“I hope at some time in the future they will be [willing] to choose Android again,” Schmidt said in a roundtable discussion with a small group of reporters following his keynote speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

Schmidt said that he and Android chief Andy Rubin had talked quite a bit with Nokia and that the company understood its operating system well, but declined to say how advanced the talks with his company had gotten. “We did talk to them,” he said. “I would rather not go into the details.”

Nokia CEO Stephen Elop told Mobilized on Tuesday that Microsoft will pay billions of dollars for the right to have the company cast the “swing vote” in favor of Windows Phone 7.

Asked whether he agreed that the Nokia-Microsoft partnership makes the smartphone business a three-horse race, Schmidt said, “They’ll have to deliver.”

Separately, Schmidt said regarding near-field communications that Google intends to build a business, but won’t be getting into the credit card or terminal business, but is interested in delivering offers to NFC-equipped devices.

He also reiterated that the company isn’t looking to get into the media business.

“It’s important not to get into businesses you don’t understand,” Schmidt said.

Rubin did say that, having gotten into the business of selling apps, Google is also exploring what other kinds of digital goods it might sell, but had no comment on whether it would sell music or publications.

Asked by Mobilized whether the company needs to do more on the social front, Schmidt said that the company isn’t as interested in building products to compete with Facebook as it is to have the social signals it needs in its core products. However, he said that the Facebook “Like” button or something akin to it is important because what you and your friends like is a key to delivering personalized search results.

On the EU front, Schmidt said that company has had some conversations with regulators and looks forward to more in order to address any concerns.

In a bold and definitive move, AOL is paying $315 million, mostly in cash, to buy the Huffington Post, one of the Web’s most prominent news and opinion sites.

As part of the deal, Huffington Post co-founder Arianna Huffington (pictured here)–who was derided by some when she co-founded the left-leaning site in 2005 with investor and well-known communications exec Kenneth Lerer–will become president and editor in chief of the Huffington Post Media Group within AOL.

The deal was signed late this afternoon, and the board of directors of each company and shareholders of the privately held Huffington Post have approved the transaction.

In an exclusive video interview BoomTown conducted earlier today in Dallas, just before Super Bowl XLV, both Armstrong and Huffington were jovial that the whirlwind deal, begun in November, actually worked out so quickly.

Perhaps giddy, they hit upon a common motto:

“One plus one equals 11.”

Get it? One and one next to each other is the number 11!

Let’s move on, shall we?

AOL said it is expected to close in the late-first or early-second quarter of 2011.

Once culminated, it will put Huffington in charge of all AOL content and other properties, including well-known names such as Engadget, Moviefone, MapQuest and TechCrunch.

She said she plans to move to New York from Los Angeles, although she will also maintain her longtime Brentwood home there.

And content for all these sites will be integrated deeply into the Huffington Post, giving it a huge new infusion of editorial material.

More to the point, the flashy acquisition–which essentially came together in less than two weeks in January–will become the linchpin of AOL CEO Tim Armstrong’s aggressive, if risky, strategy to focus the long-troubled company as a content and advertising powerhouse.

For AOL, the deal gives it a popular branded site that is very good at generating lots of page views and impressions very efficiently–which is the company’s whole thrust these days.

That means lots more ad inventory to sell and an injection of content talent, giving AOL the scale it desperately needs.

The move also obviously gives AOL a much-needed editorial identity and cohesion, which it doesn’t really have.

In fact, many think AOL needs a rallying point to bring clarity to its hodgepodge of recent acquisitions that all center on the notion that a strong company has yet to emerge in the premium content space.

Here is a mock-up of the front page of AOL tonight (click on it to make it larger):

While it all makes for a riveting narrative by the charming Armstrong, AOL still has not delivered the business turnaround promised after its spinoff from Time Warner in 2009.

Wall Street, which has given Armstrong a lot of rope, has become more impatient of late to see results–especially more robust increases in its display advertising business, as its access business dies off–after AOL spun off from Time Warner in 2009.

In its quarterly report last week, AOL reported earnings of 61 cents a share on revenue of $596 million.

But, as MediaMemo’s Peter Kafka wrote:

The bigger picture is that Armstrong’s turnaround is still in progress. Ad revenue was down 29 percent in the last quarter, although that number is worse than it looks. A big chunk of the decline comes from moves AOL has intentionally made that will cut revenue in the short run in return for more profitable sales down the road.

A more representative data set for Armstrong are his display ad sales, which are down 14 percent overall and eight percent in the U.S..

The bad news is that the rest of the Web ad industry is well into rebound mode; the good news is that AOL has trained Wall Street to expect numbers like these. If you’re waiting to see positive sales numbers, Armstrong said during AOL’s earnings call this morning, wait until the second half of this year.

In any case, the move is a good one for the Huffington Post since it will vault it to the next level of growth.

Other companies, such as Yahoo and NBC Universal, had looked at the company as a purchase target, and many expected it to eventually sell out to a larger company.

Sources close to the Huffington Post said that that outcome seemed the most likely, and the recent expansion of the site and its audience made it a good time to do a deal now.

Talks with Yahoo last year went nowhere, sources said, but Armstrong was not as slow to act.

Indeed, the actual deal happened quickly, said Armstrong and Huffington in a video interview with BoomTown earlier today (which you can see here).

The pair started talking in early November of last year at the Quadrangle Conference in New York and continued their discussions through the holidays.

Armstrong made the official offer to Huffington by phone in January, while she was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and he was snowed in in New York.

Five time multiple to the Huffington Post’s upward of $60 million in expected revenue for the coming year, and nearly 10 times the $31 million for 2010, the offer was accepted quickly.

AOL used cash for $300 million of the purchase and $15 million in stock for the rest.

“The idea of turning a fire hose of traffic onto our content made enormous sense,” said one person close to the situation. “Everything is changing so fast, it seemed like the time was right.”

An IPO was also considered for the Huffington Post, sources said. But since the site only recently moved into profitability–although barely–such an event would have been farther out.

That’s despite the fact that the Huffington Post has seen fast-growing traffic and influence, spurred in part by Huffington’s larger-than-life persona in both the mainstream media and blogosphere.

The wide-ranging site–which has added a number of content areas in recent years beyond its flagship political offering–currently has almost 26 million unique monthly visitors, according to recent stats, moving in close range to established news organizations such as the New York Times.

That kind of success seemed unlikely when the Huffington Post launched on May 9, 2005, positioning itself as as a liberal counterweight to the popular right-leaning Drudge Report.

But the Huffington Post’s heady mix of celebrity bloggers, personality and voice, as well as aggressive curation of links from other sites, quickly caught on.

To fund its efforts, the New York-based online media company has raised $37 million from angel investors such as Lerer–the largest individual shareholder, followed closely by Huffington–and venture firms such as Greycroft Partners, Softbank Capital and Oak Investment Partners.

The growth has not been without controversy around issues such as lack of payments to bloggers who contribute and accusations that the site uses too much content from other Web sources when linking.

And Huffington herself has also been a lightning rod, which has been both positive and negative for the site.

But, there is no question she is one of the Web’s most prominent players, along with writing books, appearing on television frequently and being a fixture at high-profile events in New York, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

That includes a never-ending panoply of parties that feature a potent mix of movie stars, corporate poo-bahs, glad-handing politicians and lots of journalists from all over the media.

In fact, full disclosure, I was at one of those parties this past weekend for actor Colin Firth and others involved in the making of the Oscar-nominated film “The King’s Speech.” (Apropos of nothing, actor Helena Bonham Carter is as smart as you would expect, but much more delicate.)

