AllThingsD » Broadcast.com

Airbnb Hires Former Yahoo Legal Eagle Belinda Johnson as General Counsel

Kara Swisher — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 15:44:49 +0000

Airbnb, the San Francisco online vacation rentals start-up, said it has hired a key former Yahoo lawyer, Belinda Johnson, as its new general counsel.

The legal issues at Airbnb are both interesting and challenging, all around the new arena of global sharing or, as the company calls it, “collaborative consumption.”

Johnson is one of several recent major hires by Airbnb, which has been adding more seasoned execs to its team of late. Other recent key Airbnb hires include Monroe Labouisse as head of trust and safety and customer service, and Vivek Wagle as head of content.

Johnson left Yahoo several months ago as its deputy general counsel, after a long tenure there working on a wide variety of issues.

Among other things, she oversaw legal strategy for Yahoo’s global products, and worked on deals like its search and advertising alliance with Microsoft. Johnson came to Yahoo from its Web 1.0 acquisition of Broadcast.com, where she had served as general counsel.

She attended both college and law school at the University of Texas.

If This Is Age of Web Video, Who's Buying All Those TVs?

Peter Kafka — Tue, 04 May 2010 11:00:25 +0000

Pundits keep telling us that the Web generation is happy to watch TV on a laptop. So who keeps buying all those TV sets?

Check out this chart from Nielsen (click to enlarge), which tells us that the average American household has nearly three televisions. In 1990, the average was two sets per home.

What gives? Mark Cuban, who has been consistently bearish on Web video–except for the part where he convinced Yahoo (YHOO) to buy Broadcast.com for billions–says the answer is easy: “Consumers have made their choice to spend money on new HDTVs. Why? Because they want to watch TV.”

And it’s probably good to remind the early-adopter set–like people who read this site–that sating all your video needs with computers and “over the top” solutions is going to be a niche behavior for a long time.

But! There is a cake-and-eat-it answer here too: It’s perfectly reasonable to assume that most people will watch TV on their HDTVs. And then, when it makes sense, they’ll watch some video delivered over the Web on those same sets.

That’s already happening in real numbers. Netflix (NFLX) says nearly eight million people are watching TV and movies via its streaming video service, and not all of them are watching on small screens.

Nintendo, for instance, says one million of its customers are using the Netflix service. And by definition, none of them are watching on a PC or laptop; if you’re using a Nintendo Wii, you’re using a TV.

These numbers will increase as more Americans walk out of Best Buy (BBY) and Walmart (WMT) with an Internet-connected TV, whether they planned to buy one or not.

Over the next few years, it will become increasingly hard to buy a set that doesn’t have an ethernet connection, just as you have to go out of your way today not to buy an HD set. And that’s when things are going to get really interesting.

RealNetworks' Rob Glaser Talks About Giving the Internet a Voice and, Yes, Woolly Mammoths!

Kara Swisher — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:20:16 +0000

Rob Glaser (pictured here) called BoomTown when he landed in Washington, D.C., only a few hours after he announced Wednesday he was stepping down as longtime CEO of RealNetworks (RNWK).

Digital Daily reported there was some contention between Glaser and the Real board around his departure from the Seattle-based company he founded 16 years ago, a move that has actually been in the works for some time.

While Glaser did say that he had been through the “most intense two weeks of my life,” leading up to that, he declined to comment more about the specifics of his leaving.

That was fine with me, because–although execs come and go in various and sundry ways–you simply have to give Glaser credit for his pioneering work in bringing both audio and video to the Web.

So Glaser and I talked about this and more, from what he thinks are the key highlights of his Internet career until now to what he plans to do next.

First and foremost, Glaser did “give the Internet a voice,” as I wrote in a 1998 profile of him for The Wall Street Journal about his company’s introduction of its first RealAudio product:

“RealAudio was greeted with more than a little disdain from the Internet elite because it was a tinny and unsatisfying experience for most users. But it gave the Internet a voice, and Mr. Glaser kept plugging away, improving fidelity and striking deals with more content providers to use it on their Web sites.”

Glaser said that was the simple idea behind Real, to “turn the Web from text and static links to a dynamic media space for the mainstream to enjoy.”

That effort began in earnest in the mid-1990s, he noted, by selling “tech enablement,” which simply meant hawking servers and software to companies interested in adding audio and, later, video, to their Web sites.

So successful was Real then that many big companies tried to buy it for huge sums. But ever the aggressive entrepreneur, Glaser never sold–unlike Mark Cuban at Broadcast.com–although many wished he had.

But that was simply not his style, he said; plus, business was booming and it was “like selling pickaxes during the Gold Rush.”

It is an apt metaphor since the next major moment for the company came when the Web 1.0 bubble burst in 2000.

