According to Mashable, Google is close to launching “Google Offers,” a service that will compete with Groupon, LivingSocial and their hundreds of clones.

In a fact sheet sent to Mashable, it says users will receive a daily email offering a local deal, and as with other sites, the discount will be activated once enough people have made the purchase. The deal will be promoted throughout Google’s ad networks.

Google confirmed the service at a very high level: “Google is communicating with small businesses to enlist their support and participation in a test of a pre-paid offers/vouchers program. This initiative is part of an ongoing effort at Google to make new products, such as the recent Offer Ads beta, that connect businesses with customers in new ways.”

To be sure, early providers have proven that the business can scale.

For instance, just yesterday LivingSocial sold 1.3 million $20 Amazon gift cards for $10 each to ring up a one-day sales total of $13 million. Groupon’s run rate is close to $2 billion, although about half of that is passed on to merchants.

It’s not surprising that Google is kicking off the service without acquiring a company in the space. Groupon would rather seek an IPO than sell, and LivingSocial has already teamed up with Amazon–and after those two, it’s slim pickings.

Google’s challenge won’t be in attracting a large audience but in executing the business.

Traditionally, Google has focused on a self-service advertising model, where merchants can go online to buy an ad without having to interact with a salesperson. But Groupon and LivingSocial have approached the business differently and have put hundreds of feet on the street. Groupon has roughly 3,000 employees, while LivingSocial has about 600–and both are growing extremely fast.

Google could try the approach it knows best, by automating the process and putting at least some of it online. After all, one of the reasons it was reportedly willing to pay so much for Groupon was for its local sales force.

So far, Google’s local track record has been spotty. Getting mom-and-pops interested in buying keywords online has been notoriously hard, as they have continued to prefer working with other mediums like newspapers and yellow pages (which do have local sales forces).

But if it is successful at automating any part of the process, Google could take a smaller cut of the deal than others do today, which could push down margins for everyone.

Photo Credit: Mashable.

Depending on how long it takes, the switch to QNX could cause RIM to suffer some share loss in the smartphone market, particularly its high end. That’s the theory put forth by Canaccord Genuity analyst Mike Walkley, who believes RIM’s going to have a tough time maintaining market share in higher-end smartphones given the execution risks involved in rolling out a new OS and related portfolio of products.

Says Walkley, “We believe RIM will likely lose high-end smartphone market share and higher-end North American subscribers over the next several quarters due to limited new high-end product launches ahead of new QNX smartphones combined with improving competitive smartphone offerings such as the Samsung and HTC Android based smartphones at most carriers.”

And the iPhone, likely launching at Verizon early next year, won’t make things any easier. The PlayBook, of course, has and will continue to drive upside in the months ahead–assuming its launch goes smoothly and it is as well-received as investors seem to hope. But it too faces rivals formidable enough that Walkley doesn’t see it selling much more than 1.75 million units in C2011.

“We believe the PlayBook will struggle to compete against the iPad given the large ecosystem of applications for the iPad and the form factor and GUI of the iPad versus the PlayBook,” he concludes. “Further, we anticipate several Android-based tablets launching in 2011 at very aggressive price points and potentially running the Android 3.0 (Gingerbread version) and we anticipate an increasingly competitive environment.”

Big Web CEO/very recently CEO Interviews:

The headliners for the Web crowd were Eric Schmidt of Google on day one, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook on day two and Evan Williams of Twitter on day three. None of the conversations were super revelatory, but they did highlight the heightening competitive tensions between Facebook and the rest of the Web.

Here’s the Zuckerberg video, which was notable for being one of his better public interviews in terms of ease and clarity (nothing like the near-fainting incident while being pummeled with privacy questions by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher at D8).

Two good comments from Web 2.0: About giving Google access to Facebook user email addresses, Zuckerberg said, “I’m not sure we’re 100 percent right on this.” (For someone with his hubris, that’s practically an admission of guilt.) Zuckerberg also criticized the visualization of the Web as a map of territories that illustrated the Web 2.0 stage.