As part of the AOL deal, CEO Eric Hippeau–who has been integral to professionalizing the business and will be joining Lerer Ventures–and Chief Revenue Officer Greg Coleman will leave the Huffington Post.

Ironically, Coleman was replaced by Armstrong as head of ad sales at AOL after he took over as CEO. Coleman got a big payout and will now apparently get another.

But the rest of the 200 Huffington Post employees are moving over to AOL with Huffington, who Armstrong hopes will be the company’s ace in the content hole going forward.

There are likely to be changes to come too at AOL, within weeks, especially in its content-side management and site staffs.

AOL provided some quotes in support of the deal from prominent Internet figures who know Huffington well.

“Arianna is one of the preeminent authors and editors of our time, and Tim has a remarkable track record of business success,” said Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg. “Bringing them together creates tremendous potential for AOL.”

And Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said:

“Editorial vision and leadership are essential in order to transmute our shared cacophony of voices into a valuable dialogue. Arianna’s expertise, empathy, and entrepreneurial enthusiasm forms a kind of alchemy turning mere words and phrases into powerful expressions of humanity.”

Inter-Internet harmony: How sweet!

Here is the official press release, with all the details, but there is also an 8 am ET AOL conference call tomorrow:

AOL AGREES TO ACQUIRE THE HUFFINGTON POST

Acquisition Will Solidify AOL’s Strategy of Creating a Premier Content Network With Local, National and International Reach

Arianna Huffington To Lead Newly Formed The Huffington Post Media Group Which Will Integrate All Huffington Post and AOL Content, Including News, Tech, Women, Local, Multicultural, Entertainment, Video, Community, and More

The New Combined Media Group Will Reach 117 Million Americans and 270 Million Globally

Group Uniquely Positioned To Redefine the Future of Brand Advertising and Marketing For an Engaged and Influential Audience

New York, NY–February 7, 2011–AOL Inc. [NYSE:AOL] announced today that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire The Huffington Post, the influential and rapidly growing news, analysis, and lifestyle website founded in 2005, which now counts nearly 25 million unique monthly visitors*.

The transaction will create a premier global, national, local, and hyper-local content group for the digital age–leveraged across online, mobile, tablet, and video platforms. The combination of AOL’s infrastructure and scale with The Huffington Post’s pioneering approach to news and innovative community building among a broad and sophisticated audience will mark a seminal moment in the evolution of digital journalism and online engagement.

The new group will have a combined base of 117 million unique visitors a month in the United States and 270 million around the world**. Following the close of this transaction, AOL will accelerate its strategy to deliver a scaled and differentiated array of premium news, analysis, and entertainment produced by thousands of writers, editors, reporters, and videographers around the globe.

As part of the transaction, Arianna Huffington, The Huffington Post’s co-founder and editor-in-chief, will be named president and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post Media Group, which will include all Huffington Post and AOL content, including Engadget, TechCrunch, Moviefone, MapQuest, Black Voices, PopEater, AOL Music, AOL Latino, AutoBlog, Patch, StyleList, and more.

“The acquisition of The Huffington Post will create a next-generation American media company with global reach that combines content, community, and social experiences for consumers,” said Tim Armstrong, Chairman and CEO of AOL. “Together, our companies will embrace the digital future and become a digital destination that delivers unmatched experiences for both consumers and advertisers.”

Armstrong continued, “Arianna is a singularly passionate and dedicated champion of innovative journalistic engagement, and a master of the art of using new media to illuminate, entertain and enhance the national conversation. Arianna is a remarkable person and she will continue to create remarkable outcomes for the combined company.”

“This is truly a merger of visions and a perfect fit for us,” said Huffington. “The Huffington Post will continue on the same path we have been on for the last six years–though now at light speed–by combining with AOL. Our readers will still be able to come to the Huffington Post at the same URL, and find all the same content they’ve grown to love, plus a lot more–more local, more tech, more entertainment, more finance, and lots more video. We are fusing a legendary and powerful new media brand with a vibrant, innovative news organization, known for its distinctive voice, a highly engaged audience, an expertise in community-building, and a track record for demystifying the news and putting flesh and blood on the data while drawing our audience into the conversation.”

Huffington continued, “By uniting AOL and The Huffington Post, we are creating one of the largest destinations for smart content and community on the Internet. And we intend to keep making it better and better.”

Kenneth Lerer, The Huffington Post’s Co-Founder and Chairman, said, “The Huffington Post team has created a potent brand with the proven track record of knowing how to grow traffic, inform and entertain its readers and build a one-of-a-kind online community. Add that to the powerful scale and resources of AOL and you have the perfect combination for today and the future. Together these two companies will be a premier online content provider. From local citizen reporting through AOL’s Patch, to The Huffington Post’s national reporting on politics, business and culture, consumers will have access to everything they want whenever they want it.”

AOL has agreed to purchase The Huffington Post for $315 million, approximately $300 million of which will be paid in cash funded from cash on hand. The Huffington Post is privately owned by its two cofounders, as well as a group of investors. The proposed transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including receipt of government approvals. The boards of directors of each company and shareholders of The Huffington Post have approved the transaction. The transaction is expected to close in the late first- or early second-quarter 2011.

The Huffington Post over-indexes on educated, affluent users, reaching the key decision makers in C-suites around the globe. The Huffington Post speaks to this influential audience via a host of prominent voices on its group blog. Among those who have blogged on The Huffington Post are: President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Larry Page, Diane Sawyer, Buzz Aldrin, Nora Ephron, Bill Maher, Madeleine Albright, Robert Redford, Katie Couric, Neil Young, Rahm Emanuel, Mia Farrow, Senator Russ Feingold, Senator Al Franken, Ari Emanuel, Harry Shearer, Senator John Kerry, Representative Nancy Pelosi, Madonna, Lawrence Summers, Jamie Lee Curtis, Ryan Reynolds, Craig Newmark, Alec Baldwin, Aaron Sorkin, Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson, Russell Simmons, Sean Penn, Bill Gates, Norman Lear, Charlie Rose, Elizabeth Warren, Tavis Smiley, Sheryl Sandberg, George Clooney, and former President Bill Clinton. And the audience speaks back, generating four million comments a month***.

The Huffington Post’s affluent, influential audience, that is growing at a rate of 22 percent (December 2009 vs. December 2010)****, when combined with AOL’s massive scale, video offerings and local expertise, will represent an incredibly desirable demographic for a broad range of advertising partners across the board.

And here is Armstrong’s internal memo to the AOL staff:

AOLers,

We are taking another major step in the comeback of AOL. Today we are announcing that we have agreed to acquire The Huffington Post, one of the most exciting, influential, and fastest growing properties on the Internet. We believe in brands, quality journalism, and the positive role of communities in the world–The Huffington Post shares our values and the combination of the two companies will create the premier global and local media company on the Internet.

Co-founded six years ago by Arianna Huffington and Ken Lerer, The Huffington Post has grown to become an industry leader–one of the Web’s most popular and innovative sources of online news, commentary, and information. Arianna and team have created a brand and a destination that focuses on the consumer experience. By combining The Huffington Post with AOL’s network of sites, thriving video offerings, local expertise and enormous reach, we will create a company that is laser-focused on serving our audiences across every platform imaginable–social, local, video, mobile and tablet.

The Huffington Post is core to our strategy and our 80:80:80 focus–80% of domestic spending is done by women, 80% of commerce happens locally and 80% of considered purchases are driven by influencers. The influencer part of the strategy is important and will be potent.

The Huffington Post is a strong influencer brand and it attracts a valuable audience, including a great focus on women’s content. In addition, Arianna Huffington is a world-renowned expert on women’s topics and issues, and has enabled The Huffington Post to grow rapidly by continually developing new audiences.