“A lot of great–and also not so great–companies just died,” he said.

To avoid that fate, “We pivoted in a hard way to consumer services and avoided the tailspin,” Glaser added. “It was kind of like when the woolly mammoth evolved into an elephant, while the pterodactyl did not turn into anything.”

That meant creating a variety of consumer-focused media offerings that used Real technology, such as its casual games business and its Rhapsody music service.

Real also shifted its tech licensing business to a carrier services model, Glaser said.

He regularly tangled with Microsoft (MSFT), where he started his career as a very brash 21-year-old. The software giant targeted Real’s business, but also cooperated with the company at times.

And, while the games unit and Rhapsody hit some major bumps, Real did score a whopping $761 million antitrust settlement in 2005 from Microsoft.

But that win was some time ago, and Real idled too much, as did its stock, in the following years, even as Glaser plugged away at creating a variety of new businesses and strategies.

Some were off limits, he said when I asked him why he did not come up with a service like YouTube, given Real’s advantages in video early on, noting that his public company could never had created a service that so antagonized Hollywood partners.

But Glaser did just that more recently with one such innovative idea for a “legal” DVD ripper, called RealDVD.

Though very interesting, RealDVD hit the skids quickly when a federal judge last week dismissed Real’s claims against Hollywood studios seeking to shut down the service before it could be widely distributed.

While that specific defeat was not the reason for his leaving RealNetworks, the idea that it was time to bring new blood to the company finally gained traction with investors, the board, employees and, yes, Glaser too.

What the notoriously hard-charging executive–“My intensity sometimes manifested itself in less positive ways,” Glaser conceded in my 1998 interview with him–will do next is anyone’s guess.

Including his own.

Glaser noted that he would remain chairman of Real, although his day-to-day engagement there is now over.

“It is a big transition for me, because I am closing a chapter I have been in for a very long time,” he said, adding that he would probably do more philanthropic and political work.

(That’s no surprise. After all, Real was once called Progressive Networks, after his liberal politics, and Glaser once had a newspaper column called “What’s Left” while at Yale University.)

Glaser said that on the flight to Washington he thought about the advice Lotus founder Mitch Kapor, one of Real’s earliest investors, gave him when he left Microsoft and was thinking about his next step:

You should take time to figure out what you want to do next and know why you want to do it. Because if it’s successful, once you get going you won’t have time to think through those issues as clearly as you can now.

That’s pretty much been Glaser’s modus operandi over his many years at Real and in the larger Internet space: He pushed his vision of a live Internet forth, he never cut and ran, he never sold, he kept pushing forward.

And you have to admire that kind of gumption, no matter the outcome.

In any case, it is likely Glaser will keep doing so in the years to come.

In fact, pointing out that the movement of entertainment and content online has “come a long way, but still has an even longer way to go,” Glaser started rattling off ideas about where the online media sector needs to go in exactly the same fashion I described a dozen years before.

I described Glaser then as: “speaking in staccato bursts and radiating so much intensity that his face resembles a clenched fist.”

In other words, for all the the lively entrepreneur has been part of as a key pioneer in the development of the Internet, some things will never ever change.

If you want to see Glaser in action, check out these three videos of him, two from the fifth D: All Things Digital conference and one of him talking to me about RealDVD when he introduced it at Demo:

Session interview at D5

[ See post to watch video ]

Demoing RealPlayer 11 at D5

[ See post to watch video ]

Talking about RealDVD

[ See post to watch video ]

More Mark Cuban (Trapped in the Green Room at D7 with BoomTown and the Flip Video Camera)!

Kara Swisher — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:05:24 +0000

Last week, Walt Mossberg and I interviewed entrepreneur, high-definition television fanboy, dancing fool and reliable gadfly Mark Cuban at the seventh D: All Things Digital conference.

Cuban, who sold his start-up Broadcast.com to Yahoo (YHOO) at the peak of the Web 1.0 bubble for billions, has been using that haul to do a lot of stuff.

In September 2001, the innovative Cuban launched HDNet, a provider of high-definition news, entertainment and sports programming. In January of 2000, he also used all those bucks to buy the Dallas Mavericks NBA franchise. He’s also co-owner of Landmark Theaters, Magnolia Pictures, and Rysher Entertainment, and holds a stake in Lions Gate Entertainment.

Cuban also made a laudable effort on the television dance competition, “Dancing With the Stars.”

After our onstage interview (highlights of that video are also below), BoomTown also got him to be more specific about his thoughts on a variety of things he discussed, including Google (GOOG) and its underwriting of its YouTube video subsidiary, HD TV, the problems with broadband and the Internet as a “utility.”

