Hulu’s employees used to be owners, too. But those days are over, so they’re going to have to be happy with a paycheck and some bonuses.

That’s the upshot of a new long-term incentive plan I’m told the video site is prepping. It’s meant to replace the equity stakes Hulu’s employees cashed out earlier this fall. And it should be going into effect soon.

The move is small but symbolic: Hulu used to be a start-up, and the people who worked there had the potential for a big payout if things went really, really well. But investor Providence Equity Partners sold its stake in the site in October, and that let Hulu employees sell too. The company’s value doubled, to $2 billion, in five years, so many of them did do well. But not sit-on-a-beach-and-count-your-money well.

Now, it’s purely a Big Media asset — Hulu is co-owned by Comcast, Disney and News Corp. (which also owns this Web site) — and the employees who stick around will be Big Media employees.

So who’s going to stick around? As always, there is plenty of chatter about CEO Jason Kilar’s next move, but that chatter has been going on for years, and he’s still there.

That said, if someone does present Kilar with a great opportunity — say, the chance to run a start-up that’s already up and running, but that has the potential to get really, really, big — he can now head out without reservation. He has taken the company much further than many expected and has also gotten his team paid.

Some of Kilar’s senior team could head out the door regardless. Both Andy Forssell, who heads up Hulu’s content efforts, and Jean-Paul Colaco, who runs ad sales, are frequently mentioned by people outside the company as candidates for new jobs.

Meanwhile, people who have talked to other Hulu employees say some of them either have new gigs lined up or have begun looking for them. After the cash-out in October, Hulu paid out additional bonuses to get some senior managers and key employees to stick around through the end of 2012. But now those payouts are done as well, so it won’t be surprising if you see an exodus in the new year.

Hulu’s corporate owners seem resigned to that notion, and seem confident that they can hire replacements if necessary. As The Wall Street Journal noted last week, the really big issue for the company is that its corporate owners don’t agree about what they want to do with the site going forward. If News Corp. and Disney can’t figure that out, it doesn’t matter who’s still there to run it.

And as far as everything else: Nada.

In the past, Jason Kilar has used these state of the company reports to make big declarations about The Future Of TV, or at least the near-term future of Hulu, the joint venture between News Corp., Disney and Comcast (News Corp. also owns this Web site).

Today, there’s none of that. Just the numbers, sir.

And maybe, if you’re into tea-leaf-reading, an oblique reference from Kilar: “So much has changed” since the company’s conception in 2007, he notes.

Which might be, among other things, a reference to big changes behind the scenes with Hulu’s corporate owners, who haven’t had a consistent approach to the site in five years. And/or its employees, who have had a “liquidity event” worth roughly $200 million this fall.

Or maybe it was just some he words he typed up and put on a blog. (I know the feeling!)

Back to the numbers: Hulu will do $695 million in revenue this year. That’s up 65 percent from the $420 million it did last year, when revenue was up 60 percent. And that three-million-plus number for Hulu Plus is two times last year’s tally (Hulu competitor Netflix has around 27 million paid subscribers worldwide).

In the past, Hulu has said that it expects subscription dollars to make up more than half of its total revenue. It doesn’t spell that out here, but I believe it’s still the case.

So that’s all good and bow-worthy for the Hulu team. The questions about how it works with its content/partner owners, and who at Hulu will be around to work with them, we can tackle some other time.

Just as important, the deal extends Hulu’s previous Viacom pact for another two years. That means Hulu and Hulu Plus viewers can keep using the video service to watch Jon Stewart’s and Stephen Colbert’s nightly shows, two of Hulu’s biggest draws.

The new deal will give Hulu Plus access to some of Nickelodeon’s live-action and animated kids’ shows, like “iCarly,” “Big Time Rush,” and “SpongeBob Squarepants.”

But it doesn’t include sister channel Nick Jr.’s shows, which are targeted at younger kids. That means no “Dora the Explorer” or “Fresh Beat Band.” Some of those titles are licensed to Hulu competitors Amazon and Netflix.

Viacom’s kids’ shows have been a subject of scrutiny over the last year, as their ratings have slipped. Some analysts argue that Viacom and Disney have been sacrificing TV eyeballs by putting those shows online.

The big picture for Hulu is that it still has the ability to pay for premium programming that doesn’t come from its three broadcast TV owners — NBC, Disney and Fox* — and that it’s willing to do so. The Viacom stuff is unlikely to come cheap — in 2011, when Viacom and Hulu announced the first deal, I pegged the price at $40 million to $50 million.

Meanwhile, we’re into October, and Hulu CEO Jason Kilar is still running the company. That means my most recent predictions about his departure — the most recent one was that he would be out in September — was wrong. Just like all the others I’ve made.

Plans for Hulu’s network owners to buy out co-investor Providence Equity Partners’ stake, in the works since last spring, have yet to close, which means Kilar and his co-workers haven’t received big checks from the “liquidity event,” either. Once they do, things could change, but I’ll refrain from crystal ball gazing this time around.

*Fox is owned by News Corp., which also owns this Web site.

Asa Mathat / AllThingsD.com

So, yes. It certainly appears that Jason Kilar will be leaving Hulu soon.

Of course, it has appeared that way for a long time. And he’s still there.