In the local area, the combination of the two companies will create a scaled connection between global and local communities on one platform. This will create a new way for people to get local and global information in a timely and entertaining way.

The Huffington Post will join the family of AOL Brands that are destinations for an influencer audience, brands like TechCrunch, Engadget, AutoBlog, and Moviefone. Uniquely, The Huffington Post is the platform for influential people–the people that drive trends, commerce, politics, entertainment, news, and information. Adding this strategic platform to our already strong network of sites, including the AOL homepage, has the potential to make AOL the most influential company in the content space.

Arianna Huffington is one of the most successful entrepreneurs in the Internet space and someone that is even more successful in building communities and relationships in every corner of the globe. The Huffington Post and Arianna have created a company that has partnered with the most successful and well-known leaders in all aspects of society that touch important topics to give consumers direct access to the most influential decision makers and community leaders.

This acquisition will create a high-quality and diverse digital ecosystem encompassing local, national and international news, politics, entertainment, technology, fashion, sports, health, personal finance, green, lifestyle, the arts and more. This deal will combine the amazing talent at AOL with the innovative and talented staff of The Huffington Post. Here are just a few high-level points around what this deal brings to market:

* Together, AOL and The Huffington Post will have 117MM unduplicated domestic monthly UVs, and ~270MM monthly UVs worldwide (according to comScore Dec 2010).

* The Huffington Post is one of the fastest growing web properties on the Internet. It grew 22% last year–that’s faster than Twitter, which grew 18% – and 15x as quickly as the Internet grew last year (comScore Dec ’09-’10).

* Both AOL and The Huffington Post count powerful, affluent users among their top loyal visitors, significantly over-indexing in $100K+ income users.

* AOL passed Hulu in unique viewers on video in the fourth quarter of 2010; video views on AOL are up 400 percent year-over-year.

* Between AOL’s innovative Project Devil ad unit, engaging users for 27 seconds longer than traditional display ads, and The Huffington Post’s highly-vocal community, with 4MM+ comments per month, we will marry attention-grabbing content and brand experiences for both advertisers and consumers.

In the local area, the combination of the two companies will create a premier global/local syndication network at scale. This will create a new way for people to get local and global information in a timely, informative and entertaining way.

To maximize the strategic advantage of this great deal, we will be creating a new group at AOL called The Huffington Post Media Group. Within this group will be AOL Media, AOL Local & Mapping, AOL Search and our new friends at The Huffington Post. We will continue operating the towns structure, AOL.com and HuffingtonPost.com.

I’m thrilled to announce that Arianna Huffington will join AOL’s executive team as President and Editor in Chief of The Huffington Post Media Group. We have asked Jon Brod to lead the overall operational integration on the AOL side of the combined entities. Jon will lead the local group integration and work closely with David Eun and the teams in AOL Media. We will work quickly with The Huffington Post to create a combined organizational design to coincide with the deal closing. While we wait for the required regulatory reviews to be completed and the transaction to close before implementing the design, we will move very quickly to plan the details of the integration of the two companies. To this end, we will announce the new organizational structure as soon as possible.

In the meantime, we will continue creating great content and products for our consumers within the town structure and stay laser-focused on the aggressive goals we have set for our winter luge. We are on the right track and will continue our weekly operating cadence and town structure to drive successful results against our company goals.

Here’s a special message for all of you we taped to welcome The Huffington Post and Arianna to our AOL Family:

http://today.office.aol.com/company-news/2011/02/aol-agrees-buy-huffington-post

And of course we wanted to welcome Arianna to our “You’ve Got” video of the day–check her out on AOL.com.

We will be holding a company all hands meeting to address your questions related to today’s exciting news. We will video conference from our New York office on the 6th Floor at 9:30 AM ET and will be joined by Arianna Huffington and key executives from her organization. We will also be holding a call for our west coast offices at 2:00 PM ET and for our Patch offices at 2:45 PM ET. See below for meeting info (conference rooms will be sent out shortly).

AOL is playing to win…and The Huffington Post and AOL will occupy a unique place in the future of the Internet. Let’s go get it done.

–TA

(More full disclosure: As has been previously reported by MediaMemo, All Things Digital had the briefest and most preliminary of discussions with Armstrong about moving to AOL last year, while exploring several other options. All’s well that ended well: We stayed at Dow Jones, which is owned by News Corp.)

Yesterday, Demand Media submitted another amended S-1 to the Securities and Exchange Commission, part of its march to an initial public offering many had expected to take place sooner rather than later.

What’s taken so long, said multiple sources familiar with the situation, has been discussions between government regulators and the Santa Monica, Calif., online content company about how to more fully explain to investors–which it did so in the new S-1–how it expenses the costs of making its content.

Currently, using a concept of “long-lived” content, Demand has been amortizing those expenses over five years, since it says it continues to generate revenue on that material over that much time.

As the company noted in its S-1 filing:

“Capitalized media content is amortized on a straight-line basis over five years, representing the Company’s estimate of the pattern that the underlying economic benefits are expected to be realized and based on its estimates of the projected cash flows from advertising revenues expected to be generated by the deployment of its content. These estimates are based on the Company’s plans and projections, comparison of the economic returns generated by its content of comparable quality and an analysis of historical cash flows generated by that content to date.”

That’s different from many companies in the publishing business, which typically account for costs of creating content immediately as they are incurred or over a much shorter time period.

Demand has determined that its content has a more evergreen nature, compared to more topical–and perishable, from a revenue point of view–material produced by others.

Obviously, since this accounting treatment results in more attractive financial results, the longer expense period is of great interest to many other online content creators–such as AOL and Yahoo–which are watching the Demand IPO closely.

While the SEC has not asked Demand to make changes to its accounting practices, the amended S-1 is more detailed about them.

To be allowed to expense over five years, Demand said, the company has to use a sophisticated algorithmic platform–which other content creators do not have–to provide proof of “probable economic benefits” from that content over that time.

Since Demand has long claimed that it has a new and innovative approach to content creation, it is making the case to investors that it needs to have the correct accounting for that approach.

Said Demand in its amended filing:

“In determining whether content embodies probable future economic benefit required for asset capitalization, management has reviewed, and intends to regularly review the operating performance of content published.”

But, it warned:

“Changes from the five year useful life we currently use to amortize our capitalized content would have a significant impact on our financial statements. For example, if underlying assumptions were to change such that our estimate of the weighted average useful life of our media content was higher by one year from January 1, 2010, our net loss would decrease by approximately $1.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2010, and would increase by approximately $2.4 million should the weighted average useful life be reduced by one year.”

Sources said Demand’s road show for investors will not start until the SEC gives its final approval, pushing its IPO into next year.

Demand’s initial filing was to raise $125 million at a reported $1.5 billion valuation. It had said it hoped to have DMD as its ticker symbol on the New York Stock Exchange.

There is no price range yet for the offering, which is being led by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.

Until it all happens, here’s one key section on these issues in the latest S-1 to peruse:

Capitalization and Useful Lives Associated with our Intangible Assets, including Content and Internal Software and Website Development Costs

We publish long-lived media content generated by our content studio which we commission and acquire from third party freelance content creators. Direct costs incurred for each individual content unit that we determine embodies a probable future economic benefit are capitalized. The vast majority of direct content costs represent amounts paid to freelance content creators to acquire content units and, to a lesser extent, specifically identifiable internal direct labor costs incurred to enhance the value of acquired content units prior to their publication. Internal costs not directly attributable to the enhancement of content units acquired prior to publication are expensed as incurred. All costs incurred to deploy and publish content are expensed as incurred, including the costs incurred for the ongoing maintenance of websites on which our content resides. We acquire content when our internal systems and processes, including an analysis of millions of historical Internet search queries, advertising marketing terms, or keywords, and other data provide reasonable assurance that, given predicted consumer and advertiser demand relative to our predetermined cost to acquire the content, the content unit will generate revenues over its useful life that exceed the cost of acquisition. In determining whether content embodies probable future economic benefit required for asset capitalization, management has reviewed, and intends to regularly review the operating performance of content published.