(And don’t miss his cheeky new post on his Blog Maverick site–“Who Cares What People Write?”–about ignoring, well, what some “amateur outtie” bloggers say most of the time.)

Cuban in the Green Room at D7:

[ See post to watch video ]

Cuban Onstage:

[ See post to watch video ]

D7 Interview: Mark Cuban

Peter Kafka — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:33:26 +0000

Mark Cuban was lucky enough to make billions on Internet video during the Web 1.0 bubble and smart enough to cash out before it burst. He’s spent a bunch of that money on high-profile purchases like a basketball team and a Gulfstream. But much of his investment and energy since then has been directed… away from Web video and toward conventional video, in the form of movies and television.

Cuban’s portfolio companies make movies and television shows and distribute them to movie theaters and television sets. And he’s been loudly skeptical about the possibilities of Web video outlets like YouTube–around the time that Google plunked down $1.6 billion on the site, he declared that “only a moron” would want to invest in it. Time to see if he still feels the same way.

Highlight Video

[ See post to watch video ]

Live Blog

Everyone says video on the Internet is great, but we spend 99 percent of our time watching TV, and that’s in large part because of HD TV.
Walt: 99 percent?
Mark: Well, I don’t know. But it’s a lot.
Kara: Talk about Internet video. How do you look at it? Mark: It’s a real disappointment to see how far Internet video has come. We were working on hotspots, advertising standards, multicasting 10 years ago. Nothing happened. You can go on and on and on.
Walt: Why is that? Mark: I have no idea. If you say one thing, it’s that when Google (GOOG) bought YouTube, they didn’t think about making money right away; the focus was on ubiquity, and because no one paid attention, that’s what happened. Now you can’t fight them; it’s like Microsoft (MSFT). You can’t do anything on video these days unless you work with YouTube.
There are no hits on the Web. So the only way it works is if you can create a platform like YouTube. Hulu could do that, but they have big pockets to appease.
Kara: No hits? Mark: There are hits. But they’re one-off hits. On TV, there’re hits, but they’re wrong 95 percent of the time, and there are 300-plus competitors. On the Internet, there are unlimited competitors, and YouTube subsidizes bandwidth. So the real cost is marketing. How do you stand out?

Mark: Video for the Web has become a testing ground for mediums that actually have revenue.
Kara: So what would the model have been had you bought YouTube? Mark: Like I said, I wouldn’t have bought it. They hid behind the DMCA, and they have huge copyright problems, and it’s a disaster waiting to happen. We still don’t know what’s going to happen with the Viacom (VIA) suit. And they’re paying for all that bandwidth.
Mark: And by the way, if anything happens to Google, what happens to the whole video space? Everything gets flipped on its head. If you have to pay for it, maybe your kids stop posting videos of their bands.
Discussion of bandwidth that I’m not catching entirely. But essentially, Mark is saying that the cable companies will have new bandwidth to play with, but they’re not going to necessarily hand it over to the Internet. So everyone in this room is trying to create all these apps and services to shove through one pipe, and the cable guys aren’t going to give them more room.
Kara: Where do you see TV going? Mark: Television means different things now. Broadcast is one thing. Cable is another, and that’s healthy, because of that subscription business, and they’re never going to give up those subscription dollars for Internet nickels. We need to remember that the Internet is a staid platform. There has been very little innovation. It’s like the ’80s, when we were fighting between different word processing software. There’s only evolution, not revolution. But TV… you could have real innovation there.
Kara: We’ve been hearing promises of innovation and interactivity for a long time. Mark: There’s been a problem with standards, and that needs to get fixed.
Walt still wants to watch “Star Trek” on demand. When will that happen? Mark correctly points out that this is partly a programming issue, partly a technology issue. Tech is “easy.” Programming and windows are another story.
Kara: OK. What do you think about the Internet? Yahoo?
Mark: Yahoo (YHOO), Google, MySpace, Facebook, they’re all the same: “One hit and a lot of decent products that are second, third, fourth place, and living off the gravy train.” That’s been the tradition since Microsoft and Windows. They’re all the same.
Kara: Twitter? Mark: The problem with them isn’t a business model. They have 10,000 ways to make money, and everyone in this room can come up with one. They’re just having fun and teasing you guys. I told Facebook, via Jim Breyer, that all those real names they provide via Facebook Connect–that they should charge for it. I think Twitter has similar possibilities.
Walt points out that people do pay for some Web video, like baseball. Mark: Yup. I’m not saying you can’t have some number of Web users having a great experience. But there’s a limit to the number of people that can be there because there’s limited space, too congested. It’s like having a nice car on the 405. At a certain point it doesn’t matter how nice the car is, because there’s too much traffic. It’s like what Warren Buffet says: First come the innovators, then the imitators, then the idiots. Also: “There’s always going to be someone trying to rush the fat kid to the buffet.”
Discussion of tiered pricing. Going to have it on mobile, and we should have the same thing on the Internet. What about content? Yes, we have that already.
Kara and Walt: Tell us about your fight with the SEC? Mark: No. [Pause] “When someone in the government wants you, it’s not a good place to be. You don’t want to be someone’s skin on the wall.” Kara: “Do you know how it’s going to turn out”? Mark: “Yes.”
Mark walks through how he inverts/breaks/changes traditional windows when it comes to movies, VOD, etc. Very interesting. Will have to come back to it, unfortunately.
Walt: Does the Internet help you run your basketball team? Mark: Yup: We watch video of prospects on YouTube. I follow free agent prospects on Twitter. I can accumulate information on searches, the real-time net is very helpful for the Mavericks. My Icerocket engine helps me track down info.
Q&A: What do you think of 3-D? Mark: I think it has a great future. Cost is coming down, it’s a differentiated experience. We can put a huge digital screen in American Airlines Center and do 3-D with glasses. Screens are getting so big and prices are falling so quickly that people are changing the way they consume entertainment, and 3-D is a big part of that.
Gary Shapiro from CEA has a confusing question. Ah. What should we do with the broadcast TV spectrum since 90 percent of people have cable? Mark: We should sell it.
Kara wants investment tips. Mark talks about various start-ups he’s in, like some sort of mobile/SMS play. But I tell people who are in college today or 10 years from now that are going to look at the Internet and laugh. I think where it’s at is technology geared toward personal health. Walt: Are you investing? Mark: Looking. The problem is I don’t understand any of this stuff.