“Your map is wrong,” he said. “The biggest part of the map has to be uncharted territory–this map makes it seem like it’s zero-sum, but it’s not. We’re building value, not just taking it away from someone else.”

Here are Schmidt (already at 170,000 views!) and Williams.

Best panel:

The most captivating panel was the one with venture capitalists John Doerr and Fred Wilson, ably moderated by John Heilemann. Wilson argued that Google has bought all of its recent interesting products, saying its last in-house success was Gmail. “They haven’t home-built from the ground up anything interesting in a half decade,” he said. Doerr replied passionately, “Ideas are easy. What’s really dear is execution. Google executes. Facebook executes.”

Best start-up presentation:

Brian Pokorny, CEO of DailyBooth, explained how the young people who use his site to share pictures are having conversations with each other. Pokorny made an interesting distinction about how–unlike with other photo-sharing apps–his users choose to use the front-facing camera on the iPhone and iPod Touch so they can take pictures of themselves.

An evening talk by agent Ari Emanuel was also quite well-received, with many people mentioning it to me the next day. You can watch it here.

Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics
statement.

Today, Yahoo sent out an invite for a press conference in New York on Monday with a mysterioso tone:

It read, vaguely:

“Please join Yahoo! CEO Carol Bartz for an exciting announcement about providing global consumers with rich online and mobile experiences, and bringing forward a new era in keeping consumers connected.”

That’s all it took to get BoomTown on the horn to find out what that meant.

And, according to sources, that will be a deal with Finland-based mobile phone giant Nokia (NOK) to build Yahoo (YHOO) email, search and other applications and services into a range of its devices.

While the pair had once discussed Nokia making a Yahoo-centric phone, sources said that is unlikely to be part of this deal.

Such a partnership–code-named “Project Nike” after the Greek goddess of victory and not the sneaker–has been batted around for many years between the companies without result, even as Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL) have grabbed the spotlight and business in the exploding smartphone market.

Yahoo has had a range of various mobile initiatives and has had many, mostly failed, partnerships with carriers and telecom makers.

But without its own phone or mobile operating system, such as Google’s Android, the Internet giant is essentially nowhere in what has become the most important digital sector today.

Nokia, which makes more mobile devices–mostly “feature” phones, not smartphones–than any other company, has also struggled to keep up the lightning-fast pace of innovation and has been looking for ways to compete as the landscape shifts dramatically.

That’s why the long-festering deal was placed again on the fast track, especially by Bartz, who has put a lot of emphasis of late on showing Yahoo to be more relevant and cutting-edge.

Thus, the Nokia deal is likely to be a splashy centerpiece of next week’s investor day on Wednesday in Silicon Valley, which will feature Bartz and her senior management, including Americas EVP Hilary Schneider.

Schneider has played a lead role in the Nokia deal, which sources said closed two to three weeks ago.

Bartz will also be appearing at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in New York next week, a speaker addition that will be announced soon, where she is likely to discuss the deal.

Yahoo has been on a bit of a deal tear of late, purchasing social publishing start-up Associated Content for $90 million earlier this week.

And while the Nokia deal will likely garner a lot of attention when announced, execution will–as usual–be key in determining if this works, especially since both companies are now in a much weaker position.

“Recently, Nokia has offered devices that people don’t want and Yahoo has launched mobile services that they don’t want,” said one person familiar with the talks. “Perhaps in working together, they will find a way to finally create some value.”

Yahoo declined to comment and Nokia has not responded to an email I sent tonight.

BoomTown liveblogged the AOL conference call, the first since it spun off from Time Warner (TWX).

And essentially, it was all about turning the Internet icon around. Bottom line: Still turning, but the lid is super-duper tight, folks!

Earlier this morning, AOL (AOL) reported its fourth-quarter results, which beat very, very low Wall Street expectations.