But Variety’s excellent story (registration required), sparked by an internal memo laying out scenarios for the video site’s future, now pegs his likely exit date to September. That’s when a deal to let Kilar and his fellow employees cash out their equity stakes should go into effect.

Once that’s finally done — those wheels have formally been in motion since April, when investor Providence Equity got its own cash-out deal lined up — it’s hard to imagine Kilar staying, though he could if he wanted to.

I’ve asked around, and both on and off the record, sources on all sides say that no one has made any decisions about anything. Which could even be true. We should note that even while this has dragged on, Kilar has never dropped his game face, and in the meantime has rolled out stuff like a cool integration with Apple TV.

But, one day, Franco-style, Kilar will leave. And then we (that is, I) can stop running reports about his imminent departure.

The bigger news in the Variety story is the rest of the stuff in the memo, which is about the future of Hulu itself, regardless of who runs it.

In short, it paints a picture of a site and service that will operate much differently than the one that launched in 2008. Instead of being the Web’s primary place to see TV shows from Fox, NBC, and ABC, Hulu will now be one place among many where you can see some of that stuff. With certain restrictions. (News Corp., which owns Fox, also owns this Web site.)

There are a bunch of reasons for that, but the basic one is that it’s not 2008 anymore. That means Hulu’s owners are no longer as terrified of Google and YouTube as they once were, so it’s less important to them to have a single portal as leverage in negotiations. And Hulu’s owners are most interested in getting cable-carriage fees for their programming, which means they’re much less interested in giving them away for free, without restrictions, on Hulu.

From Variety’s highlighting of the big changes outlined in the memo:

• No more exclusivity for current-season content once restricted to Hulu and the networks’ respective Web sites. Now Disney and News Corp. can turn around and license programming to another third-party, i.e. YouTube, which could dilute Hulu’s competitive advantage in the marketplace.

• No more content parity. ABC.com and Fox.com will be able to hold back certain content to differentiate their own sites from Hulu, which was once entitled to everything on the networks’ sites.

• Exclusive “super-distribution” rights Hulu once retained to syndicate content to third-party sites like Yahoo and AOL would revert back to Disney and News Corp.

Alas, Variety doesn’t publish the memo itself. And the story is oblique about what the document actually is — we don’t know if this is a summary of stuff Hulu’s owners have agreed to do, or are discussing, etc.

But it has been clear for some time that Hulu has been headed in this direction. Its owners are happy to use it as a subscription service, if it generates ancillary revenue for them. But they’re not interested in using it as a free service that competes with their other properties — or, most importantly, one that threatens their ability to get license fees.

That’s a much more constrained vision for Hulu than the one Kilar and company rolled out four years ago. But it’s in lockstep with the rest of Big Media’s current stance about digital video. And it could still be an interesting business for someone to run.

Very unlikely that someone will be Kilar.

Like this: Today Hulu Plus subscribers can finally start using the service on Apple’s Web TV peripheral, via a software update Apple pushed out overnight. So if you’re paying the service’s $8-a-month fee, you can now stream TV shows, movies — along with ads — directly to your flat screen.

This brings Apple’s hardware to parity with other devices like the Roku devices and Microsoft’s Xbox 360, so it’s certainly not a game changer. But there are two interesting notes here:

• Like Apple’s deal with Netflix, Hulu Plus is integrated directly into Apple’s iTunes store, which means that if you aren’t a Hulu Plus subscriber, you can sign up using your iTunes account, and Hulu will bill you via Apple. Presumably this means that, just like it does with Netflix, Apple will keep a portion of Hulu’s monthly fee. And from what I can tell, just like Netflix, Hulu won’t let you use iTunes to sign up for the service via a different Apple device, like an iPad or iPhone — if you’re going that route, you’ll still need to visit to Hulu.com
• Hulu and its owner/content partners (Disney, Comcast, and News Corp., which also owns this Web site) had little choice but to get Hulu Plus onto Apple TV. Because with the new Airplay feature in Apple’s new Mountain Lion update, anyone with an Apple TV can already “mirror” the free Hulu Web service onto their TVs. Not being able to offer the paid service — which has features like a deeper content library and HD streaming — would have been quite vexing for Jason Kilar and company.

Big picture for Apple: Tim Cook refuses to say much about TV other than that Apple is interested in it. But these incremental feature adds give you a pretty good sense of where Cook may be going.

It’s now standard issue for Amazon and Netflix to announce new additions to their subscription video catalogs, but this one has a slight twist. Amazon will have “West Wing” and “Fringe” exclusively — but that exclusive only lasts “for the summer.”

What happens after that? It’s not clear: Amazon will continue to have access to the show, but other digital video subscription services could also offer it, if they’re willing to pay up. So Amazon’s exclusive could effectively last beyond the summer, or it could end in a couple of months.

It’s a small deal any way you cut it. But in the big picture, it points out that the value of “exclusive” content is still a fluid notion for digital distributors like Amazon, Netflix and Hulu.

All three of them are going to offer many of the same shows, because content owners like to sell their stuff as many times as they can. So you can see “Battlestar Galactica” on both Hulu and Netflix, for instance. And you can see “Dora the Explorer” on both Netflix and Amazon.

But all three distributors also want stuff that distinguishes their catalogs from those of their competitors. Not necessarily because they think consumers will pick one service or another, but because they want to give consumers a reason to add their service to their entertainment offerings.