A note about our coverage: This liveblog is not an official transcript of the conversation that occurred onstage. Rather, it is a compilation of quotes, paraphrased statements and ad-lib observations written and posted to the Web as quickly as we were able. It was not intended as a transcript and should not be interpreted as one.

Mark Cuban to Sam Zell: I'd Still Like to Buy the Chicago Cubs. Just Lower Your Price, Please.

Peter Kafka — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:51:50 +0000

Nothing like a billionaire with a blog: Mark Cuban uses his this morning to explain that he’s still in the market for the Chicago Cubs. It’s just that Cuban, who made his money selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo (YHOO) during Bubble 1.0 and kept it by getting out of that stock before Crash 1.0, doesn’t want to pay what owner Sam Zell wants–which seems to be about $1 billion.

If you’re at all interested in sports and business, it’s worth a quick read–Cuban has a nice touch at the keyboard, and really, how many other billionaires can you describe that way?

But for the time-pressed, here’s the upshot: Given that the Zell’s Tribune Company has turned into a nightmare for Zell, that price should come down, which seems to be Cuban’s thinking here:

So when it came down to it, I did what I thought was the only smart thing to do. I asked for an extension. I knew that if they got the money they wanted for the team, well my bid was not going to be high enough anyway. If they didnt, or the other bidders couldnt come up with their money, they would come back to me.

I’m still waiting.”

Mark Cuban Weighs In on Yahoo (aka, a Jerry Yang Nightmare)

Kara Swisher — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:50:56 +0000

BoomTown, who never met a Yahoo story I didn’t like to write up, is handing over the stage today to hyperactive entrepreneur Mark Cuban, who just weighed in on what Yahoo should do.

Literally, his post yesterday on his Blog Maverick site is titled “What Yahoo Should Do,” and he lays waste to a lot of the conventional wisdom about the Internet portal’s fate.

Cuban and Yahoo have a rocky history. Yahoo bought his company, Broadcast.com, in the Web 1.0 boom in 1999 for $5.7 billion in stock, which Cuban promptly sold at the peak.

Since then, he’s used the billions he garnered to conduct the longest-running I-told-you-so in the digital industry, including being on the alternate board when Carl Icahn was waging a proxy fight against Yahoo (YHOO) earlier this year.

(Full disclosure: Cuban has recently also gotten into a tussle with the SEC recently.)

Let’s just say, Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang is not a fan. Ironically, in the piece, Cuban seems to be a big fan of Yahoo, or–more precisely–of its potential.

First, Cuban discounts any purchase of Yahoo’s search business by Microsoft (MSFT)–sorry, Carl. And not because Yahoo does not want to sell, but because he thinks the software giant will not waste its cash horde, as it gears up to fight Google (GOOG).

“Why anyone thinks that Microsoft is stupid enough to give up what amounts to most, if not all of their liquidity is beyond me. Particularly when their net current assets have now fallen a little below Google’s. Between liquid assets and borrowing capacity, both have about the same amount of ‘powder’ in place in the event ‘the next big thing’ appears on the radar. I doubt either wants to be at a disadvantage to the other when it comes to potential opportunities.”