As MediaMemo reported:

After factoring out one-time charges, AOL posted earnings of 71 cents per share on revenue of $810 million. Wall Street expected earnings of either 62 cents or 66 cents per share, depending on who you ask, on revenue of around $766 million.

And while advertising revenue was lousy, it wasn’t as bad as Wall Street had expected–it dropped eight percent, and analysts had assumed it would show a double-digit decline. Subscription revenue, which still drives the company, though, dropped more quickly than analysts assumed, down 28 percent.

5:39 am PT: I jumped on the call a few minutes late, since AOL’s fancy system for listening to the call using a Webcast would not play in Apple’s (AAPL) Safari browser. Or else I am an idiot.

In any case, Firefox worked and we pressed on!

When I finally got on the call, it was perfect timing, since CFO Arthur Minson was delivering the results in a deeply glum manner, but with a very nice New York accent. It could have also been a Boston accent.

It was definitely a glum accent! “To be clear,” said Minson, AOL’s model “was not working.”

Well, it was nice to hear the obvious!

Minson continued to smack AOL around for quite a bit, which is a good strategy–to drop expectations in order to raise the company’s prospects with Wall Street later.

But the team led by CEO Tim Armstrong was on it! It has cut employees and other costs! It has decided to dump businesses that aren’t working! It has even cutting coupons, metaphorically speaking! This was serious beeswax, people!

5:52 am: Armstrong came back to answer questions from the analysts gathered.

He’s all about the content and how it will bring in the audience to sell advertising to.

The next question: Others have tried this niche content strategy and failed. Why was Armstrong different? Also, can AOL control its search destiny?

Armstrong begged to differ on calling AOL’s content strategies “niche.” Engadget is HUGE!

“It’s a scale that…advertisers find very attractive,” he said. “It works for consumers, it works for advertisers.”

As to search engine ranking? Search is not the only game in town, said the man who made his fortune as an exec at search giant Google (GOOG).

There are other fish in the sea, said Armstrong, such as Facebook and Twitter. “Our strategy on distribution is not relying on search,” he added. “Fragmentation is our friend.”

The next question: How’s AOL on display advertising compared with others?

What else was he going to say? Great, natch! Lots of low-hanging fruit (whatever that means!).

“Advertisers tend to vote where momentum is,” said Armstrong. “AOL is the company people are used to kicking around.”

No longer! The 98-pound weakling is now 99 pounds!

6:08 am: Another question on how AOL is improving itself. No more obsession with page views! No more tricks, like too many slideshows.

“As a net takeaway, the company is getting healthier, although you may see bumps,” said Armstrong.

It sounds painful!

More questions about fixing what’s broke.

And then, finally, a different one on what AOL is going to do around products and what it is planning on acquiring to help it do so, as well as what’s up with its search deal, which is up for renewal soon.

“We’re bringing product mentality back into the company,” said Armstrong, continuing to bash the previous administration about its overspending and lack of innovation.

Apparently, AOL is also done with “Hail Mary” acquisitions.

As to the search deal, Armstrong said AOL likes Google, but it is not making any commitments!

Also: “If you’re looking at this deal to squeeze out extra pennies,” look elsewhere, said Armstrong, who uses the word “partner,” which could also translate to “Microsoft” (MSFT).

What about making capital expenditures? We’re comfortable, said Minson. And no more short-term thinking!

More bashing of the past, which was getting a little tiresome.

6:22 am: What about divestitures?

Minson noted that he could not comment, but took a long time doing so.

A question about brand advertising and whether it is in good shape.

Yes, said Armstrong, but what else was he going to say again, since AOL sells brand advertising?

Last question: What is the key driver of margins at AOL going forward? As in: What the heck is going to get this baby humming and not sputtering?

“I think it comes down to user engagement,” said Armstrong about brand advertising.

To wrap up, after a decade of quiet, concluded Armstrong, who also underscored that the management team is more interested in execution than pleasing investors: “We’re live.”

Apparently, reports of AOL’s death are greatly exaggerated.