How they do that is more art than science.

On the one hand, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has been willing to make very expensive bets to get his hands on upcoming originals like “House of Cards” and new episodes of “Arrested Development”, both slated to run next year. But apparently Hastings’ team wasn’t willing to outbid Amazon for access to “West Wing”.

Meanwhile Hulu, whose main selling point is its co-exclusive access to broadcast TV shows, has made a point of producing small-scale original programming, like its “Day in the Life” documentary series. And next year, it will be the first U.S. distribution outlet for new episodes of “In the Thick of It,” a BBC comedy (from the same team that brought HBO its “Veep” series).

To date, video sellers tell me, Amazon has not been an aggressive buyers when content comes on the market — Jeff Bezos’ team has had a reputation for being fairly indiscriminate about what it acquires, and not particularly interested in outbidding competitors. But in this case, Amazon was willing to pay for something no one else would have — at least for six weeks.

That said, if you’re willing to watch the show in two-minute clips, it’s quite easy to get the West Wing online without going through Amazon — YouTube has a very large selection, of varying quality:

The appointment of Marissa Mayer as CEO of Yahoo earlier today was a definitively splashy move by the board of the troubled Internet giant.

And a key impresario of the showy hiring of the high-profile Google exec? None other than Yahoo’s former foe now turned driving force Daniel Loeb of the Third Point hedge fund.

It was classic Loeb style — brash, quick and done with an eye to the optics of the move as well as its impact.

The selection of the high-profile Mayer was unanimous among the Yahoo directors, who have now clearly gone in a product direction over a media one, represented by interim CEO Ross Levinsohn.

The choice came down to Mayer or Levinsohn and, in this, there really was no choice to speak of given her much more honed tech and product pedigree.

Mayer was integral to the early days of Google especially, in charge for a long time over its search product. More recently, though, she had been working on local efforts.

But, it was notable to many inside and outside the company that she did not get one of the key senior vice president nods at Google in a major reorg of the company under new CEO Larry Page.

“She was pretty much voted off the island, even though she was critical to its earliest successes,” said one person close to the situation.

Recently, multiple sources said she had been quietly seeking an exit from the search giant, including considering several venture firms. She also recently joined the board of retail giant Walmart.

Loeb, who had met Mayer relatively recently, was one of the key forces in pushing the board to consider aiming for someone of her level.

In fact, multiple sources said that he has become an influential voice — perhaps the most influential — on the board. While there has been a search committee run by director David Kenny, Loeb has also been actively buttonholing prospects, including focusing his early CEO search efforts on Hulu’s Jason Kilar.

That did not pan out, as Kilar withdrew himself from contention, but sources said Loeb kept pushing for a big name who would burnish Yahoo’s bruised reputation.

It’s all part of a series of efforts by the New York hedge fund head — who has been spending a lot of time of late trying to learn the complicated byways of Silicon Valley — to be more than just a smash-and-grab money man.

Loeb now owns close to six percent of Yahoo and is intent on reviving its prospects and, more importantly, its moribund stock.

And nabbing Mayer — who often appears in glossy magazine spreads, part of an effort that she has promoted that has made her the face of the search giant over the last decade — fits into that strategy well.

Indeed, Mayer will now be charged with the difficult task of creating innovative products to win at Yahoo going forward and even competing with Google in some arenas.

It’s clear she will attract talent, and is reportedly considering several other current and former Googlers to bring on board at Yahoo.

It will take a lot of such deep expertise, given Yahoo’s dicey prospects of late, with problems ranging from its advertising technology to weak morale to, perhaps most importantly, the continued lack of a clear strategic direction.

Whether Mayer can stem the tide is unclear, with some comparing her task to an even bigger version of the massive challenges and slow turnaround another former Googler, Tim Armstrong, has faced at AOL.

“Is she the Tim show, part 2, or can she remake Yahoo into a successful narrative going forward?,” said one person close to the situation.

One thing’s for certain: Today, at least, it was also the Dan Loeb show.

Hulu CEO Jason Kilar is bowing out of the Yahoo CEO sweepstakes.

He has been the main competition to interim Yahoo CEO Ross Levinsohn, who now appears to be the last man standing to take on the tough job.

Here’s the decidedly odd statement from a Hulu spokesperson about Kilar’s just-say-no:

“As has been reported, Jason Kilar has been a focus of the Yahoo CEO search committee. He has graciously declined to be considered.”

Well, alrighty then!

That said, Kilar most certainly will also not be staying at Hulu, where he is currently on the way out and where tensions persist with his media-owner partners, including News Corp. and Disney.

Multiple sources all over the ying-yang — they are not even trying to hide it now — said that Kilar has been negotiating his exit from the premium video service.

The Kilar I-did-not-want-the-job-anyway statement — shock of shocks on the timing — comes just as Levinsohn scored a big win this morning with the settlement of a troublesome patent lawsuit with Facebook, which includes a huge expansion of their content and contact deal and also adds a new advertising partnership.

It will be interesting to see if Yahoo’s board now removes the “interim” from Levinsohn’s title and makes him the permanent leader of the company in desperate need of stability.

A search committee of directors has looked at a number of candidates, some quite high profile and many that have been previously asked. But most have turned down the job, for a variety of reasons.