Next, calling Yahoo’s directors and large shareholders the “Huggy Bear contingent,” after that classic cliché of a character on the “Starsky & Hutch” television show, he advises against “trying to dress up Yahoo in order to pimp it out to any bidder it can find.”

Instead, in a very clear strategic explanation, Cuban advises that Yahoo become an aggressive buyer of traffic, services, content and monetization.

Given so much is on sale at a huge discount, Cuban posits that Yahoo should make 20 or more acquisitions in the next 18 months:

“Yahoo should be on the warpath, vetting each and every media (yes, media) and technology company it can sit down with looking for bargains.

“It should be taking Yahoo stock and finding every and any accretive investment in the Internet and media space that it possibly can. Some may argue that Yahoo stock is too cheap to use for acquisitions. I beg to differ. The speculation around a potential Microsoft acquisition, along with a very strong balance sheet has propped up its stock. Compared to private and public would be targets, Yahoo stock is amazingly strong currency.”

I like Cuban’s moxie–I always do–especially given he seems to be able to articulate a clear vision in his piece of what Yahoo could be, much better than its leadership.

“Yahoo has the opportunity to be the ultimate next generation media company,” write Cuban, quite correctly. “It just has to stop being afraid of its own shadow.”

Amen to that.

BoomTown's Short List of Yahoo CEOs (Sorry Jerry, but Fortune Favors the Prepared)

Kara Swisher — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 11:00:20 +0000

Billionaire activist investor Carl Icahn has asked for it, although he has gone all kittenish now, after realizing his scheme to get Microsoft (MSFT) to buy Yahoo (YHOO) was over, once Yahoo signed on with Google (GOOG) to outsource some of its search-ad business.

And then the New York Times’s Joe Nocera called for it in an eviscerating column this past weekend that articulated what an increasing number of people in Silicon Valley and Wall Street and, more importantly, within Yahoo have been thinking of late.

And that it is: Whether Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang (pictured here at D6) should step down in favor of another top executive to lead the troubled Internet company into the next era.

It’s the obvious question, of course, to ask whether the co-founder of Yahoo has what it takes to manage the company through what will doubtlessly be a very difficult year.

(Speaking of that, see this disturbing hiring freeze post by Peter Kafka of Silicon Alley Insider, which might spell trouble ahead at Yahoo.)

BoomTown asked Yang specifically why he was the right leader for Yahoo going forward at our sixth D: All Things Digital conference recently and–guess what?–he did not really have an answer to the question.

Let me for him, then: The main reason he is the right leader is due to his history, his obvious love for Yahoo and its employees and that his heart, as Yang said in his one and only passionate moment onstage, does bleed Yahoo purple.

Unfortunately, as important and touching as those things are, it’s probably not enough for the rough road ahead for Yahoo.

As Yahoo continues to be in limbo, pressure is sure to mount heavily on Yang, and it is not a stretch to imagine he will not remain in the top job at the troubled company for the long term.

So who would be good to replace him?

The list is a long one and could include execs like Tim Armstrong of Google, Kevin Johnson of Microsoft and any number of media and advertising execs.

But I have six candidates I like, so here’s my short list, in no particular order (and remember, the last time I made one for the job of the No. 2 leader for Facebook, its current COO Sheryl Sandberg was high on my list).

Sue Decker

Yahoo President Sue Decker (pictured here) is the obvious choice for Yang to hand over the reins to.

But should he?

Here are the positives: Decker is smart, articulate, financially savvy and a well-known quantity within Yahoo.

And, like Yang, she has worked her heart out there for many years.

But there are some significant negatives, starting with the tarnish of the whole Microsoft takeover saga, which most think both she and Yang have handled badly.

After so much confusion and missed opportunities, it is not clear if the troops at Yahoo or, perhaps more importantly, Wall Street and the company’s shareholders will give Decker the kind of running room she needs.

In addition, again and again, many within Yahoo talk about Decker’s lack of product feel and overall vision that will be required to truly give Yahoo the kick in the pants it so sorely needs.

Plus, Decker has been around Yahoo a long time and is clearly part of the leadership group that has allowed the company to languish for so long.

Nonetheless, Decker clearly remains the front-runner and might blossom if she had full control over Yahoo, as Bob Iger of Disney (DIS) did there, for example.

Meg Whitman

While many do not know it, Meg Whitman (pictured here) was almost the CEO of Yahoo once, but lost the chance due to a botched merger attempt between Yahoo and eBay (EBAY) back in Web 1.0.

Think of the might-have-beens of that union.

There is no doubt Whitman is an Internet exec star, despite the fact that she herself admits having done as much as she could at eBay after a decade when she recently stepped down as CEO there.