UPDATE: I got to chat with Armstrong for a bit after the call and he reiterated his essential talking points, including the need for execution, the importance of running AOL for the long term, and how he thinks Wall Street has patience for the company.

“AOL had a premise of making decisions for next week,” he said. “We are now stringently focused on the user.”

Obviously, Armstrong added, there will be focus on expanding AOL’s ad business. “That expansion is strong and continuing,” he said.

But there were no in-place strictures he called “guardrails.” And anything not in the guardrails? Off the road!

As to investor patience? “My guess is that we have multiple years,” said Armstrong.

“Going into 2010, the overall mobile devices market is stabilizing and it is growing more in the areas where Nokia has competitive advantages,” CFO Timo Ihamuotila said during the company’s Capital Markets Day event today.

And while the company expects its mobile device volume share to be flat in 2010 compared with 2009, it also expects to increase its “mobile device value market share” a bit.

Of course, to do that, Nokia (NOK) needs a device that can compete with the likes of Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, and its recent efforts–the N97, for example–have fallen far short of that goal.

“Last year’s N97 flagship was an exercise in how not to create a touchscreen phone, complete with an odd three row keyboard featuring a space bar mysteriously moved right of center,” says technology strategist Michael Gartenberg.

“The N900 feels more like a science experiment to me,” Gartenberg observes,” than a product that’s designed for mainstream users….I used to feel Nokia’s hardware designs defined cool, but these days they just remind me of an aging movie starlet trying to re-capture some former beauty.”

2010 will be different, though. At least according to Nokia CEO Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo. “I see great opportunity for Nokia to capture new growth in our industry,” he said. “We have measures in place to push smart phones down to new price points globally, while growing margins….We have three targets for 2010: execution, execution, execution.”

Wenda Harris Millard–calling in to BoomTown HQ from a cruise either on the way to or the way from Slovenia, since she said she was not exactly sure, given that it was the middle of the night there–wanted to make one thing clear:

She is still working for her dozens of other clients at Media Link as its president, but also has a big new gig helping MySpace get its advertising sales house in order, especially related to strategy and execution.

“I guess it’s a matter of semantics, but I will be leading the engagement,” said Millard. “But, we have a whole team here too, and I am also still working for all our great clients.”

Okay, people?!? Which is, in Slovenian, in case anyone asks there, Wenda: Vidirati narod?

Which is precisely what All Things Digital had written in a previous post: That Media Link was the hired gun on a strategic basis, with Millard as the point person on fixing the ad sales structure, strategy and more at MySpace.

In an internal memo today, MySpace CEO Owen Van Natta said the same: “As part of this process on an interim basis the firm will help manage our day-to-day sales organization under the leadership of Wenda Harris Millard.”

Still, the New York and Los Angeles media consultancy definitely wanted to make clear, both internally and externally, that their hiring had nothing to do with the departure today of MySpace Sales and Marketing President Jeff Berman.

And, indeed, according to both Media Link founder and Chairman Michael Kassan, whom I also spoke with today, Media Link had been talking to MySpace–including Berman, who decided to finally leave only today–since January.

Got it! Media Link also did not hip-check Berman to the curb!

Still, it is a huge and deeply involved job for Media Link, and especially Millard, who will be working with ad sales until a replacement is found for Berman, and then after.

Millard stressed that her new role does not mean spending all her time cussing out ad sales folks who did not make their numbers.

“Media Link will be working on big-picture strategy related to ad sales, product development and structure,” she said. “But, of course, I will be very involved and this is a huge assignment.”

She certainly has the experience to take on the ad troubles of MySpace.

Millard–who was the top ad exec at Yahoo (YHOO) in its glory days and who recently left her job as co-CEO of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSO)–has been a longtime online exec, working at Ziff Davis Media and DoubleClick in the very early days of the Web. She was also chairman of the Interactive Advertising Bureau last year until this past April.