And, now, that list includes Kilar, gracious or not.

Executives at Yahoo and Facebook have completed an extensive strategic deal, as part of a final settlement of their contentious patent infringement lawsuit and countersuit.

According to sources close to the situation, the agreement will include a major expansion of their ongoing partnership, including a joint advertising sales effort, as well as cross-licensing of some key patents between the pair.

The deal has gotten approval from the companies’ boards — in fact, Yahoo’s directors agreed to it this morning in a telephonic meeting. It will be announced sometime later today.

No actual cash payment will change hands under terms of the deal over the patents, in contrast to the $550 million that Facebook paid Microsoft recently in another transaction related to AOL patents.

But sources said Facebook and Yahoo hope there will be significant upside in several possible advertising and other business deals between the pair that could yield large revenues if executed well.

In addition, there is a possibility that Facebook could later pay to license other Yahoo patents not included in this deal.

Discussions to settle the lawsuits — negotiated by Yahoo interim CEO Ross Levinsohn and Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, among others — began almost as soon as Yahoo’s board ousted former CEO Scott Thompson, which I reported on in early June and Yahoo officially confirmed several weeks later in a regulatory filing.

The lawsuit was initially waged by Thompson, who reportedly promised directors that a big financial payoff of many billions of dollars could result from the patent lawsuits against Facebook.

At the time, despite strong support by its legal execs, many other Yahoo managers — including those who had crafted an earlier and successful content- and data-sharing agreement with Facebook — were blindsided by the aggressive move by Thompson. That included Levinsohn — who was then in charge of its global media unit — and other top execs.

So, after Thompson was gone and with board support, Levinsohn immediately reached out to Sandberg. In addition, Yahoo’s point person on the deal, VP of strategy James Heckman, met with a number of top Facebook execs including: Dan Rose, VP of business development and monetization; VP of global marketing solutions Carolyn Everson; and business development director Chris Daniels.

Such an outreach was a major shift for Yahoo, but was possible due to a newly configured board in the wake of the Thompson departure.

Still, some directors who had pushed for the initial lawsuit that Yahoo unexpectedly lobbed against the social networking powerhouse in March have remained on the board and agreed to the latest settlement.

The reason for the change of heart? While many still felt Yahoo had a strong case, backed by important intellectual property in a range of key digital arenas, Facebook was prepping for a long and expensive battle by girding its patent defenses.

Thus, the possible end of the rancorous legal battle should be greeted with enthusiasm by Wall Street investors, as well as many detractors of Yahoo’s legal action across the tech landscape.

And, indeed, the company’s reputation definitely suffered as a result of the lawsuit, with many techies, both inside and outside the company, decrying Yahoo’s lawsuit.

Many of those engineers, as well as entrepreneurs — key constituencies for Yahoo’s revival — firmly believe a patent portfolio should only be used defensively.

Now, if the deal is approved, the move will have been turned a decidedly negative situation into a potentially stronger partnership.

Among the most notable parts of the deal is an arrangement to jointly sell big events and other packages to advertisers.

In addition, as it has in content, Facebook will allow Yahoo to be the first partner to feature information about its users’ “Likes” in actual display advertising on Yahoo.

Extending and adding to such contact-sharing was apparently one bone of contention in the talks to settle the lawsuits, although there had already been an element of that in a previous partnership between the pair. Yahoo is one of the few Facebook partners with access to information from its social graph; Facebook, in turn, gets user contact data from Yahoo.

Of course, how well the pair works together to deliver better experiences for its consumers and marketing for its advertisers remains to be seen.

But it’s clear that any rocky road in cooperation is much better than the legal quagmire both had been stuck in.

One thing is likely — the successful end to the tensions ups Levinsohn’s chances of getting the permanent CEO job. Directors have not given him the nod as yet, with another candidate — Hulu CEO Jason Kilar — as Levinsohn’s leading rival for the job, as I first reported yesterday.

Image via .shock

According to sources close to the situation, the search for a new CEO for Yahoo is closing in on key candidates.

But, said sources, it appears to be coming down to a contest between interim Yahoo CEO Ross Levinsohn and Hulu CEO Jason Kilar.

“It’s pretty much a choice between picking a media exec or a product exec,” said one person, referring to Kilar and Levinsohn respectively, about leading the troubled Silicon Valley Internet giant. “It’s about defining what Yahoo is going to be.”

Jim Citrin of Spencer Stuart is conducting the search.

At this point, said sources, it appears to still be a situation that is Levinsohn’s to lose. Along with having been at Yahoo for several years, the media-savvy exec has also recently scored points with the hiring of a new and very well-regarded sales chief, Michael Barrett.

In addition, some Yahoo board members feel that adding yet another new CEO into the mix from outside could further destabilize a company that has gone through the leadership wringer over the last year.

That has included the ousting of two CEOs since last fall — Carol Bartz and Scott Thompson — in less than ideal circumstances that has called into question the competence of its board.

Actually, more precisely, its incompetence.

The newly formed board of Yahoo — most of the directors responsible for recent snafus have departed — is now very wary of making another such mistake, which is apparently why it did not name Levinsohn immediately.

“This has to be seen as a process that really is not slapdash,” said another source. “Yahoo can’t afford to make another mistake.”

No, it cannot.

But in keeping Levinsohn hanging, some inside the company feel the board is doing just that.