But that kind of candor is exactly what is most impressive about Whitman, who is straight-talking, and very, very tough, despite a sunny-seeming exterior.

She has certainly impressed Yahoos already, having appeared in the not-too-distant past at a sales conference, where she blew away the crowd with her grasp of Yahoo’s business.

Here’s the problem: Most expect the Republican Whitman to make her next move in the California political arena. Can you say Governor Whitman? Senator Whitman?

And also, she’s about as rich as you can be and any monetary attraction to reviving Yahoo would probably be negligible.

Peter Chernin

Let’s be clear–we’re not putting Peter Chernin (pictured here and BoomTown’s kind-of boss) in this list to kiss up to him.

While News Corp. (NWS), where Chernin is No. 2, is the owner of this site, I and many others consider him (along with Disney’s Iger) to be one of the sharpest and most versatile “old” media execs to get the Web.

At the very least, he does not seem scared senseless by it. (Which is a very big deal.)

And while he probably presides over one of the choicest media conglomerates out there, CEO Rupert Murdoch shows no signs of retiring, and his son, James Murdoch, is clearly training in the wings.

A move to Yahoo would be a bold one for someone like Chernin, who clearly has the tough management chops to run the place and give it direction to become a true partner to Hollywood in the way the Spock clones of Google never ever will be able to.

Actually, given he has a foot in both old and new media (Hulu.com, MySpace), he is BoomTown’s No. 1 pick.

Marc Andreessen

I had included Marc Andreessen (pictured here) in my list as a possible No. 2 exec at Facebook as a bit of a lark, just to remind folks that vision matters.

For his excellent blog alone, Andreeseen deserves a lot of attention for its bracing insight about the Internet business and its future.

And Andreessen has plenty of real-life chops too, from his founding Netscape right up until today, creating a series of new Web companies (he is currently chairman of a social-networking company called Ning) and investing in a lot of others that have given him a lot of gravitas and financial windfalls over the years.

Let me clearly state, I was not sure Andreessen could ever grow out of his enfant-terrible mode when I covered him several years ago, but that has clearly happened.

He knows how to build exciting companies, he is well-liked in Silicon Valley, he knows about scale, he knows about social networking and he is a respected technologist.

Most of all, Andreessen would be a leader who would add a lot of excitement to Yahoo. And, believe me, Yahoo needs a lot of that.

Dan Rosensweig

I know, I know. But why not?

Some might question my choice of Dan Rosensweig (pictured here), mostly because he departed from Yahoo in a previous crisis, but was still part of the management group that got Yahoo into this mess in the first place.

But, think hard. Rosensweig was not in charge then–in fact, leadership failures fell to former CEO Terry Semel and also Yang.

In addition, many at Yahoo–though not all–thought Rosensweig did a decent job of running the place.

He also wanted Yahoo to take a lot more chances than it did and is well liked in Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

In leaving and then returning, Rosensweig might represent a choice that allows Yahoo employees to feel confident that some of its past soul remains.

Mark Cuban

I am not kidding. Not even one little bit.

I know Mark Cuban (pictured here hoofing with gusto) is disliked by Yang and others at Yahoo for selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo back in the last bubble and then clearing out and making bank.

And I know they were furious that Cuban popped up on Icahn’s alternative board to replace Yahoo’s current board.

So what! Big whoop! Blah, blah, blah.

Because Yahoo needs a major restart and Cuban would easily be able to push that button.

Cuban is unorthodox, has clear business acumen and success, knows how to invest and he is loaded for bear with vision.

He is also dabbling in some very interesting arena of HDTV, as well as being involved in some other interesting investments.

Cuban is willing to be controversial and often takes aim at Google, with some good results, in his blog.

His current post: “Hulu Is Kicking YouTube’s Ass.” (Ahahahahahaha. Dang, I wish I had written it.)

It’s that kind of moxie that means he is probably the only one with the guts to really get down in the weeds of Yahoo and start hacking away at the tangle that needs hacking.

Also, Cuban can sure dance.

And, most of all, the next CEO of Yahoo is going to need to know how to do some very complex two-stepping–with Wall Street, with shareholders and with employees.

And he or she is going to have to look good doing it.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Memo to Jerry: Mark Cuban, Jethro Tull and Thee!

Kara Swisher — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:43:05 +0000

It’s clear that some Yahoos and its CEO and Co-Founder Jerry Yang have got to be a little more than miffed that billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban is on billionaire investor Carl Icahn’s board, as he begins a proxy fight for control of the troubled Internet company.

As BoomTown noted in a post yesterday, there is no love lost at Yahoo (YHOO) for Cuban (pictured here).

He sold the Web 1.0 star, Broadcast.com, for $5.7 billion in cash to Yahoo at the peak of the bubble in 1999, skedaddled quickly and then made bank by hedging his Yahoo shares and enjoying the proceeds extravagantly.