But she also noted that she did not want people to be confused, pointing out that many others at Media Link will also be working on the fix-MySpace assignment too, even as she will also be tending to Media Link’s stable of clients.

“This is an engagement to help its management drive forward a lot of initiatives,” said Millard. “It is the management of MySpace who are the ones in charge.”

It’s a point that Media Link’s Kassan also made in a conversation I had with him today.

“I am very excited, since it is an important strategic assignment and part of the promise of Wenda’s unique set of skills,” he said, acknowledging that this was an unusually large job, very complex and unique for Media Link. “That said, this kind of work is our sweet spot.”

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

Never mind that it faces some particularly long, historic odds. That it has launched a new bet-the-company product in the worst economy we’ve seen in 50 years, for example. That with the Pre, it is challenging Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, one of the most successful mobile phones in history. That it’s competing in a market crowded by the likes of Research in Motion (RIMM) and Nokia (NOK), which shipped an astonishing 468 million phones in calendar 2008.

Never mind all that. Because, according to RBC Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky, Palm (PALM) has the “special sauce”–the means of orchestrating a second act, perhaps even one of Jobsian proportions.

“Following a period of decline and facing oblivion, we believe Palm has the potential for a remarkable smartphone turnaround,” Abramsky writes in a lengthy research note on the wireless industry that I mentioned here yesterday as well. “With its new strategy, WebOS product line and under the direction of a new management team headed by ex-Apple executive Jon Rubinstein, Palm (like RIM and Apple) is, in our opinion, well-positioned for smartphone leadership.”

Abramsky sees a promising future: “Our outlook calls for Palm to quickly recover, growing from an estimated 1.3 percent data-centric smartphone shipment market share (0.2 percent TAM) or 2.2 million units in calendar 2009 to 3.6 percent share (1.3 percent of TAM) or 18.2 million units in calendar 2012. Targeting the PIM-centric segment of the Palm legacy, Palm in our view faces near-term risks, but has the ‘special sauce.’” (Click on table below to enlarge.)

And what, exactly, is that? The stuff that goes between the two all-beef patties and the lettuce and cheese?

Not quite. Abramsky’s idea of special sauce includes vertical integration, “controlling the end-to-end smartphone software and hardware platform, a ground-up developed smartphone OS platform with unique innovations like multitasking, Synergy (user data integration), developer-friendly SDK, and compelling and clever hardware/software designs [that] all combine to offer a unique, iconic smartphone experience, differentiated from incumbent vendors.”

A hell of an ingredient list. But it’s one that the Pre and Palm’s webOS largely deliver on–despite some drawbacks. And if Palm can improve on that list, the company should have little trouble wooing back disenfranchised users and winning new ones.

Abramsky, again: “The huge positive reception to the launch of Palm’s Pre, its first WebOS device–despite the already broad awareness of iPhone–illustrates pent-up demand for innovative, non-intimidating smartphone user experiences. The accolades for Pre also show Palm has the potential to provide that rare iconic smartphone experience, above competitors, some incumbents and in the company of RIM and Apple.”

Which is pretty much what Palm has set out to do, as CEO Jon Rubinstein noted in the company’s last earnings call. “There is room for three to five players in this space,” he said. “We don’t have to beat one another to prosper.”

You do have to execute, though. And execution hasn’t historically been one of Palm’s strong suits. Perhaps it will improve with the addition of that special sauce Abramsky’s talking about.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Palm: The Turnaround Story of the Year
• Pre Makes Palm a New Man in Only Minutes a Day
• Palm: Execution Is Everything

Never mind that it faces some particularly long, historic odds. That it has launched a new bet-the-company product in the worst economy we’ve seen in 50 years, for example. That with the Pre, it is challenging Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, one of the most successful mobile phones in history. That it’s competing in a market crowded by the likes of Research in Motion (RIMM) and Nokia (NOK), which shipped an astonishing 468 million phones in calendar 2008.