“The employees at Yahoo cannot take yet another all-hands meeting where we meet another CEO and hear another new vision for the company,” said one longtime staffer. “It’s hard to imagine that again without becoming nauseous.”

Still, Kilar is a favorite choice of some Yahoo board members; he is now out-of-contract with Hulu and is reportedly in the middle of negotiating his exit there.

“Jason is a free agent,” said a source close to the situation at the premium video service, which includes News Corp. (which owns this Web site) and Disney, as well as Comcast. “And he is looking for this next thing.”

He should, since tensions between Kilar and his major media partners/owners remain high and his departure seems imminent.

Whether taking on the huge task of fixing what ails Yahoo is that is unclear; some expect Kilar to favor moving on to a start-up.

One other issue: Neither Levinsohn nor Kilar has ever run a public company, although both have worked for them.

Other candidates Yahoo has spoken to are part of a list it has gone to several times before.

They include News Corp. digital exec — and longtime Levinsohn friend and business partner — Jon Miller, who has definitively declined to be considered due to his relationship with Levinsohn; former Yahoo exec Dan Rosensweig, who is now CEO of Chegg and who has declined several overtures; and former aQuantive CEO Brian McAndrews, whom sources said is also not interested in the job.

Other possible execs — none of whom appear to have bitten the Yahoo line either — include former Microsoft CFO Chris Liddell and former DoubleClick CEO David Rosenblatt.

There appear to be no women candidates among those in the talent search. (What a shockeroo!)

It will be interesting to see if the usually lugubrious Yahoo board will act before the annual meeting, which is in one week. The choice certainly cannot drag on, though.

“Yahoo needs to move forward with someone,” said another source.

Asa Mathat / AllThingsD.com

For someone who is still mulling things over about what to do about his more than five percent investment in Yahoo, hedge fund investor and activist shareholder Daniel Loeb has been very busy lately getting his arsenal ready.

While deciding whether to mount a proxy fight — a potentially nasty public fight with the Silicon Valley Internet giant that sources said could start much earlier than the expected February 24 filing date to make a board challenge — he’s also had at least one phone meeting with new Yahoo CEO Scott Thompson in the last week to talk about the company’s future.

Sources said the talk was cordial, although the pair were not yet discussing any kind of rapprochement, which presumably could lead to board seats for Loeb.

But how far Loeb will go and how far Yahoo will give are the big open questions that are about to be answered.

The earliest nominations for directors by outsiders like Loeb can be submitted is February 24. He then has a month after that to propose a competing slate.

Starting last fall when he started accumulating Yahoo shares, Loeb had aggressively called for the ouster of Yahoo’s Chairman Roy Bostock and director and co-founder Jerry Yang. Yang stepped away from Yahoo earlier this month and Bostock just announced his upcoming departure this week.

Despite the renewed communication with Yahoo, Loeb is still acting like he might opt to fight — or at least freak out Yahoo enough to cooperate.

Among his recent activities, according to many sources:

* Attempting to assemble an alternate slate of directors — including trying to persuade high-profile entrepreneurs such as David Goldberg and Max Levchin to join his board. Loeb has been to Silicon Valley several times to stir that pot.

* Meeting with a spate of powerful tech execs, here and elsewhere, in order to gain support for his battle and search for his own preferred leaders for Yahoo. A favorite is Hulu CEO Jason Kilar.

* Working on hiring a top outside crisis communications firm to handle the expected onslaught of media mudslinging that is sure to take place.

* Buttonholing large Yahoo investors to join him and getting, sources said, more support than expected from bigger ones. That’s no surprise: Capital Research Global Investors and Capital World Investors, Yahoo’s biggest institutional shareholders, voted against the company’s board in its last proxy battle and has been much disgruntled with the latest Yahoo stumbles.

* Recently reaching out to top Yahoo execs, including both Yahoo’s Chief Product Officer Blake Irving and Americas head Ross Levinsohn. Irving was so spooked by Loeb’s hello-there, several sources said, that he sent an email to Yahoo’s top staff about the contact attempt, noting he did not return the call (teacher’s pet alert!).

These are, of course, classic activist tactics by Loeb, aimed at getting the changes he wants made at Yahoo by applying real and perceived pressure.

Loeb had previously criticized the company’s talks with private equity investors, saying the prices being discussed were too low, which helped scuttle those talks.

Yahoo has also tried to gird itself and to assuage other shareholders and the media, as it can hardly stand what a proxy fight will do to its already battered image.

Some recent moves to look like it is on the move include: Loudly negotiating with its Asian partners for a big payday; making significant board changes; and hiring Thompson. Next up, as I previously reported, a large-scale restructuring and the inevitable cost-saving layoffs.

Who wins — and who blinks — in this Loeb versus Yahoo face-off, though, is still to be determined.

But the Hulu CEO is still running his site, a full year after angering his owners/bosses with a “Jerry Maguire” manifesto. And Hulu itself generated more than $400 million in revenue last year — just a few years after all the smart money was sure that the “ClownCo” would never work.

So what was Kilar thinking when he published that memo, anyway? And more important, what’s next for him and his site? We got to ask him directly at D: Dive Into Media last week — his first onstage interview in a very long time.

