offer.

Such proxy battles have increased this year, with 34 proxy fights announced so far, compared with 23 in the same period a year ago, according to FactSet SharkWatch.

"Some managements might not accept that today's stock prices are the true reflection of a company's value," said Michel of Boston University. "Shareholders tend to understand that the value is less today and they are willing to take what they can get."

Quang

05-04-2008, 02:24 PM

According to Principles of Negotiation, this is exactly what MS should do: lower the bid, not raising it. Anybody who read the case about the battle between Donald Trump and the lady at his Trump casino should have a good idea why it is the case.
=================================================

By Anupreeta Das
Fri Apr 4, 7:19 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) is evaluating its bid for Yahoo Inc (YHOO.O) because the Internet company may have lost value since Microsoft made its offer, people familiar with the matter said on Friday.

The news, first reported by Reuters, sent Yahoo shares down more than 5 percent in extended trade.

The sources said Yahoo has lost some key personnel, making the company less valuable, while generous severance packages it handed out to executives and full-time employees in the case of a takeover have made it more expensive.

Yahoo's board of directors has rejected Microsoft's offer, made on January 31, saying it "substantially undervalues" the company. The cash-and-stock bid initially valued Yahoo at $44.6 billion, but is currently worth about $42 billion.

Yahoo and Microsoft representatives declined to comment.

Yahoo has said it is exploring strategic alternatives, but no credible option has publicly emerged so far, narrowing its choices even as Microsoft refuses to raise its bid.

Instead, Microsoft has been repeatedly trying to engage Yahoo's board in discussions, these people said, declining to be named because they are not authorized to speak on the matter.

"It is up to Yahoo's board to engage in meaningful discussions with Microsoft," one person said.

In the meantime, the market has deteriorated and changes in Yahoo's business may have dragged down its value below what it was when Microsoft made its bid, these people said.

Roiling markets and ongoing economic woes have depressed Internet shares, with Google Inc (GOOG.O), Yahoo's most direct competitor, down more than 16 percent since Microsoft's offer.

The sources said the overall decline in the market has inflated the premium Microsoft is offering for Yahoo.

Microsoft's bid for Yahoo is widely seen as the Redmond, Washington-based company's attempt to take on Google, which leads the U.S. search and paid advertising market.

Google's shares fell 3 percent in February on the day Web measurement firm comScore said "paid clicks" -- a key measure of how Web searchers are converted into ad viewers -- grew only modestly year-on-year.

According to comScore, Yahoo's share among the top five Web search providers dropped from 22.2 percent in January to 21.6 percent in February. These are signs, according to the sources, of deterioration in Yahoo's core businesses.

In February, Yahoo instituted "golden parachutes" for its executives and full-time employees, pumping up benefits in the event of an acquisition.

Microsoft and Yahoo executives have met at least once since the offer to discuss a potential merger, a source told Reuters earlier.

Yahoo has also held talks with News Corp (NWSa.N) and Time Warner Inc's (TWX.N) AOL division about potential combinations, but these discussions appear to have yielded no alternatives yet.

A person familiar with Microsoft's thinking earlier told Reuters the company sees no reason to raise its bid and would not bid against itself.

Yahoo shares fell to $26.81 in extended trade after closing on Friday up 0.8 percent at $28.36 on the Nasdaq. Microsoft gained 24 cents after closing up 0.55 percent at $29.16.

Quang

06-04-2008, 08:52 AM

The battle rages on. Very interesting.

================================

Redmond (WA) - Microsoft is increasing the public pressure on Yahoo and has set a deadline for an acquisition agreement with the Internet company. If Yahoo's board does not authorize the management to enter negotiations with Microsoft and an agreement will not be reached within three weeks, Microsoft said that it will take its case directly to Yahoo's shareholders - with the goal to replace the company's board with an "alternative slate of directors" through a proxy fight.

Microsoft's open letter to Yahoo's board of directors follows reports that talks between the two companies are in a dead end and Yahoo's board has still not officially authorized executives to engage in acquisition negotiations.

"It has now been more than two months since we made our proposal to acquire Yahoo! at a 62% premium to its closing price on January 31, 2008, the day prior to our announcement. Our goal in making such a generous offer was to create the basis for a speedy and ultimately friendly transaction. Despite this, the pace of the last two months has been anything but speedy," Microsoft wrote.