As one longtime Yahoo, who has left the company recently, emailed me in a typical sentiment: “You don’t even know how much they hate Cuban over there.”

Oh, I do.

But, while I get the emotional part, it is actually quite unfair realistically, given it was Yahoo that did precious little with Broadcast.com’s assets after paying so much for the company.

While that $5.7 billion was in inflated 1999 stock, Yahoo still had bought a lot of potentially good ideas and baby-step assets from Broadcast.com that it could have eventually parlayed into much more.

That’s because, though in its nascent stages, Broadcast.com was broadcasting live television events and had licensed television shows too.

In addition, it also had begun to put together capabilities to allow for the uploading of user-generated video, which YouTube later perfected.

While this was all relatively crude in today’s terms and timing is everything (who knows if Broadcast.com’s technologies would have worked right), it is yet another example of a soon-to-be-critical technology trend that Yahoo had a bead on early and then failed to capitalize on.

The same could be said of its mid-2003 acquisition of Overture, a start-up that pioneered text-based online ads and purchase that Yahoo did not take full advantage of until it was too late.

Of course, that was quite a whiff, since Google (GOOG) followed Yahoo into the business and, well, the rest is history.

Maybe Yahoo should get over its ire at Cuban and bring him back.

Considering a recent post by him on his Blog Maverick site, he sounds ready to go:

Is there anything more fun than sitting around, growing your hair, drinking a Bud while listening to Jethro Tull and pondering how to change the balance of power in the search world and unseat Google?”

How much would BoomTown pay to see Cuban and Yang doing that?

Much.

The Sweet, Sweet Irony of Mark Cuban and Yahoo

Kara Swisher — Thu, 15 May 2008 23:25:21 +0000

Of the amazingly Internet-experience-free board that billionaire investor Carl Icahn has proposed to replace Yahoo’s current directors in this proxy fight, there is one name who does have a lot of Web-related experience, especially with regards to Yahoo (YHOO).

Specifically, in how to make bank from Yahoo’s desperation.

That would be entrepreneur and all-around bon vivant Mark Cuban (he is pictured here at our first D: All Things Digital conference in 2003), who sold Broadcast.com to Yahoo in the heady days of 1999 for $5.7 billion in Yahoo stock.

It was a huge deal at the time, with Yahoo engaged in an arms war with other Internet companies like Excite (remember them?), AOL (TWX) and others.

In an acquisitions frenzy, it grabbed Broadcast.com, which was started in 1992 as AudioNet, with Cuban and others in charge.

Broadcast.com was one of the nascent efforts to broadcast online, focusing on radio-like content on the Web, largely using sports and other live events.

It had one of those typical Web 1.0 faux-blockbuster IPOs in 1998 and then, as the stock began to decline, sold quickly to Yahoo a year later.

Right before, as it turned out, the whole bubble burst.

But Cuban and his cohorts made their scratch and were soon gone from Yahoo.

Cuban, sensing the end was nigh, also dumped his Yahoo shares before the decline. And, armed with a fortune, he began his fun foray into a range of businesses, from sports teams to movie theaters to his HDNet, a high-definition cable network.

And, of course, the private jets and entertaining courtside antics and working at the Dairy Queen!

And, also of course, most of Broadcast.com’s assets are useless to Yahoo today.

Now, Cuban is back knocking at Yahoo’s door as an invader, the only major Internet figure apparently willing to turn on the iconic Yahoo CEO and Co-Founder Jerry Yang.

Calling Benedict Arnold!

I don’t blame Cuban, actually, although Yang surely will be angry over his presence on the Icahn board.

There was always a level of rancor within Yahoo about Cuban, because he sold Broadcast.com at the top, traded out of Yahoo shares at the top and then simply sat back and watched it all as a billionaire gadfly.

BoomTown used to even tease Yang about how Cuban was richer than he was and got to have all the fun. It would always get a glare out of him.

So too could Cuban, as in this post from his smart Blog Maverick (of course, it is named that!) blog, right after Microsoft’s (MSFT) unsolicited bid for Yahoo,.

In it, Cuban urged Yang to sell to the Internet giant, largely due to the pressure of competing with Google (GOOG).

Cuban wrote:

Building a world class Yahoo to be the best company it possibly can be using the management skills that Jerry and company have is a far different challenge than optimizing the stock price. Particularly when Google is your stock comp…

Which is exactly why Jerry and David should sell to MSFT…

So the question isn’t whether Yahoo should sell. It should. The only question is what the structure of the deal should look like so that Jerry and David can achieve many of the goals they set out to accomplish on the net under the MSFT umbrella. Jerry definitely is about customers first. This is his chance to show it…

So Yahoo should say yes. It’s less about the money than about finally achieving the corporate goals set out more than a decade ago. One time Jerry told me that Yahoo stood for You Always Have Other Options. This time Yahoo doesn’t, but their customers options could improve exponentially if Yahoo says yes.”