Never mind all that. Because, according to RBC Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky, Palm (PALM) has the “special sauce”–the means of orchestrating a second act, perhaps even one of Jobsian proportions.

“Following a period of decline and facing oblivion, we believe Palm has the potential for a remarkable smartphone turnaround,” Abramsky writes in a lengthy research note on the wireless industry that I mentioned here yesterday as well. “With its new strategy, WebOS product line and under the direction of a new management team headed by ex-Apple executive Jon Rubinstein, Palm (like RIM and Apple) is, in our opinion, well-positioned for smartphone leadership.”

Abramsky sees a promising future: “Our outlook calls for Palm to quickly recover, growing from an estimated 1.3 percent data-centric smartphone shipment market share (0.2 percent TAM) or 2.2 million units in calendar 2009 to 3.6 percent share (1.3 percent of TAM) or 18.2 million units in calendar 2012. Targeting the PIM-centric segment of the Palm legacy, Palm in our view faces near-term risks, but has the ‘special sauce.’” (Click on table below to enlarge.)

And what, exactly, is that? The stuff that goes between the two all-beef patties and the lettuce and cheese?

Not quite. Abramsky’s idea of special sauce includes vertical integration, “controlling the end-to-end smartphone software and hardware platform, a ground-up developed smartphone OS platform with unique innovations like multitasking, Synergy (user data integration), developer-friendly SDK, and compelling and clever hardware/software designs [that] all combine to offer a unique, iconic smartphone experience, differentiated from incumbent vendors.”

A hell of an ingredient list. But it’s one that the Pre and Palm’s webOS largely deliver on–despite some drawbacks. And if Palm can improve on that list, the company should have little trouble wooing back disenfranchised users and winning new ones.

Abramsky, again: “The huge positive reception to the launch of Palm’s Pre, its first WebOS device–despite the already broad awareness of iPhone–illustrates pent-up demand for innovative, non-intimidating smartphone user experiences. The accolades for Pre also show Palm has the potential to provide that rare iconic smartphone experience, above competitors, some incumbents and in the company of RIM and Apple.”

Which is pretty much what Palm has set out to do, as CEO Jon Rubinstein noted in the company’s last earnings call. “There is room for three to five players in this space,” he said. “We don’t have to beat one another to prosper.”

You do have to execute, though. And execution hasn’t historically been one of Palm’s strong suits. Perhaps it will improve with the addition of that special sauce Abramsky’s talking about.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Palm: The Turnaround Story of the Year
• Pre Makes Palm a New Man in Only Minutes a Day
• Palm: Execution Is Everything

BoomTown was so glad we had this time together with Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Carol Bartz and Microsoft (MSFT) CEO Steve Ballmer, just to have a laugh or sing a song about a major Web search and advertising deal.

I liveblogged the conference call, which I updated as it happened.

Did Ballmer scream and jump up and down? Did Carol say something naughty?

Or as the companies said:

SUNNYVALE, Calif. & REDMOND, Wash., Jul 29, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE)–Yahoo! Inc. and Microsoft will host a conference call for accredited media and financial and industry analysts at 8:30 a.m. ET/5:30 a.m. PT today, July 29, 2009, to discuss the search agreement the companies recently announced. In addition, b-roll footage will be available. The satellite feed of b-roll footage will contain broadcast footage of remarks from Yahoo! CEO Carol Bartz and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, as well as corporate Yahoo! and Microsoft b-roll footage.

B-roll? More like, were Bartz and Ballmer on a roll?

To find out, read on!

5:28 am PDT: It was EARLY on the West Coast and we were being forced at first to listen to really sleepy music like you might hear in a dentist’s office.

Zzzzzzzzz…

5:34 am PDT: Memo Impresario Eric Brown was late! But, as soon as he gets on, the new Yahoo PR head began with an enthusiastic hello about the deal.

Bartz was up first, followed by Ballmer. They were clearly together in the same place, likely in Silicon Valley at some bunker.

“This is a great day for Yahoo,” she said. “It’s a game-changer and I am glad to finally be able to talk to you about it.”