We also capitalize initial registration and acquisition costs of our undeveloped websites and our internally developed software and website development costs during their development phase.

In addition we have also capitalized certain identifiable intangible assets acquired in connection with business combinations and we use valuation techniques to value these intangibles assets, with the primary technique being a discounted cash flow analysis. A discounted cash flow analysis requires us to make various judgmental assumptions and estimates including projected revenues, operating costs, growth rates, useful lives and discount rates.

Our finite lived intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method, which approximates the estimated pattern in which the underlying economic benefits are consumed. Capitalized website registration costs for undeveloped websites are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives of one to seven years. Internally developed software and website development costs are depreciated on a straight-line basis over their estimated three -year useful life. We amortize our intangible assets acquired through business combinations on a straight-line basis over the period in which the underlying economic benefits are expected to be consumed.

Capitalized content is amortized on a straight-line basis over five years, representing our estimate of the pattern that the underlying economic benefits are expected to be realized and based on our estimates of the projected cash flows from advertising revenues expected to be generated by the deployment of our content. These estimates are based on our current plans and projections for our content, our comparison of the economic returns generated by content of comparable quality and an analysis of historical cash flows generated by that content to date which, particularly for more recent content cohorts, is somewhat limited. To date, certain content that we acquired in business combinations has generated cash flows from advertisements beyond a five year useful life. The acquisition of content, at scale, however, is a new and rapidly evolving model, and therefore we closely monitor its performance and, periodically, assess its estimated useful life.

Advertising revenue generated from the deployment of our media content makes up a significant element of our business such that amounts we record in our financial statements related to our content are material. Significant judgment is required in estimating the useful life of our content. Changes from the five year useful life we currently use to amortize our capitalized content would have a significant impact on our financial statements. For example, if underlying assumptions were to change such that our estimate of the weighted average useful life of our media content was higher by one year from January 1, 2010, our net loss would decrease by approximately $1.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2010, and would increase by approximately $2.4 million should the weighted average useful life be reduced by one year. We periodically assess the useful life of our content, and when adjustments in our estimate of the useful life of content are required, any changes from prior estimates are accounted for prospectively.

Walt, Kara and the D staff gobbled up mountains of tiny cupcakes and sipped a drink or two.

We even caught a few photos of the fun.

The acquisition talks between Google and Groupon have ended.

“It’s as over as these things get,” said one person close to the situation.

The reasons for the collapse of the discussions are not clear at this moment, but it seems to center on the decision by the social buying site to remain independent and perhaps go for an IPO.

There are sure to be conflicting stories over the next few days. Did Google get cold feet first? Was there a tussle over a breakup fee, in case of too much regulatory scrutiny? Were the cultural differences too much?

As BoomTown reported earlier today, the annual revenue run rate for Groupon is $2 billion.

Groupon gets to keep about half of that and the rest goes to the myriad merchants it strikes deals with worldwide.

That’s still tremendous growth since its founding in 2008.

And that’s why Silicon Valley search giant Google and Chicago-based start-up Groupon have been in talks in recent weeks about a mammoth acquisition at a $6 billion price tag.

Groupon had turned down a bid of $3 billion from Yahoo earlier this year.

Now, it’s likely that the company will begin a new funding process.

Its closest competitor–LivingSocial–just got $175 million in a strategic investment from Amazon.

Chicago Breaking Business first posted a report of the talks ending, also citing a desire to be independent on the part of Groupon.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

According to sources close to the situation, Groupon’s actual run rate for this year is clocking in at $2 billion in revenue, rather than the widely quoted $500 million.

Who knew hawking spas treatments and stripper pole lessons could be so lucrative?

About 50 percent ofhat revenue is paid out to the myriad of local merchants–called a pass-through–that the social buying phenom does discount deals with, those kind of numbers give some insight into why Google has been willing to entertain paying up to $6 billion to acquire Groupon.

The pair have been in discussions about an acquisition by the search giant, which was first reported here.

Over the last several weeks, a much lower $500 million to $600 million annual revenue figure has been used for Groupon–including here.

Apparently, that’s only in one quarter of the year.

The Chicago-based start-up is privately held and does not have to release its financial information.

As in all acquisition talks, there is a chance they will not result in a purchase. Google and reviews site Yelp, for example, held serious discussions that resulted in no purchase by the search giant.

[UPDATE: The Google-Groupon talks are over, as Chicago-based start-up decided to go it alone.]

One thing not true: A split between CEO Andrew Mason and his two original partners–Brad Keywell and Eric Lefkofsky over the possible sale.

That tension has been rumored by some, with Mason more interested in keeping Groupon independent and focused on an IPO and the others wanting to sell.

Sources said the trio are not at odds over the future of Groupon.

Amazon will invest $175 million in LivingSocial, the No. 2 player in the fast-growing social buying space.

(The press release is below.)

BoomTown reported yesterday that the massive investment was in the works.

The online retail giant’s big bet on the Washington, D.C.-based start-up comes in the wake of ongoing acquisition talks between Google and Groupon, the category leader in the local deals business.

While it appears to be a reaction to those discussions, sources said Amazon and LivingSocial have been talking for some time about a variety of deals between them.

Sources said the Amazon investment put a very hefty valuation of over one billion dollars on LivingSocial.

Interest in LivingSocial has heightened of late, given the $6 billion in cash, stock and earnouts that BoomTown has reported Google is considering ponying up to purchase Chicago-based Groupon, and grab ahold of its 12 million users across the globe and $500 million in annual revenue.

But LivingSocial–which has been thriving even in Groupon’s flashier shadow–has 10 million subscribers worldwide in more than 120 markets and five countries, including the U.S., Canada, the U.K., Ireland and Australia.

And, as LivingSocial noted when it announced its acquisition of Australia’s Jump On It recently, it is currently booking an average of more than $1 million a day and is projected to book well more than $500 million in revenue in 2011.

And that is what has attracted Amazon, which has almost no profile in this lucrative local space, despite some attempts at its own solution. It bought a small and quirky daily deals site, Woot, for $110 million in June.

But sources said that, rather than sell, LivingSocial management wanted to keep the company independent, and thinks a sale of Groupon will give it a huge opportunity for growth.

Why? Well, even though Groupoogle or Goopon are fun to say, the inevitable regulatory review could drag on, resulting in a slowing down of innovation in the bigger Google culture and the distinct possibility of newly rich Groupon execs flying the coop (in private planes).

More investment money should help LivingSocial move ahead faster. Sources also said there is likely to be deep integration between its and Amazon’s services.

LivingSocial announced in April that it had raised $14 million in a Series C round, after grabbing $25 million in a Series B venture funding only a month before. And it has raised $10 million on top of that since 2008.

Sources estimated at the time that the valuation for LivingSocial was several hundred million dollars.

The newest round was led by Lightspeed Venture Partners; earlier investors include U.S. Venture Partners, Grotech Ventures and former AOL head Steve Case.

Lightspeed also invested $8 million more on top of Amazon’s funding.