Given the Yahoo acquisition of Broadcast.com gave the clever Cuban the billions he has used so entertainingly, it’s all kind of ironic, no?

Mark Cuban Already Knows How to Tap Dance

Kara Swisher — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:42:47 +0000

Oh how very delicious comes the news that once obstreperous Internet entrepreneur and now obstreperous Mavericks owner Mark Cuban might appear as a contestant on the guilty-pleasure television show “Dancing With the Stars.”

According to Sports Illustrated, Cuban might join–I have truly died and gone to heaven–singer Wayne Newton and “Beverly Hills, 90210″ star Jennie Garth in the reality show phenomenon, which is actually a pretty tough challenge once you get beyond all that glittery spandex tight pants flaunting and focus on the difficulty of learning how to dance that well in front of huge audiences.

Of course, the Internet chattering class has been more riveted by Cuban’s recent “fight” with VC Fred Wilson and really the whole of the digerati, after he basically said the Internet was “dead and boring” in a post on his Blog Maverick site. (Cuban is pictured above almost perfectly.)

He actually only used those terms to get people all pissed off–a typical Cuban tactic–in this post, but was actually making a great point about the Net becoming a utility and how that is a good thing.

I would agree. Just because I did not ooh and ahh over the fact that my blow dryer was powered by the electrical grid this morning does not make it any less amazing.

It’s just there, as Cuban notes about the Net now, writing, “The days of the Internet creating explosively exciting ideas are dead for the foreseeable future.”

He does go a little far in saying that the Web is not evolving (maybe not as dramatically, but it does still change more drastically than most mediums and will change much more in the years ahead).

But, ever the fight-picker, he came back yesterday with another juicy one right to the kisser of Silicon Valley–which did, to be fair, hand over a fortune to him for his (let’s be kind, shall we?) nascent Broadcast.com many years ago.

Still, who can match Cuban’s frenetic defense of his incessant Web use (all punctuation and spelling as he wrote it):

Ive been inundated with spam on Myspace. Used flicker. Used Digg for sourcing news and laughed at the unending ridiculousness of its posters. Used and posted to Youtube, Google Video, DailyMotion, Veoh, Flickr, Slideshare, used every bittorrent client, got bored with twitter after 7 minutes, signed up for other findme, find you, this is where I am, this is where you are, type app I could find, and the lists go on and on. I read techmeme, techcrunch, extremetech, and tons of other tech sites and I make a point to try every and any new site that seems the least bit plausible or interesting. I spend far far too much time on the net just to make sure I keep up and know whats going on.”

Having covered Cuban back in the day and interviewed him onstage at the very first D: All Things Digital conference, this was a nice reminder of what a pleasure it was to cover such a right-back-at-you character.

In other words, Jennie Garth better be very careful or she is sure to get a sharp elbow to the midsection very, very soon. Wayne Newton is, of course, doomed.

Billionaire Entrepreneur Blamed in Death of Internet

John Paczkowski — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:21:35 +0000

“There is nothing ‘oh my god’ unique that has happened on the Net in forever. What we have seen are incremental applications that have been powered by the amazing ongoing drop in pricing of PCs, hard drives, memory and BACKBONE (not last mile) bandwidth. None of which are ‘the Internet.’ … It’s not the Net, it’s the applications, stupid! Falling costs to create, host and deliver digital bits enable entrepreneurs to be entrepreneurial. … It’s the brainpower that is changing our world. The Internet is just a utility to deliver the digital bits they create.”
–Mark Cuban

In July 2006, Mark Cuban, the billionaire Internet entrepreneur who sold Broadcast.com to Yahoo for $5.7 billion in stock back in 1999, declared the Internet “old news and boring.” And now, a little over a year later, he’s gone and pronounced it dead. Speaking at a cable telecommunications industry event earlier this week Cuban, who seems to have regained his wind after a recent and much publicized colonoscopy, said the Internet has become a dull bunch of infrastructure. “The Internet’s dead,” Cuban said. “It’s over. … The Internet’s for old people.”

Huh. So if the Internet’s for old people, where should the world’s next Mark Cuban focus his/her attentions? On the “intranet,” which Cuban describes as the on-demand and digital video-recording platforms managed by cable companies. “There’s less restriction on the intranet, it’s like your own corporate network for all the cable networks and even wireless,” Cuban told Advertising Age. “All [content] is moving to the TV. What’s the difference between a PC and a TV? Nothing.”