Her patter was clearly scripted, but Bartz was pretty jaunty in her delivery.

And sassy enough to make the first of many dings to former Yahoo savior Google (GOOG)–not by name, but as either “the market leader” or “the competitor.”

Why not just go right to calling the search giant this deal is aimed at battling what Bartz really meant: The Borg.

Bartz stressed that this deal only covers search and the search ad business and not, say, display advertising.

And, she added, while Microsoft’s AdCenter technology will power the money-making, “search will continue to be an integral part of the Yahoo consumer experience.”

Boiling it down, Bartz said: “What this deal is really about for everyone is scale.”

Cue the next Google dig: “The combination of Microsoft and Yahoo search puts the choice back into the hands of consumers, increasingly concerned about the influence of a single player.”

Single player=Darth Vader.

5:40 am PDT: Ballmer was next. “I am so delighted to see [the deal] come to fruition,” he said.

He does not say much more except that he hoped it would “flourish and come to life over the many years.”

Ballmer sounded like someone speaking at a ribbon cutting of a copy store at the mall.

The livelier Bartz came back on, discussing the terms, hewing pretty much to what was already in the press release.

Microsoft’s AdCenter as technology. Integration. 10 years. No display deal. Separate user experience.

Now to the bucks, as Bartz noted, they add $500 million to Yahoo’s operating income, save $200 million in capital expenditures and improve annual operating cash flow by $275 million.

“At its full implementation,” she added. There is always a catch!

Bartz said Yahoo would use the money to invest in its other properties, although she was not specific.

Then, it was onto regulatory issues and getting this party started.

Bartz put on the brakes. “This deal will not happen overnight,” she said.

Actually, not even close. She predicted a closing in early 2010 and it being rolled out over the following three to six months.

Finally, Bartz thanked the tireless teams who did the deal. “With a lot of help from Steve and I,” she said and then quipped, “not always so.”

She and Ballmer were now sounding like a hip mom and dad.

5:45 am PDT: Question time!

The first one was about why the pair did not do a display deal and also how they were going to bridge the huge gap in how much each made per search compared to each other and Google.

Bartz said that the point was to keep the deal idiot-proof. “Frankly, we wanted it as straightforward and simple as possible,” she said.

Ballmer concurred: “We are taking a big bite here.”

As to the earnings gap in search, he said, “The deal in and of itself will let us close gap with the market leader.”

Ballmer tried not to say the word “Google,” but stumbled and did anyway.

The next question was about Bartz’s shift from her “boatloads of cash” quote–which she said, in an interview with me at the seventh D: All Things Digital conference in late May, was a must for a deal with Microsoft–to her new “boatloads of value.”

Simple, she said, trying to gloss it over–Yahoo did not need a big cash payment up front (and it did not get it either).

“As far as we are concerned, the boatload of cash is us preserving our revenue line,” said Bartz.

The next question was about what Microsoft gets out of this deal.

“We clearly see an upside as execution really builds,” said Ballmer.

After more money questions, there is finally one on regulator issues.

Back to Google-bashing from Ballmer.

“I suspect the competitor who may not like more competition is Google,” he said.

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith then jumped in and talked about working together and filings in D.C. and making the case.

He said he “looks forward to the debate,” which is just what a lawyer would say.

5:58 am PDT: Finally, the layoff question.

Bartz is clear here. Some Yahoo search employees will be dragooned over to Microsoft, some will move to other parts of Yahoo and some will be let go.

“Unfortunately, there are some redundancies,” said Bartz.

More financial questions, one on the mobile search market, one on innovation, one on scale and one on advertisers.

“Advertisers, especially smaller ones, want to make sure there is enough meaningful market for them and they don’t want to learn three platforms,” said Bartz. “They know how to enter into the Google system.”

She said “Google system” like she was talking about a gulag.

Meanwhile, Ballmer talked about how good it was to now be No. 2. Really, he did, since he was a distant No. 3 before this deal.