Here is the official press release:

LivingSocial Announces $175 Million Investment by Amazon.com

WASHINGTON, Dec. 2, 2010 /PRNewswire/–LivingSocial (www.livingsocial.com) has secured a $175 million investment from Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN). LivingSocial has also secured an additional $8 million investment from Lightspeed Venture Partners. LivingSocial will use this investment to maintain a steady drumbeat of worldwide launches and overall business growth while continuing to serve more than 10 million subscribers across the U.S., Canada, UK, Ireland and Australia in more than 120 locations. Because of LivingSocial’s rapid expansion, the company is currently booking revenues of more than $1 million a day on average and is projected to book well over $500 million in revenue in 2011.

“To be the biggest player in the local commerce space there is no one better to work with than Amazon,” said Tim O’Shaughnessy, CEO of LivingSocial. “As the social shopping space continues to heat up, LivingSocial is committed to staying focused on providing the high level of quality that consumers and merchants have come to expect when working with us.”

As the online source to find amazing experiences at an unbeatable value, LivingSocial lets anyone experience the hottest restaurants, shops, activities and services in their area. The company has dedicated area experts on the ground in every location working directly with business owners, and constantly researching the best in local adventures to bring a savings of 50% to 70% for consumers.

Recently, LivingSocial expanded its business by acquiring adventure company Urban Escapes, and launching three new verticals including LivingSocial Family Edition, Campus Deals and LivingSocial Escapes, a travel site that offers unbeatable savings on curated adventures. In addition, the company continues a regular flow of launches–on average one per day–and has expanded its reach in Australia with a controlling stake in Jump On It, making it live in five countries.

With the red-hot acquisition dance between Google and Groupon sucking up all the attention, it’s easy once again to ignore the No. 2 player in the fast-growing social buying space–LivingSocial.

But not everyone is–according to sources close to the situation, the Washington, D.C.-based company that also focuses on local deals is in advanced talks for a major strategic investment–as high as $150 million–by online retail giant Amazon, at a very hefty valuation of over one billion dollars.

Sources said there will also be a deep operating partnership between the pair, as part of the deal.

Sources said the investment negotiations with Amazon is not complete yet, of course, and could fall apart.

But interest in LivingSocial has heightened of late, given the $6 billion in cash, stock and earnouts that BoomTown has reported that Google is considering ponying up to purchase the category leader, Chicago-based Groupon, and grab ahold of its 12 million users across the globe and $500 million in annual revenue.

But LivingSocial–which has been thriving even in Groupon’s flashier shadow–has 10 million subscribers worldwide in more than 120 markets and five countries, including the U.S., Canada, the U.K., Ireland and Australia.

And, as the start-up noted when LivingSocial announced its acquisition of Jump On It recently, it is currently booking an average of more than $1 million a day and is projected to book well more than $500 million in revenue in 2011.

That is what is apparently attracting Amazon, which has almost no profile in this lucrative local space, despite some attempts at its own solution. It bought a small and quirky daily deals site Woot, for $110 million in June.

But, rather than sell, sources said LivingSocial management wants to keep the company independent, and thinks a sale of Groupon will give it a huge opportunity for growth.

Why? Well, even though Groupoogle or Goopon are fun to say, the inevitable regulatory review could drag on, resulting in a slowing down of innovation in the bigger Google culture and the distinct possibility of newly rich Groupon execs flying the coop (in private planes).

More investment money should help.

LivingSocial announced in April that it had raised $14 million in a Series C round, after grabbing $25 million in a Series B venture financing only a month before. And it raised $10 million on top of that since 2008.

Sources estimated at the time that the valuation for LivingSocial was several hundred million dollars.

The newest round was led by Lightspeed Venture Partners; Earlier investors U.S. Venture Partners, Grotech Ventures and former AOL head Steve Case.

A report of the Amazon interest in LivingSocial was first posted several weeks ago in a in VentureBeat, a day before BoomTown first broke the news of the Groupon and Google discussions.

Both Amazon and LivingSocial declined to comment.

But here is an October video interview I did with LivingSocial CEO Tim O’Shaughnessy on a recent visit to Silicon Valley.

The entrepreneur has worked at AOL, as well as at Case’s Revolution Health in Washington, before moving on to the local deals start-up.

Enjoy:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101201/amazon-poised-to-make-a-major-strategic-investment-in-livingsocial-to-counter-groupoogle-threat/feed/ 3 http://allthingsd.com/20101129/googles-groupon-offer-5-3-billion-with-700-million-earnout/ http://allthingsd.com/20101129/googles-groupon-offer-5-3-billion-with-700-million-earnout/#comments Tue, 30 Nov 2010 06:58:13 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=37775

According to sources close to the situation, Google has offered $5.3 billion for Groupon, in what would be its largest acquisition yet, if completed.

Sources said the deal for the Chicago-based social buying site seems likely to be struck, even as early as tomorrow, although it certainly could fall apart right up to the end.

But, if done, it will move the search giant instantly to the top spot in local commerce online and give it huge troves of data about consumer buying habits and merchant information across the globe.

Combined with its pending $700 million acquisition of ITA Software, the travel data firm, that should freak out regulators worldwide and could be considered Google’s own version of a jobs plan for antitrust lawyers.

That said, it is a killer move for Google–despite the high price–given it has long tried to enter the local advertising space, with decidedly mixed results.

With its more than $33 billion in cash and strong stock, it had previously tried to buy local reviews site Yelp, in a deal that fell apart for reasons that are still unclear.

In contrast, Groupon, founded in 2008, has taken off like a Roman candle and dominates the huge market for social shopping and discounting.

While the $6 billion Google is considering paying seems high, Groupon’s fast-growing revenue and profitability make its multiples less daunting, said those familiar with the matter.

It will certainly be a big payoff for Groupon’s investors, including Silicon Valley’s Accel Partners, as well as Battery Ventures, New Enterprise Associates and Russia’s DST Global.

Groupon has gleaned about $170 million in venture funding from them, most of which it has not needed.

That’s because it has reportedly attracted upward of $50 million in monthly revenue.

It has done this by offering “daily deals”–getting a massive discount from local retailers in return for delivering customers via marketing via email and on social networks, especially Facebook and Twitter.

Typically, local merchants rely on less effective newspaper circulars or paper couponing.

In what will certainly be one of the deal’s ironies, Google could own a start-up that is largely powered by rival Facebook’s massive skein of social networking connections.

Facebook, of course, recently introduced its own Facebook Deals offering.

BoomTown first wrote about the deal discussions between Groupon and Google two weeks ago, noting the price would be well above the $2 billion to $3 billion offered by Yahoo.

That interest from Yahoo, which was first to sniff around the fast-growing social buying site, was first reported here too–mostly because I apparently like to stalk Groupon CEO and Justin Bieber lookalike Andrew Mason.

(And I will personally be fascinated to see how he’ll mesh with Marissa Mayer, the former search experience head who is now leading local for Google.)

The New York Times–which does not ever seem able to give credit, as All Things Digital and other blogs always do happily and without fuss–is also reporting a $6 billion price tag for Groupon.

While we all await the outcome of this potential blockbuster of a deal, here is a video interview I did with Mason this summer in Vancouver, where I asked him specifically about Google’s interest (actually, I suggested he mug Google co-founder Larry Page for dough).

Note the Bieber haircut:

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101129/googles-groupon-offer-5-3-billion-with-700-million-earnout/feed/ 30 http://allthingsd.com/20101129/if-google-buys-groupon-itll-be-a-windfall-for-investors-bankers-and-regulators/ http://allthingsd.com/20101129/if-google-buys-groupon-itll-be-a-windfall-for-investors-bankers-and-regulators/#comments Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:33:39 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=37734

If Google does manage to close the deal to buy Groupon–acquisition discussions flagged by BoomTown 10 days ago–it will be at a cost that is likely to be much more than the $2.5 billion price tag being floated in the latest batch of rumors.