Microsoft conceded that, since the announcement of the offer, "some limited interaction between management" had occurred, but there has been "no meaningful negotiation to conclude an agreement." Amidst speculations that Microsoft may actually consider to reduce its offer due to changing market conditions and a decreased value of its own stock, the company reiterated its offer and said that it believes that its valuation of Yahoo is now even stronger than in February.

The company stated that, over the past two months, "the Internet has continued to march on, while the public equity markets and overall economic conditions have weakened considerably, both in general and for other Internet-focused companies in particular." Microsoft also noted that Yahoo's search and page views may have declined and Yahoo has "adopted new plans at the company that have made any change of control more costly."

"By any fair measure, the large premium we offered in January is even more significant today. We believe that the majority of your shareholders share this assessment, even after reviewing your public disclosures relating to your future prospects," Microsoft wrote.

Showing signs that it has run out of patience, the software firm said that "now is the time for our respective companies to authorize teams to sit down and negotiate a definitive agreement on a combination of our companies."

If Yahoo should continue to delay the negotiations, Microsoft said that it will initiate a proxy contest in an effort to replace Yahoo's board of directors. The software company also indicated that it may reduce its offer: "The substantial premium reflected in our initial proposal anticipated a friendly transaction with you. If we are forced to take an offer directly to your shareholders, that action will have an undesirable impact on the value of your company from our perspective which will be reflected in the terms of our proposal."

Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/04/05/microsoft_threatens_yahoo_with_proxy_fight_and_les s_money/

1u29

06-04-2008, 10:08 AM

Chẹp các bác cứ cẩn thận với báo chí, toàn PR không à. Cứ mấy nguồn không tiện nêu tên là toàn bài của các công ty cả.
Hay nhở, anh Microsoft tự đến bảo anh giả chú ngần này nhé. Chú Yahoo ngúng nguẩy bảo là không anh trả rẻ quá em không bán. Sau đó anh MSFT cứ dọa dẫm kiểu chú không lấy thì anh trả thấp hơn bây giờ, hay anh vận động cổ đông nó đẩy chú ra. Khổ quá nhưng chú Yahoo đâu có nhu cầu phải bán. Ở đây dọa nhau thế khi Yahoo có nhu cầu phải bán thôi.
Wall Street cứ làm náo loạn lên. Ai đã ở trong 1 công ty thì biết đâu phải cứ đẻ ra cái plan nào là thực thi được đâu. Anh MSFT đang cần Yahoo bỏ xừ mà cứ dọa là anh giả chú thấp hơn nhé, căng nhể.
Kiểu như 1 anh theo 1 cô xong cứ dọa em không đổ anh bỏ đi đấy nhé, hay anh đi nói chuyện với bố mẹ em nhé.
Các bác thông cảm, nhiều khi đọc báo xong thấy đúng là sự nhìn nhận vấn đề giữa Wall Street với các công ty là 2 khái niệm khác nhau.

ncmkhoa

06-04-2008, 10:38 AM

Đã gọi là hostile bid thì làm gì có việc em bảo em không thích là được. Em không thích thì mặc kệ em miễn là bố mẹ em đồng ý gả là được. Em không còn tiếng nói trong cái vụ này rồi em ạ.

1u29

06-04-2008, 11:20 AM

Đã gọi là hostile bid thì làm gì có việc em bảo em không thích là được. Em không thích thì mặc kệ em miễn là bố mẹ em đồng ý gả là được. Em không còn tiếng nói trong cái vụ này rồi em ạ.

Này chưa đến đoạn đấy nhé. Mới nhăm nhe dọa thế thôi chứ chưa đến gặp phụ huynh nhé. Chứ ngay từ đầu anh đã tuyên bố là này tôi chơi hostile bid nhé thì việc gì mà phải đặt lên đặt xuống đắt hay rẻ, hay là dọa dẫm anh bỏ đi nhé. Mà so far thì bà con chú bác lâu nhâu thì nhiều, chứ bố mẹ cũng đã thấy nói gì đâu. Mà anh thì cũng biết thừa là phải lôi bố mẹ em vào là hạ sách lắm rồi, vì anh muốn cưới em rồi ở với em cơ chứ có phải là muốn làm đám cưới linh đình xong rồi em cứ xịu cái mặt ra.
Mà đến đoạn đấy xong em ghét, em không làm đủ nghĩa vụ làm vợ thì kể ra cũng mệt nhở?

thquangvn

04-05-2008, 08:53 AM

From The Wall Street Journal

Microsoft has withdrawn its bid to acquire Yahoo after the two sides couldn't agree on a price. Microsoft said it had increased its offer to $33 a share, but said Yahoo wanted at least $37 a share.