You can watch the full interview here, but you’re also going to want to watch Hulu carefully in the next few months. That’s because its strategic owners — Comcast, Disney and News Corp., which also owns this site — still don’t seem to have figured out what they want to do with the joint venture. And financial backer Providence Equity has a chance to get its money out this spring, which could directly impact Kilar’s plans, too.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120208/hulu-ceo-jason-kilar-is-still-standing-the-full-dive-into-media-interview-video/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-alien-mushymush-plot-is-back-for-the-super-bowl-with-will-arnett/ http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-alien-mushymush-plot-is-back-for-the-super-bowl-with-will-arnett/#comments Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:32:22 +0000 Arik Hesseldahl http://allthingsd.com/?p=169743 Not long after its CEO, Jason Kilar, left the stage after his talk with Peter Kafka at D: Dive Into Media today, Hulu revealed a teaser for the TV ad that will promote the online video service during Sunday’s Super Bowl.

Here, Hulu returns to the campaign it launched in 2009, which starred Alec Baldwin and involved an alien plan to turn human brains into tasty “mushymush.” You see, your mother was right about TV turning your brains to mush, and Hulu is just the secret weapon to make it happen faster, allowing the aliens to eat more. Get it? And Hulu Plus, its subscription service, is even better.

Naturally Hulu is turning to Twitter, and there’s a hashtag you can use to tweet about what you’re watching to turn your own brain into #mushymush.

The latest installment stars Will Arnett, whom you’ll recognize if you watch shows like “30 Rock,” “Arrested Development” and “Up All Night,” which I don’t, so I, uh, didn’t. Anyhow, enjoy the ad:

Correction: Earlier I said this was the ad, not understanding that the video above is actually a teaser for the real ad that will run on Sunday. Sorry about that.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-alien-mushymush-plot-is-back-for-the-super-bowl-with-will-arnett/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120131/jason-kilar-is-not-surprised-hes-still-at-hulu-video/ http://allthingsd.com/20120131/jason-kilar-is-not-surprised-hes-still-at-hulu-video/#comments Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:55:06 +0000 Liz Gannes http://allthingsd.com/?p=169566 Hulu’s Jason Kilar opened D: Dive Into Media this morning, saying he’s totally okay with the turn of events that left Hulu ownership intact after a failed attempt to sell last year. It also left him in his CEO job a year after he wrote an incendiary blog post about the future of television.

Here’s a video from his interview with AllThingsD’s Peter Kafka:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120131/jason-kilar-is-not-surprised-hes-still-at-hulu-video/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-jason-kilar-we-and-i-are-here-for-the-long-haul/ http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-jason-kilar-we-and-i-are-here-for-the-long-haul/#comments Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:28:50 +0000 Liz Gannes http://allthingsd.com/?p=169148 “I think there’s more reason for Hulu to exist now than four and a half years ago,” said Hulu CEO Jason Kilar, who was amiable but guarded in an interview on stage at D: Dive Into Media this morning.

Asked about last year’s failed Hulu sales effort and expectations he would move on, Kilar said he sees “many winners” among Hulu and competitors like YouTube, Netflix, Amazon and Apple. “Online video and online video advertising are enormous,” he said.

Last year’s aborted sales effort, Kilar said, was “far more public than I would have liked. I’m a private guy.” Is he surprised he’s still at Hulu? “I’m not.”

Will he be leaving Hulu any time soon? Kilar urged watchers to look at his history, which includes two employers — Amazon and Hulu — since graduating school. “I’m not the kind of guy who dabbles in a lot of things,” he said. “Just judge me on my history, and the team on the history.”

As for the economics of Hulu, Kilar noted (as he has before) that the company made $420 million last year, which was 60 percent more than 2010, but less than the company had expected after a “soft” third quarter.

Hulu Plus, which Kilar described as being in “investment mode,” pays content owners more per user per month than any of its competitors, Kilar said. “The dollars going back to content owners on Hulu Plus are extremely generous.”

Kilar downplayed content negotiations with News Corp., NBC and Disney, the large media companies who own significant parts of Hulu. “Keep in mind we have 330 content partners, three of which we have an equity relationship with,” he said. (News Corp. also owns this Web site.)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120131/hulus-jason-kilar-we-and-i-are-here-for-the-long-haul/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120131/live-at-dive-hulu-boss-jason-kilar/ http://allthingsd.com/20120131/live-at-dive-hulu-boss-jason-kilar/#comments Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:45:07 +0000 Ina Fried http://allthingsd.com/?p=168895 Well, it must be prime time somewhere.

It’s not even 8 am PT yet here, but we’ve got a full day of speakers at D: Dive Into Media, and first up is Hulu CEO Jason Kilar. I’m sure we’ll hear him talk about the future of Web video, not to mention his own position and that of his company in said future.

Earlier:
8:08 am: We’re getting just a bit of a late start, as SoCal traffic is messing with the schedule just a bit.

8:19 am: I think we are close now. Attendees are grabbing seats.

8:24 am: Looks like you still have some time to catch up on your favorite show on Hulu. But it shouldn’t be too much longer now.

8:27 am: Here he is.

Peter: I’m a little surprised you are here (refers to memo a year ago that a lot of people thought would get Kilar canned).

Are you surprised you are still running Hulu?

Kilar: No, I am not.

You have to be a bit crazy to do this. He notes that the company was initially called Clown Co.