It’s not just that the deal will likely come in at a higher number–upwards of $3 billion, according to sources I have spoken to–which will mean a big payoff for Silicon Valley’s Accel Partners, Boston’s Battery Ventures and Russia’s DST Global.

Or that this deal will net New York bankers used on each side–Allen & Co. for Groupon and Morgan Stanley for Google–sizable fees.

It’s because as soon as it purchases the social group buying phenom, the search giant will be buying a whole lot of pricey regulatory scrutiny too.

That cost will be, many think, much deserved and will definitely not come at any discount, given the rising worries in Washington about the swaggering power of Google.

After ever-testier brushes with federal regulators–including over an overreaching attempt to join with Yahoo in search and online access to copyrighted books–Google narrowly missed getting approval for its $750 million purchase of mobile advertising start-up AdMob.

That deal was only saved after Apple made enough noise in the same space to take the focus off the controversy.

And let’s not forget Google suing the feds earlier this month over being excluded from competitive bidding to provide email and collaboration technology to the Interior Department’s 88,000 employees.

More seriously, Google has come under fire recently from numerous critics for its proposed purchase of huge flight data firm ITA Software for $700 million.

Those opposed to the acquisition, on antitrust grounds, contend that Google would control travel search in a way that would inevitably invite abuse.

The government, of course, is looking over the whole deal now.

Having Groupon in its arsenal would garner Google even more powerful pricing information from both customers and merchants across the globe.

That would in the lucrative local commerce arena. Currently, despite a plethora of clones, Groupon dominates socially fueled couponing across cities worldwide.

Owning the hot space around local purchasing and consumer information, combined with the social element, would be a tasty treat for Google.

The Silicon Valley search giant has struggled to deliver social tools to users, even as Facebook has morphed into a potent rival.

Google had looked at social reviews site Yelp for purchase previously, but that deal fell apart.

It has been introducing its own various local advertising and commerce efforts, which would be instantly turbocharged given Groupon’s much quicker progress.

In April, Groupon garnered a valuation of well above $1 billion in a massive venture funding.

It has used that money to buy up companies in the U.S. and internationally, trying to solidify itself as the major player in the marketplace.

If Google were to complete a deal to buy Groupon, it would have echoes of its purchase of YouTube in 2006 for $1.6 billion.

Many felt it a high price at the time, but it looks cheap now given how the site almost completely dominates Web video.

If that deal were to be struck today, of course, it is unlikely regulators would allow such a purchase to sail through the approval process so easily.

Thus, it will be interesting to see how they will react to a possible hook-up with Groupon, which–in many ways–is perhaps the most aggressive of Google’s moves to date to own valuable data up and down the food chain.

And, like I said, this particular move to buy discounting online could be one of its costliest too, in more ways than one.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101129/if-google-buys-groupon-itll-be-a-windfall-for-investors-bankers-and-regulators/feed/ 6 http://allthingsd.com/20101119/google-turns-its-local-eyes-to-groupon-but-who-else-could-enter-bidding/ http://allthingsd.com/20101119/google-turns-its-local-eyes-to-groupon-but-who-else-could-enter-bidding/#comments Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:38:06 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=37521

According to multiple sources close to the situation, Google is in discussions with local deals powerhouse Groupon about buying it.

Without making the requisite joke about the deal of the day, sources said the price being considered is certainly no discount–well above the $2 billion to $3 billion that Yahoo offered Groupon in acquisition talks that took place earlier this year.

But sources cautioned that the talks are not complete, and could also end up without any result, as the Yahoo discussions did.

In an email, a Google spokesperson said with some style: “Per usual, we don’t comment on rumor or speculation. If we did we’d be busy 24/7!”

A Groupon spokesperson was also sassy, noting: “Thanks for the heads-up!”

Still, the company appears to be engaged in a pattern of shopping itself around, via its bankers Allen & Co., even though Groupon investors have expressed a desire to stay independent many times.

But could there be other interested parties poking around, given the explosive revenue growth of Groupon–whose revenues are reportedly upward of $50 million a month–in the huge local retail market?

Sources said only three could pay such a high price: Microsoft, Amazon and, perhaps the most logical buyer, eBay.

Facebook is another company that could be interested, of course, although this would be a sizable purchase in both cost and also staff for the social networking giant, which has fewer employees than Groupon.

As does Google, all–except perhaps Facebook, which is not public yet–have more than enough cash reserves, as well as stock, to pay up for one of the more promising start-ups in a lucrative arena.

That would be local commerce. Currently, despite a plethora of clones, Groupon dominates socially fueled couponing across cities globally.

Owning the hot space around local purchasing and consumer information, combined with the social element, would be a tasty treat for Google.

The Silicon Valley search giant has struggled to deliver social tools to users, even as Facebook has morphed into a potent rival.

Google had looked at social reviews site Yelp for purchase previously, but that deal fell apart.

It has been introducing various local advertising and commerce efforts, efforts that would be turbocharged given Groupon’s quick progress.

In April, Groupon garnered a valuation of well above $1 billion in a massive venture funding.

It has used that money to buy up companies in the U.S. and internationally, trying to solidify itself as the major player in the marketplace.

If Google were to complete a deal to buy Groupon, it would have echoes of its purchase of YouTube in 2006 for $1.6 billion.

Many felt it a high price at the time, but it looks cheap today given how the site almost completely dominates Web video.

A purchase this size would also likely require bankers. Google’s favored one is Morgan Stanley.

But there is one major issue in a possible Google purchase of Groupon: Even more regulatory scrutiny by the federal government over its power online.

Google narrowly missed getting approval for its $750 million purchase of mobile advertising start-up AdMob.

And it is currently under fire from numerous critics for its proposed purchase of huge flight data firm ITA Software for $700 million.

Those opposed to the acquisition, on antitrust grounds, contend that Google would control travel search in a way that would invite abuse.

Having Groupon would garner Google even more powerful pricing information from both customers and merchants across the globe.

Stay tuned, but check out this video interview I did with Groupon founder and CEO Andrew Mason this summer in Vancouver, where I asked him specifically about Google’s interest (actually, I suggested he mug Google co-founder Larry Page):

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101119/google-turns-its-local-eyes-to-groupon-but-who-else-could-enter-bidding/feed/ 16 http://allthingsd.com/20101107/aol-yahoo-hookup-not-so-much-right-now-but-bankers-spinning-much/ http://allthingsd.com/20101107/aol-yahoo-hookup-not-so-much-right-now-but-bankers-spinning-much/#comments Mon, 08 Nov 2010 05:39:52 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=36869

While a merger of AOL and Yahoo is a fervent dream of bankers looking for fees, the reality is a little more–shall we say–premature.

In fact, it’s likely it was just those dealmakers, looking to gin up some activity, who are behind the latest spin-riffic article in The Wall Street Journal that reports on machinations by AOL to hire unnamed advisers to carry out all kinds of complex deals.

Actually, it is the complexity of any of those deals that has put a lot of the takeover, buyout, merger and other scenarios that center around Yahoo–with a side of AOL, as well as News Corp., Microsoft, Yahoo Japan, the Alibaba Group–on ice.

Among the issues being grappled with: Onerous tax implications around a variety of deals; a need for complete cooperation from too many players; and the realization that a hookup of AOL and Yahoo might cause more problems than it solves.

“It looks great conceptually and everyone gets all hot and bothered,” said one prominent investor who did his own strategizing about Yahoo and AOL. “But when you actually do the numbers, you hit a pretty big wall of impossible.”

Still, any whiff of a deal makes for a spate of overreaching stories in the press, such as the Journal’s, which sources at both Yahoo and AOL tell me started out as one about how the pair were in preliminary merger discussions.

