SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Yahoo! has finally found a billions-slinging buyer for its "assets":
Verizon Communications Inc said Monday it would buy Yahoo Inc's core internet properties for $4.83 billion in cash to expand its digital advertising and media business, in a deal that ends a lengthy sale process for the fading Web pioneer. The purchase of Yahoo's operations will boost Verizon's AOL internet business, which it bought last year for $4.4 billion, and give it access to Yahoo's ad technology tools, BrightRoll and Flurry, and assets such as search, mail and messenger.
The deal, expected to close in early 2017, marks the end of Yahoo as an operating company, leaving it with a 15 percent stake in Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba Group Holding Ltd and a 35.5 percent interest in Yahoo Japan Corp. "The sale of our operating business, which effectively separates our Asian asset equity stakes, is an important step in our plan to unlock shareholder value for Yahoo," Yahoo Chief Executive Marissa Mayer said in a statement on Monday.
Did you know that Verizon owns TechCrunch?
Microsoft executives recalled a previous buyout attempt and breathed a sigh of relief:
In February 2008 Microsoft Corporation made an unsolicited bid to acquire Yahoo for US$44.6 billion. Yahoo formally rejected the bid, claiming that it "substantially undervalues" the company and was not in the interest of its shareholders. Three years later Yahoo had a market capitalization of US$22.24 billion.
martyb: Registered on 1995-01-18, yahoo.com has been around for a long time. Many services were made available on their site such as e-mail, groups, finance. What, if any, of their services have you used? Do you still use them? What are your plans in light of the buyout?
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday July 25 2016, @06:06PM
Mayer seems to have failed completely in doing anything with Yahoo to turn it around.
And that seems to be the gist of the news these days.
You could have lead with that, and not fallen into the morass of judging her looks. (Disclosure: I'm so clueless about Yahoo that I had to go google her to see what the hell you were getting on about.).
Signing on to help save a sinking ship is a thankless task, especially when you keep buying other sinking ships. But given that she extracted 4.8 billion from the smoking ruin of a walking-dead company would seem to suggest she was not a total failure. It was dead when she got there. And like Elvis, its still dead.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Monday July 25 2016, @07:36PM
Mayer's looks are important because every ... single ... article ... about ... Yahoo for years has had her picture. I think I've seen one that didn't. We are bombarded with her looks. I pointed out the double standard, because I don't know any other CEO, male or female, who is given this treatment. Ellen Pao or whatever her name was got the same treatment. Every single article about her had a picture of her. I think that it's worth pointing out and discussing because it's so in-your-face. How do you judge people on their merits (or demerits) when the media is judging them on their looks? If Mayer was as ugly as Ginni, would she have been given the same treatment? Not even close!
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday July 25 2016, @08:15PM
So what? Would you decide to buy stock of a company because the CEO is attractive? Or would you consider using a company's products because the CEO is attractive?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 25 2016, @10:31PM
Theranos suddenly makes sense.