If it was easy, everyone would be doing it.

8:28 am: What were you thinking when you wrote that memo?

Kilar encourages people to reread the memo. “I think it stands up today.” I actually think that when it comes to bundles, there is tremendous value, but you have to be very careful in how you construct that. Customers vote with their wallets.

8:30 am: Why print the memo?

When you are starting a new business, it’s important to explain yourselves. That was a very important moment for the company.

The entrepreneurial jouney is not a smooth one or an easy one.

8:31 am: Kafka: One of the reasons it was called Clown Co. was the idea that the media companies couldn’t build a successful joint venture, and that the interests of the parents and the company would necessarily diverge.

8:32 am: Kilar: It’s not unique to the history of media. Kilar notes that TV was originally seen as a threat to the movie industry.

It turned out it was the best thing that ever could have happened to content companies. The Internet could be the same way.

8:33 am: Kafka: The broadcast content industry is now getting paid in the form of retransmission fees, and distributing its shows in many forums. Is there the same need for Hulu to exist as there was four years ago?

Kilar: I think there’s more reason for Hulu to exist now than there was four years ago.

8:34 am: Some of the content isn’t there, or is being “windowed.” You have to wait eight days for some shows. Are customers still as happy?

Kilar: There’s actually more content. In addition, we have Hulu Plus (the paid service), which allows customers to get content sooner, and with more content.

Kafka: Is the subscription business a profitable one?

Kilar: Clearly still in investment mode, but a lot of opportunity to make money.

It allows us to pay the content community more per user per month than any other service. “We’re thrilled about that business. It’s a very scalable service. It’s our fastest growing service.”

8:37 am: Kafka: You have to pay for TV, but not for laptop. Isn’t that confusing?

Kilar: Agrees, the distinction might be confusing to our grandkids down the road.

“There’s no doubt there is this transition happening.”

8:38 am: Kafka: How do you think the content owners think about the value Hulu delivers?

If I were in their shoes.

You’ve got this amazingly large business (broadcast TV) that is very robust and very healthy, so you are constantly thinking about that.

At the same time, you can’t be blind to what you are hearing from consumers.

If I were in their shoes, I’d balance the obligation to that existing business, but plant seeds that allow things to bear fruit for the long term.

This is not dissimilar to the introduction of television. People used to go to movie houses three or four times a week to watch “premium content.”

8:44 am: Kafka: What about YouTube and others?

Kilar: There’s going to be many winners in this space. Online video and online advertising space.

Kafka: Why did owners put you on the block then?

Kilar: You should ask News Corp.’s Chase (Carey) this. (Carey is on stage later.)

It’s fair to say the process that happened last year. … We were approached by a company.

Kafka: Yahoo.

Kilar: We never commented on it.

Kafka: Yahoo.

Kilar: It was far more public than I would have liked. I’m a private guy.

Kafka: What do you think happened?

Kilar: Things change … people have different points of view.

It wasn’t dramatic. It wasn’t salacious.

Kafka: One thing that you heard was that the bids weren’t high enough and/or that the content owners weren’t willing to give a long enough rights deal to make it viable.

Could you ever sell this company or take it public? Can this work as a standalone company?

Kilar: We have 330 content partners, only three of which are investors in the company.

Kafka: You’ve said you are going to spend $500 million in content fees this year. Does that include money to main broadcasters?

Kilar: Yes. Main investment is in existing content, though spending a little on new, exclusive content. Gives them some healthy differentiation.

It’s not the thing, but it is an important thing.

Kafka: Is it important to have a lot of exclusive content?

Kilar: It’s important to have some exclusive content.

8:51 am: Kafka: Folks describe you as “rerun TV.” Are you OK with that?

Kilar: At end of day, we search for Hulu and Hulu Plus and see what consumers say. Kilar reads on Twitter a lot, but doesn’t post much.

8:52 am: Audience Q&A. Hulu said it brought in $420 million last year, but less than it had been on a pace to do.

Kilar: In Q3, specifically, the ad market was very soft. Things rebounded in Q4. “We’re pacing very well. I’m not going to talk about the financials of the business.”

Kilar said it was up 60 percent from the prior year, and ahead of its original plan for 2011, which was for $408 million.

Kafka: Will you stick around?

Kilar: I’ve only done two things. One was Amazon for nine years. The other is Hulu. I’m not the kind of guy that dabbles. I tend to go deep.

Kafka: Do you think you will be here in a year?

Kilar: Just judge me on my history.

Kafka: Very eloquent side step. I appreciate it.

8:55 am: TV everywhere. How does Hulu fit into that?

Kilar: Differentiation is important. When we think about services like TV Everywhere, which has been around as a theory for a while … Hulu Plus is designed to be different from TV Everywhere, which only has four or five episodes.

TV Everywhere is getting better, and will continue to, but Hulu Plus is designed to be different.

8:58 am: Hulu Plus for Apple TV?

Kilar: It’s a juicy question. I don’t have a juicy answer. We don’t talk about our product road map.

Q: Can we expect it in 2012?