They are not, unless a call or two between AOL CEO Tim Armstrong and Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz on how to handle the hubbub constitutes preliminary.

It doesn’t, of course, unlike serious merger discussions the companies held several years ago, well before the arrival of either Armstrong or Bartz on the scene.

The Journal story then apparently morphed into one about how AOL was on the hunt to figure out what to do–especially about Yahoo–by hiring new advisers.

Actually, the company has had its same old one, Allen & Co., since it was spun off from Time Warner last year. It has since also retained Bank of America.

Yahoo’s longtime banking adviser has been Goldman Sachs, which was re-engaged more than six weeks ago, only due to all the incoming attention.

That would be from other bankers, private equity firms and others, many of whom have ginned up a variety of schemes and have then pinged both AOL and Yahoo.

Curiously, this kind of activity was reported extensively a month ago here and in the Journal too.

Read the Journal article on October 13:

“AOL Inc. and several private-equity firms are exploring making an offer to buy Yahoo Inc., according to people familiar with the matter, devising a bold plan to marry two big Internet brands facing steep challenges.”

A bold plan to marry? You might want put the honeymoon reservations on hold for now.

That’s because interest does not mean result, especially when it comes to merger scenarios (and, if you are bored, you can read a whole bunch BoomTown came up with in late September).

But, in fact, because the big Yahoo-AOL deal is harder to realize in practice than in theory, things have quieted down and there are no proposals being evaluated by Yahoo or offered by AOL.

And, thus, the dealmakers must begin to chatter again to get things hopping.

Ironically, both boards of AOL and Yahoo should be considering a spate of ideas–however outlandish–to spur growth and innovation in their lackluster businesses.

And, in truth, if some very big players, such as Microsoft, got involved, the smoke around both AOL and Yahoo could someday become a real fire.

(Full disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns both this site and the Journal.)

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101107/aol-yahoo-hookup-not-so-much-right-now-but-bankers-spinning-much/feed/ 2 http://allthingsd.com/20101008/from-the-department-of-the-obvious-poll-finds-parents-are-worried-about-privacy-on-social-networks/ http://allthingsd.com/20101008/from-the-department-of-the-obvious-poll-finds-parents-are-worried-about-privacy-on-social-networks/#comments Fri, 08 Oct 2010 07:10:43 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=35149

A national poll released today by Common Sense Media asking how well social networks protect kids online produced an answer that should come as a shock to exactly no one:

Not very well, at least according to parents.

A full 75 percent of them gave social networking sites such as Facebook a negative rating for the task.

About 2,000 parents were polled by the nonprofit media organization, as well as 400 teens, who also gave thumbs down to social networks’ ability to police themselves.

There will be a big roundtable discussion on the topic in Washington, D.C., this morning, which will include Common Sense Media head Jim Steyer, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz and Deputy Secretary of Education Anthony Miller.

Along with the poll results, San Francisco-based Common Sense Media said it will also announce the launch of the “Protect Our Privacy–Protect Our Kids” campaign to help parents protect kids’ reputations and personal information online.

I love the smell of impending privacy legislation in the morning!

Already from Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts: “As the House author of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, I remain intently interested in ensuring that children are not targeted online and their privacy is strictly protected. Twelve years after the bill was signed into law, entire new technologies and industries have emerged that could put children’s safety at risk, making a legislative update necessary. I look forward to introducing such legislation to bring COPPA into the 21st century.”

Thus, here is more for pols to chew on: The bulk of those surveyed are more concerned with online privacy than they were five year ago (another obvious one); parents do not believe Web sites, including search engines such as Google (GOOG), should share the location of kids (count me in on that one too!); and teens think their friends overshare (you think?).

But instead of me telling you, just read it all here in top-line results for adults and teens, as well as in the official press release:

Final CSM adults topline

Final CSM teen topline

Privacy Poll Results and Campaign Launch

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101008/from-the-department-of-the-obvious-poll-finds-parents-are-worried-about-privacy-on-social-networks/feed/ 2 http://allthingsd.com/20100916/apparently-yahoos-bartz-didnt-get-the-memo-about-avoiding-land-wars-in-asia/ http://allthingsd.com/20100916/apparently-yahoos-bartz-didnt-get-the-memo-about-avoiding-land-wars-in-asia/#comments Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:02:56 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=33822

How can BoomTown put this as delicately as Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz would?

How about this: Her actions in regard to the Internet giant’s Asian relationships are about as bad as it gets these days.

After losing Yahoo Japan’s search and online advertising business to Google (GOOG) last month, followed by the loss of a major South Korean site’s search business, Yahoo is poised for a third strike with its partner in China, the Alibaba Group.

Sources close to the company said it is likely Alibaba will either partner with another search technology for sites that are now powered by Yahoo (YHOO) or build it internally.

That inevitability became crystal clear after Bartz gave an interview to Reuters that was posted yesterday.

In it, she claimed that the Alibaba Group “constantly” was asking Yahoo about repurchasing its 40 percent stake in the company and she was always putting its execs off with a big, fat no.

Alibaba, which has been in several word wars with Yahoo since Bartz took over, begged to differ, noting there was only one legitimate offer and that Yahoo engaged in discussions over it.

So, not exactly a no.

Said an Alibaba PR spokesman in a statement:

“We made an offer that included a partial sale and a specific plan to maximize the value of their remaining stake. That offer was rejected, and they countered with a very different proposal, which we found unjustifiable, and we terminated the discussions.”

Bartz then stuck the knife in deeper in an interview in The Wall Street Journal, published today, noting, “I personally think what is happening is [Alibaba CEO] Jack Ma would like to go public and like some of his stock back.”

That’s probably true, given that the eventual IPO of Alibaba’s Taobao online retail unit will boost value of Yahoo’s stake.

Still, Bartz’s words were as impolitic as a public company CEO could make, especially after a series of gaffes related to its ally in China.

Alibaba has made no bones about wanting it and Yahoo to go their own separate ways, with one exec saying in an interview last week, “Why do we need a financial investor with no business synergy or technology?”

While such noise has all the signs of a negotiating tactic, the growing tensions between Yahoo and Alibaba are quite real, and born from a series of uncomfortable encounters between Bartz and Ma.

Remember, this is the same exec who sold off a piece of Alibaba to former Yahoo co-founder and CEO Jerry Yang, and with whom he had, and continues to have, a cordial relationship.

Yang is on the board of Alibaba, which is about to become another point of conflict after Bartz also said in the Journal interview that she “probably” would join it.

Said an Alibaba spokesman about that:

“Regarding reports of Carol Bartz seeking a board seat, we have no notice of that and also no notice of whether she intends to replace Jerry or seek an additional board seat.”

Now, that’s a nice welcome!

While sources said Alibaba is loath to have Bartz as a director, Yahoo does have the right to another seat on the four-person board, which also includes Masayoshi Son, the powerful Asian investor who was apparently behind the ending of Yahoo Japan’s search technology partnership with Yahoo.

It was Son himself, one of Yahoo’s earliest investors, several sources said, who jump-started the deal with Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

Why? According to numerous sources, the SoftBank founder had also soured on Yahoo management and its ability to monetize the very successful Yahoo Japan site.

While it might seem unusual that Yahoo Japan will be using Google’s search, it is not actually owned by Yahoo, which holds a 35 percent stake in the publicly traded company. SoftBank, the giant Japan-based Internet service provider and cell phone provider, has a stake of around 40 percent in Yahoo Japan.

As for NHN, which is South Korea’s largest Internet search engine, with a 65 percent share, it said in late August it would dump Yahoo technology and use its own after its deal ends later this year.