6:11 am PDT: Some technology question. Ballmer noted that the deal was not a “rip and replace” of Yahoo’s search for Microsoft. It will be an “integration.”

Next was a question about how this deal measured up to last year’s more money-laden offer by Microsoft.

Bartz said she didn’t just want an upfront payment, but a “true partnership,” with control over the Yahoo user interface and “real skin in the game.”

Ballmer called last year’s deal more investor-focused than operational. “The deal was different for Microsoft, not better,” he said, leaving out the cheaper part.

Finally, I get called on, and ask about who will lead the integration and how it will get done, so as not to create a huge distraction.

Bartz said it would be a “smooth transition…not that different from when Yahoo went from Overture to Panama.”

I did not have the heart to tell her that the transition of the Yahoo ad platform was anything but smooth and one of the reasons Yahoo got into the trouble it has gotten in.

Ballmer noted that the leadership that put together the deal is the leadership of the companies in the digital arena.

I also asked how the deal finally came together, especially after such historical rancor.

“It was like a snowball down a hill,” said Bartz.

But it was also a complex ball of ice, she added, noting “it was not a two-page term sheet.”

More like hundreds of pages. “There was not a high level of abstraction,” said Ballmer.

Finally, finding a kind of married groove–from that time before the random bickering sets in–Bartz noted that “dating is one thing, but having a partnership is another.”

She added: “The good news once we reached a point we believed to be advantageous, [we did a deal]…that’s how partnerships work.”

Well, exactly how it all works out, of course, still remains to be seen.

“We think the Palm Pre is by far the best product we’ve ever shipped and I am very happy with how we are managing the launch,” CEO Jon Rubinstein said on an earnings call Thursday, though he refused to disclose actual sales numbers. “We are successfully ramping supply to meet demand that is strong and growing.”

Rubinstein gave strong emphasis to Palm’s new operating system. “The most important indicator of our success is that customer response has been simply great, especially to Palm webOS. Just as Palm pioneered PDAs in the 90s, we believe it has now pioneered the mobile operating platform for the next 10 years and beyond. WebOS integrates information and services from the cloud and offers a true multi-tasking environment. We feel it takes better advantage of the benefits of Web 3.0 than any other mobile platform available today.”

Quite a claim, especially given the incumbents in the market and Palm’s history. The company has never been strong on execution, and while it’s done a great job of bringing the Pre and webOS to market, it has clearly stumbled a bit. Thanks to supply constraints, Palm may be leaving some sales on the table. And it hasn’t done itself any favors by delaying the release of the webOS software development kit.

WebOS won’t be the “the mobile operating platform for the next 10 years and beyond” unless developers are actually, you know, writing applications for it. And there are far too few of them doing that right now because Palm has, so far, restricted access to the SDK.

Rubinstein says that will soon change, though. “We are eager to expand access to our SDK but we need to do so in a measured and methodical fashion, so we can be sure we are providing a great development experience,” he said Thursday. “Over the next few weeks, we expect the program to grow from hundreds to thousands of developers and our goal from there is to make our SDK available to everyone by the end of this summer.”

OK. So Palm would rather do things right than too quickly. That’s understandable–especially if it has more products in the pipeline, as it most certainly does. Given the rivals against which it must compete, the company cannot afford even a single misstep. If it is to truly to revitalize its brand, it must execute, as Rubinstein well knows.

“My highest priority is execution,” he said. “That means delivering world-class products and customer support. Operational excellence in our supply chain management. Strong carrier relationships. Great sales and marketing. Strong back-office functions….Palm already has a foundation in all of these areas. We’ve been in this business for years. We have long-established industry relationships and we’ve successfully brought mobile products to market for over a decade. This footing can create a real advantage.”

But only if it’s managed well. So far, so good. We’ll find out how Palm’s really doing next quarter, which will more fully reflect the impact of the Pre.

You’ll find more notes from yesterday’s call here.