"Despite our best efforts, including raising our bid by roughly $5 billion, Yahoo has not moved toward accepting our offer," said Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer in a press release. "After careful consideration, we believe the economics demanded by Yahoo do not make sense for us, and it is in the best interests of Microsoft stockholders, employees and other stakeholders to withdraw our proposal."

For more information: http://www.wsj.com?mod=djemalertNEWS

Yahoo will be around for a long while, great more job opportunities.

Quang

04-05-2008, 09:08 AM

Quang Trần nói sao vậy. MS withdraw bid thì Yahoo stock price drops. Pressure từ stockholders tăng. Yahoo phải cut job để increase profit chứ. Logic nào mà lại bảo là có nhiều job hơn?

Mà bác Jerry Yang quả này trụ được là cũng giỏi.

From The Wall Street Journal

Microsoft has withdrawn its bid to acquire Yahoo after the two sides couldn't agree on a price. Microsoft said it had increased its offer to $33 a share, but said Yahoo wanted at least $37 a share.

"Despite our best efforts, including raising our bid by roughly $5 billion, Yahoo has not moved toward accepting our offer," said Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer in a press release. "After careful consideration, we believe the economics demanded by Yahoo do not make sense for us, and it is in the best interests of Microsoft stockholders, employees and other stakeholders to withdraw our proposal."

For more information: http://www.wsj.com?mod=djemalertNEWS

Yahoo will be around for a long while, great more job opportunities.

thuonghuyen

04-05-2008, 09:33 AM

Quang

04-05-2008, 10:22 AM

Bình thường mình không thích bác Ballmer này. Nhìn vẻ bề ngoài của bác ấy aggressive quá. Nhưng đọc cái letter này lại rất thích. Letter về một cái deal mấy chục tỷ đô mà được viết rất simple, easy to understand therefore prevent any misunderstanding. Viết như thế này mình thấy là đỉnh cao của writing skill.
=================================================
May 3, 2008

Mr. Jerry Yang
CEO and Chief Yahoo

Yahoo! Inc.

701 First Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089

Dear Jerry:

After over three months, we have reached the conclusion of the process regarding a possible combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!.

I first want to convey my personal thanks to you, your management team, and Yahoo!s Board of Directors for your consideration of our proposal. I appreciate the time and attention all of you have given to this matter, and I especially appreciate the time that you have invested personally. I feel that our discussions this week have been particularly useful, providing me for the first time with real clarity on what is and is not possible.

I am disappointed that Yahoo! has not moved towards accepting our offer. I first called you with our offer on January 31 because I believed that a combination of our two companies would have created real value for our respective shareholders and would have provided consumers, publishers, and advertisers with greater innovation and choice in the marketplace. Our decision to offer a 62 percent premium at that time reflected the strength of these convictions.

In our conversations this week, we conveyed our willingness to raise our offer to $33.00 per share, reflecting again our belief in this collective opportunity. This increase would have added approximately another $5 billion of value to your shareholders, compared to the current value of our initial offer. It also would have reflected a premium of over 70 percent compared to the price at which your stock closed on January 31. Yet it has proven insufficient, as your final position insisted on Microsoft paying yet another $5 billion or more, or at least another $4 per share above our $33.00 offer.

Also, after giving this weeks conversations further thought, it is clear to me that it is not sensible for Microsoft to take our offer directly to your shareholders. This approach would necessarily involve a protracted proxy contest and eventually an exchange offer. Our discussions with you have led us to conclude that, in the interim, you would take steps that would make Yahoo! undesirable as an acquisition for Microsoft.

We regard with particular concern your apparent planning to respond to a hostile bid by pursuing a new arrangement that would involve or lead to the outsourcing to Google of key paid Internet search terms offered by Yahoo! today. In our view, such an arrangement with the dominant search provider would make an acquisition of Yahoo! undesirable to us for a number of reasons:

· First, it would fundamentally undermine Yahoo!s own strategy and long-term viability by encouraging advertisers to use Google as opposed to your Panama paid search system. This would also fragment your search advertising and display advertising strategies and the ecosystem surrounding them. This would undermine the reliance on your display advertising business to fuel future growth.