“We desperately need an advertising platform that’s more flexible and effective, with closer ties to the local market to respond to advertisers’ expectations promptly,” said NHN CEO Kim Sang Hun about ending its Yahoo relationship.

While each of these Asian situations are different, as Bartz will surely point out, it all adds up to trouble, given Yahoo has signed a deal with Microsoft (MSFT) to take over its search technology going forward globally.

Sources at Microsoft said management is exasperated at the turn of events, especially in Japan, which seemed a certainty for Yahoo to maintain as a partner.

The software giant has been trying to see if there are any ways to block the Google-Yahoo Japan deal via regulators there, which is a very long shot.

“Not ideal,” said one source close to the situation. “That would be an understatement.”

In this noisy war in Asia, perhaps understatement might be a good strategy going forward for Yahoo.

Until all the tension clears up, though, have a laugh at at this classic battle-of-wits scene from the movie “The Princess Bride,” which has the single best use of the classic land-war-in-Asia line:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100916/apparently-yahoos-bartz-didnt-get-the-memo-about-avoiding-land-wars-in-asia/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20100916/exclusive-myspace-and-google-zero-in-on-renewing-realistic-search-deal/ http://allthingsd.com/20100916/exclusive-myspace-and-google-zero-in-on-renewing-realistic-search-deal/#comments Thu, 16 Sep 2010 08:45:31 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=33792

After what started out as one of Web 2.0′s most frothy deals and soon became a contentious relationship, several sources said that Google and MySpace are moving close to signing a new agreement, in which the search giant would remain the provider of search and online advertising technology for the social networking site.

But, said sources, this deal is a lot different from the one signed four years back when the News Corp. (NWS) unit was flying high and Google (GOOG) forked over $900 million in guaranteed payments to stave off a competitive effort from Microsoft (MSFT).

This time, because MySpace’s traffic has declined so precipitously over these years, the new deal has no giant guaranteed payments and not even any of the bells and whistles the recent renewed and expanded search deal AOL (AOL) struck with Google has.

“It is a different time and MySpace is in a much different place,” said one source close to the situation. “This is a realistic deal.”

Sources stressed the deal with Google was not complete, although it could be struck within weeks.

Sources said Microsoft (MSFT), which had been in talks with MySpace too, has largely dropped out, although it certainly could put forward another offer at any time.

But, said sources, the search volume from MySpace is not as valuable to Microsoft’s Bing search service and it would have to pay MySpace more since it does not monetize as well as Google.

Another bidder, Yahoo (YHOO), sources said, was not considered a factor in the competition, although it could also still make a better bid.

Google and MySpace continued their talks about renewing the deal after their original contract ended at the end of July, agreeing to two one-month extensions.

The hope is, if struck, a new Google deal will perform better, given MySpace will launch a soup-to-nuts renovation of its site, codenamed Futura, in mid-October.

Before that, the Beverly Hills, Calif., company, which has undergone much management turmoil over the last year, has been dribbling out some of these new features.

That has included new profiles and also the ability to synch status updates on its site with Facebook.

Yes, the very social networking giant whose total decimation of MySpace in the consumer space has been at the heart of its problems in making its original Google deal as lucrative as was once hoped.

MySpace declined to comment on the status of its negotiations, and Google has not yet returned a query about the deal discussions.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100916/exclusive-myspace-and-google-zero-in-on-renewing-realistic-search-deal/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100915/exclusive-facebook-and-microsoft-deep-in-talks-about-deepening-search-ties/ http://allthingsd.com/20100915/exclusive-facebook-and-microsoft-deep-in-talks-about-deepening-search-ties/#comments Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:05:08 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=33774

Facebook and Microsoft are discussing an agreement that would significantly expand the search relationship the pair have shared for many years, said several people with knowledge of the situation.

According to those sources, that includes the possibility for the software giant’s Bing search service to mine anonimized data from consumer usage of the social networking site’s recently introduced Like buttons.

The Like button, which Facebook has been trying to proliferate around the Web, allows users to indicate an interest in a page with one click that then tells their Facebook friends.

While the deal is not closed and talks could end without result, such information might yield a treasure trove of insight for both search users and advertisers.

That’s because it represents search based on what people are actually interested in rather than just crunching massive amounts of information and muscling it into something useful.

And it would also presumably give Bing a little leg up on Google (GOOG), since data will be available on it that is not available on the search giant, made more important as Facebook’s information-generating audience grows ever larger.

But because of Facebook’s many privacy snafus, sources said that any expansion of the search relationship will never involve providing any information except that which users have agreed to make public.

Facebook and Microsoft (MSFT) already struck a nonexclusive agreement almost a year ago to integrate Facebook’s real-time feeds of public status updates into Bing.

It’s part of a longtime search–as well as investment–relationship between Microsoft and Facebook that stretches back for years.

Currently, Bing provides global Web search to Facebook, yielding branded results whenever someone searches within the service.

Microsoft also invested $240 million in Facebook in late 2007 and has since had a mostly cooperative relationship with the fast-growing Silicon Valley company.

It also has provided a hedge against Google for Facebook, as that pair’s relations has worsened over the years due to intensified competition.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100915/exclusive-facebook-and-microsoft-deep-in-talks-about-deepening-search-ties/feed/ 2 http://allthingsd.com/20100826/google-realtime-search-now-with-real-web-address/ http://allthingsd.com/20100826/google-realtime-search-now-with-real-web-address/#comments Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:36:00 +0000 Beth Callaghan http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=28856 Google introduced real-time search features in December, but it wasn’t until today that the niche got its own home at www.google.com/realtime. Google has also added some tools to make the mighty river of real-time more manageable: You can narrow your search to a specific geographic area or discussion and get email updates on search topics you’re interested in. And in the opacity of a typical Google user experience, if you want to access Realtime Search from the homepage, good luck. You can, however, find it in the left column of Web search results by clicking on “more,” then on “updates.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100826/google-realtime-search-now-with-real-web-address/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100318/flashback-when-viacom-wanted-to-buy-youtube/ http://allthingsd.com/20100318/flashback-when-viacom-wanted-to-buy-youtube/#comments Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:30:33 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=17554 Here are a couple documents the Google public relations team is pointing reporters to as it releases material related to its fight with Viacom: Evidence that Viacom executives were interested in buying YouTube four years ago.

My understanding is that Viacom discussed this internally and made preliminary approaches to YouTube in 2006, but that discussions never got serious, even though Viacom had thrown out a $1 billion price tag. Google (GOOG), of course, ended up buying YouTube for $1.65 billion later that year.

The implication here is that if Viacom (VIA) thought YouTube was worth owning in 2006, it shouldn’t be suing it now. I don’t know if this is relevant in court, but that’s for lawyers and judges to hash out.

Regardless, it’s fun reading, if you’re into this kind of thing. Note the concern among Viacom executives that News Corp. (NWS) would end up owning YouTube instead of them.

SchEx126

SchEx173

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100318/flashback-when-viacom-wanted-to-buy-youtube/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100205/mossberg-ipad-on-charlie-rose-show/ http://allthingsd.com/20100205/mossberg-ipad-on-charlie-rose-show/#comments Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:17:01 +0000 Walt Mossberg http://mossblog.allthingsd.com/?p=408 Thursday’s “Charlie Rose Show” featured a discussion with Walt Mossberg, David Carr and Michael Arrington about the upcoming Apple iPad. Their wide-ranging discussion covered topics such as the surprising price point, the omission of Flash and Apple’s (AAPL) challenges in this new market.

[FLOWPLAYER=http://charlierose.http.internapcdn.net/charlierose/digitalgrill_content/020410_2.flv,380,300]

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100205/mossberg-ipad-on-charlie-rose-show/feed/ 34