· Given this, it would impair Yahoos ability to retain the talented engineers working on advertising systems that are important to our interest in a combination of our companies.

· In addition, it would raise a host of regulatory and legal problems that no acquirer, including Microsoft, would want to inherit. Among other things, this would consolidate market share with the already-dominant paid search provider in a manner that would reduce competition and choice in the marketplace.

· This would also effectively enable Google to set the prices for key search terms on both their and your search platforms and, in the process, raise prices charged to advertisers on Yahoo. In addition to whatever resulting legal problems, this seems unwise from a business perspective unless in fact one simply wishes to use this as a vehicle to exit the paid search business in favor of Google.

· It could foreclose any chance of a combination with any other search provider that is not already relying on Googles search services.

Accordingly, your apparent plan to pursue such an arrangement in the event of a proxy contest or exchange offer leads me to the firm decision not to pursue such a path. Instead, I hereby formally withdraw Microsofts proposal to acquire Yahoo!.

We will move forward and will continue to innovate and grow our business at Microsoft with the talented team we have in place and potentially through strategic transactions with other business partners.

I still believe even today that our offer remains the only alternative put forward that provides your stockholders full and fair value for their shares. By failing to reach an agreement with us, you and your stockholders have left significant value on the table.

But clearly a deal is not to be.

Thank you again for the time we have spent together discussing this.

Sincerely yours,

Steven A. Ballmer

Chief Executive Officer

Microsoft Corporation

thai

04-05-2008, 10:30 AM

(Bí, Cấn) Đọc tin này, tự nhiên thấy hứng lập quẻ xem. Quẻ chủ cho thấy M vẫn còn nhiệt tâm lắm lắm, chưa đành lòng; nhưng tiếc là đến quẻ biến, được lời hào là "giữ cũ, đợi thời". Vậy là xong!

E rằng đến hết tháng 6 âm lịch mọi việc vẫn không có gì biến chuyển; anh đường anh, tôi đường tôi. Có gì thì phải sang tháng 7 âm lịch or lâu hơn. Thôi, chờ thêm vậy!

Quang

04-05-2008, 10:40 AM

Đây vẫn có thể là chiến thuật của MS. Walking away, price drop, share holders pressure. Lúc nào Yahoo nội bộ tự loạn rồi thì MS lại quay lại. Lúc đấy có khi lại offer giá thấp hơn ấy chứ.

Mà thầy Thái dạo này toàn gieo quẻ mấy việc cao siêu quá. Đề nghị bỏ chút thời gian giúp anh chị em forum khai sáng quá khứ vị lai đê :D

(Bí, Cấn) Đọc tin này, tự nhiên thấy hứng lập quẻ xem. Quẻ chủ cho thấy M vẫn còn nhiệt tâm lắm lắm, chưa đành lòng; nhưng tiếc là đến quẻ biến, được lời hào là "giữ cũ, đợi thời". Thế mới lạ chứ!

E rằng đến hết tháng 6 âm lịch mọi việc vẫn không có gì biến chuyển; anh đường anh, tôi đường tôi.

little.nemo

04-05-2008, 11:48 AM

Không chỉ có bác Thái thích gieo quẻ đâu. Hôm nọ có 1 bác Tây vào trường em giảng giải về Chu Dịch. Bác ấy cũng gieo quẻ Yahoo! với MS, kết quả là "conflict", chắc giải ra là cái deal sẽ không thành :D

Little_dragon

19-05-2008, 03:30 AM

Mấy anh ở ngay bên Mĩ nên có những bình luận mang tính thực tế hơn bọn em ở nhà :D.

Không biết bài báo này như nào:

Now the rebellion

Enraged shareholders and activists are pushing Yahoo!s board to revive takeover talks with Microsoft

YAHOO!S co-founder and boss, Jerry Yang, and his board had this coming. For three months they did everything they could to rebuff Microsoft, which was offering to buy the internet company at a big premium to its value before the bid. They succeeded, if that is the word, when Microsoft walked away in frustration this month. Yahoo!s shareholders were livid, and have been saying so. The proxy fight that Microsoft itself shied away from now appears likely to start anyway.

The person to launch it is Carl Icahn, a shareholder activist who is feared by boards across America that he has taken on or threatened. Since Microsoft dropped its bid for Yahoo!, Mr Icahn has bought 59m shares, worth more than $1.5 billion, in the company and has applied for regulatory permission to buy lots more. And his first action as a shareholder has been to send Yahoo!s board a letter that amounts to a public flogging.

Yahoo!s board, Mr Icahn wrote, acted irrationally in its response to Microsoft. It has lost the faith of shareholders, he continued. To him it is obvious that Microsofts bid was superior to any value Yahoo! could create on its own. He is perplexed by the boards behaviour, he said, which is irresponsible and unconscionable.

One pictures Yahoo!s wounded fiduciaries gulping. They may indeed be on their way out, because Mr Icahn is nominating his own slate of ten directors in their stead. It is a cheeky line-up, consisting of himself and several private investors who have been his partners. There is also a corporate-governance professor and a media tycoon turned investor. Above all, there is Adam Dell, the brother of Michael, founder of the eponymous computer company, who once sold a company to Yahoo!; and Mark Cuban, who got rich by selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo! at the height of the dotcom bubble and now owns the Dallas Mavericks, a basketball team.

Mr Icahn does not always succeed in his attacks on boards he considers soft, but often. He recently played a big role in forcing another technology company, BEA Systems, a neighbour of Yahoo!s in Silicon Valley, to resume negotiations with Oracle, another software company in the valley, that led to its acquistion.

In Mr Icahns favour is that he has a good point. The overwhelming logic for a combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! is that this appears to be the only way that the two can put up a good fight against the new superpower of web search, online advertising and the Internet in general, which is Google. As a reminder, on the day of Mr Icahns letter, Hitwise, an online-measurement firm, released the latest market-share numbers in American web searches. Googles share once again went up, to 67.9%, and both Yahoo! and Microsoft fell, to 20.28% and 6.26% respectively.

And what has been Mr Yangs proposed alternative so far? To do a deal with Google, in which Yahoo! would outsource part of its search-advertising technology. Mathematically, this could indeed boost Yahoo!s profits somewhat, and thus raise its technical value, because Google is better at placing ads next to search results that consumers actually click on, and collects more revenue for each such click. But for Yahoo! this would amount to total capitulation in its effort, after years and billions spent, to catch up with Google in precisely this technology. Yahoo! would in effect resign to becoming a second-tier internet player, not unlike Ask.com, another search engine that uses Googles advertising technology.

Even assuming that Mr Yang and his board now feel the pressure, would Microsoft come back to the table? Mr Ballmer, its boss, may just be playing the game tactically, but his frustration appears to have been real. Engineers in both companies have been griping about a combination. In the bigger battle against Google to attract and retain the brightest geeksultimately the crucial factor in the search warsthe uncertainty of an acquistion cannot help. Mr Yang had better become very co-operative indeed, and quickly.

source: http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11393827&CFID=6023094&CFTOKEN=34981356

Little_dragon

23-05-2008, 06:08 PM

Thương vụ không thành giữa Microsoft và Yahoo đã làm thiệt hại không ít tiền của một số tỉ phú nhưng cũng giúp nhiều "ông lớn" đút túi ít nhiều.

Những ông chủ lớn trong ngành CNTT Steve Ballmer, Jerry Yang, Eric Schmidt, Rupert Murdoch, Carl Icahn và Mark Cuban nay trở thành những nhà tỉ phú trong show truyền hình thực tế mang tên Battle of the Billionaires (Cuộc chiến của những tỉ phú) chỉ sau vài tháng kể từ khi thương vụ này được khơi mào.

Steve Ballmer - Thiệt hại 1 tỉ đôla

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu6.jpg

Tính đến thời điểm này, ông Steve Ballmer khoa trương đã mất 1 tỉ đôla trong trận chiến nhằm thu phụcYahoo!. Trong suốt 3 tháng đàm phán, cổ phiếu của Microsoft giảm 10%, tổng giá trị cổ phiếu của Microsoft mà Ballmer đang nắm giữ đã sụt từ 13 tỉ đôla xuống còn 12 tỉ đôla. Tạp chí Forbes ước tính tổng giá trị tài sản của nhà tỉ phú này lên đến 15 tỉ đôla (năm 2007).

Jerry Yang - mất 1,7 tỉ đôla

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu5.jpg

Nhiều người cho rằng đến thời điểm này vị tổng giám đốc của Yahoo! đã mất đi cơ hội ngàn vàng khi từ chối mức đề nghị cuối cùng của Ballmer (33 đôla/1 cổ phiếu). Yang hiện đang sở hữu hơn 54 triệu cổ phiếu của Yahoo! và đã mất 1,7 tỉ đôla trong thương vụ chưa thành với Microsoft. Tạp chí Forbes ước tính tổng giá trị tài sản của Yang năm 2007 là 2,3 tỉ đôla.

Eric Schmidt - thắng 271 triệu đôla

Trong thương vụ giữa hai gã khổng lồ lớn thứ 2, thứ 3 của thế giới công nghệ thông tin này, tổng giám đốc của Google, ông Eric Schmidt, đóng vai trò là một kẻ phá đám. Hợp đồng thỏa thuận để Yahoo! trở thành đối tác quảng cáo thử nghiệm của Google là một đòn giáng mạnh vào lưng Microsoft. Bằng chứng là Ballmer đã từng tuyên bố mối quan hệ hợp tác này giữa Yahoo! và Google khiến cho nhiệm vụ mua lại Yahoo! của Microsoft trở nên bất khả thi.

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu4.jpg

Schmidt hiện đang nắm giữ 9,5 triệu cổ phiếu Google và từng một phen hú vía khi giá trị của một cổ phiếu tụt xuống còn 413,62 đôla vào ngày Microsoft tuyên bố từ bỏ Yahoo! (ngày 3 tháng 5 vừa qua). Trong suốt quá trình đàm phán giữa Yahoo và Microsoft, Eric đã thu lợi 271 triệu đôla từ cổ phiếu. Theo ước tính của tạp chí Forbes, tổng giá trị tài sản của nhà tỉ phú này trong năm 2007 là 6,6 tỉ đôla.

Rupert Murdoch chưa tính được

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu3.jpg

Tổng giám đốc của News Corp. hiện đang chơi trò hai mang trong thương vụ Microsoft-Yahoo!. Ban đầu, ông trùm truyền thông này tỏ ý sẵn sàng muốn giúp Yahoo! giữ vững ngôi vị là cổng Internet hàng đầu thế giới với việc bán lại mạng xã hội MySpace. Nhưng chỉ sau 1 thời gian ngắn quan sát diễn biến, News Corp. bỏ lửng Yahoo! quay sang tiến hành đàm phán với Microsoft.

Carl Icahn - có thể được 400 triệu đôla

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu2.jpg

Có lẽ vị thuyền trưởng kỳ lạ này là người nỗ lực nhất trong việc kéo Yahoo! và Microsoft trở lại bàn đàm phán bằng việc gây áp lực đối với ban quản trị Yahoo!. Ngày 15 tháng 5 vừa qua, ông lên một danh sách ứng cử viên đề cử vào ban quản trị bao gồm ông , Mark Cuban và Frank Biondi. Mục đích của Icahn không gì khác là nâng giá cổ phiếu của Yahoo! lên mức cao nhất có thể. Trong thương vụ này, ông có thể kiếm được 400 triệu đôla. Tạp chí Forbes ước tính tổng giá trị tài sản của Icahn lên đến 14 tỉ đôla vào năm 2007.
Mark Cuban chưa thu được đồng nào

http://images7.dantri.com.vn/Uploaded/nguyenhuong/thang5.08/typhu1.jpg

Icahn tín nhiệm Cuban, một thương nhân công thành danh toại trên thương trường ngành công nghệ thông tin, đến nỗi muốn bổ nhiệm anh chàng này vào ban quản trị của Yahoo!. Cuban từng kiếm bộn tiền từ hãng này khi anh bán công ty Broadcast.com của mình cho Yahoo! vào năm 1999 với giá 5,7 tỉ đôla. Nếu anh được đề cử vào Ban quản trị của Yahoo! tại kỳ họp cổ đông thường niên của công ty này diễn ra vào ngày 3 tháng 7 tới đây thì chắc chắn thương vụ Microsoft Yahoo! sẽ diễn ra tốt đẹp hơn.

Theo Dân Trí

Thương vụ này vẫn chưa kết thúc, nhưng Google đã ngư ông đắc lợi được tương đồi rồi, không biết càng kéo dài thì ai sẽ tiếp tục được lợi đây :D