Kilar: We don’t talk about our product road map.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120131/live-at-dive-hulu-boss-jason-kilar/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120112/soft-ad-sales-ding-hulus-2011-growth/ http://allthingsd.com/20120112/soft-ad-sales-ding-hulus-2011-growth/#comments Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:23:59 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=163413 Remember back in the fall of 2011, when we started hearing anecdotal reports about slowing ad sales? Add Hulu to the list of examples: The company just reported a 60 percent jump in overall revenue for 2011 — which isn’t as much as it had thought it was going to do a year ago.

In a blog post, CEO Jason Kilar blames the shortfall on a “soft advertising market (economy) in the second half of 2011.”

The numbers: Hulu did $420 million last year, via a combination of ad sales and revenue from its Hulu Plus subscription service. But during the first half of 2011, it had told the world — several times — that it was “on pace to approach” $500 million.

In retrospect, it’s easy to see when sales started softening. In July, when Kilar reported his company’s Q2 numbers, he was still offering the same $500 million revenue guidance. But in early October, when he reported Q3 numbers, the guidance had disappeared from his update.

There are a whole lot of people who would like to report 60 percent annual growth. And the fact that Hulu revenue missed earlier projections by 16 percent  – “overall the Hulu ad business grew aggressively and Hulu Plus materially exceeded our plan,” Kilar notes in his post — isn’t going to be the biggest issue for the service by a long shot.

Hulu’s management and its owners — Providence Equity, Comcast, Disney and News Corp. — need to reach a fundamental agreement about the video site’s direction, and how the site fits into today’s entertainment landscape. (News Corp. also owns this Web site.)

But it’s still worth noting the miss, because Hulu is both a digital ad business and a digital ad business that sells very premium video.

It’s an article of faith among digital ad bulls that the industry will keep growing even if the larger economy takes a hit, because ad dollars will shift from old media, anyway. And advertisers are supposed to be clamoring for the tv shows and movies that Hulu sells — which is one of the reasons Google is trying to shift upmarket from dogs on skateboards, with its “channels” strategy.

We’ll start hearing other reports on the state of last fall’s ad market, and the outlook for the future, over the next couple weeks, when public companies start reporting their Q4 numbers.

And we’ll hear a lot more from Kilar himself, who will be appearing at our D: Dive into Media conference at the end of this month. If you want to see him in person, grab a seat.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120112/soft-ad-sales-ding-hulus-2011-growth/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111220/yahoo-intensifies-search-for-ceo-with-hulus-kilar-as-dream-unicorn-candidate/ http://allthingsd.com/20111220/yahoo-intensifies-search-for-ceo-with-hulus-kilar-as-dream-unicorn-candidate/#comments Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:40:07 +0000 Kara Swisher http://allthingsd.com/?p=154996

Whatever you want to call him or her — a silver bullet, the cure or, as I like to say, the last unicorn — Yahoo’s ever-seeking and never-deciding board has now renewed its focus on finding a new CEO.

Also on the docket: Working on a deal to sell back at least some of its stake in its twin Asian assets — Yahoo Japan and the Alibaba Group — back to the companies. A partial sale of stock back could placate the often tense situation among the partners.

What is clear is that the two bids from private equity firms are now in an undetermined circling pattern — due to a variety of concerns around shareholder unrest (Occupy Yahoo looms for 2012).

Therefore, the idea of bringing in said fantasy leader to perhaps finally be the one to revive the long-troubled company has returned to the forefront of action, according to numerous sources both inside and outside the company.

The concept in short, said people familiar with the situation: Hire some compelling and entrepreneurial CEO to get the company moving again from a product point of view, do a massive organizational overhaul and help settle Yahoo’s thorny Asian issues.

While a number of names have been rumored in reports — such as Google business lead Nikesh Arora, who is actually not likely to leave his top post at the search giant — sources said the board has been targeting a number of candidates, including Hulu CEO Jason Kilar.

Others on Yahoo’s wish list include Juniper CEO Kevin Johnson and online advertising entrepreneur Brian McAndrews, who sold aQuantive to Microsoft. There are several others also being considered.

Sources said Kilar has met with Yahoo board members about the offer, but his hiring would be a long shot.

It’s an interesting — if complex — gambit to bring in Kilar, who has had his own wrangles with the multi-owner structure of the premium video service over the years.

Kilar’s status at Hulu has been in question ever since it was put on the block, then removed and then — well — who knows.

Hulu’s owners — News Corp., Disney and Providence Equity Partners, along with Comcast (which is a now a passive investor) — did not like the offers it got from various bidders, including Yahoo.

While the media giants have made noises about wanting to keep a stake in distribution, their commitment to that remains unclear.

The situation has put Kilar — who already had tense relations with the service’s shareholders — in limbo until a valuation is determined next year. Without going into the complex details, Kilar has a large equity stake that could be liquid in April, related to certain rights held by Providence.

It is well known that Kilar has been concerned the team that built Hulu gets some sort of payout for their work. In fact, many years ago, Hulu was seen as a possible IPO candidate.

What’s not in question is Kilar’s talent at creating a cohesive team and a compelling product — especially with an advertising and media focus — and the need at Yahoo for a vibrant leader to encourage innovation and discourage its rapidly increasing attrition issues.

The search for a new Yahoo CEO — which is being led by director Patti Hart, and is being conducted by Heidrick & Struggles — had been mostly sidelined until recently, as the board solicited bids for a partial investment from PE firms.

Two emerged, from Silver Lake and TPG Capital, which had wanted to pay from $16.50 to $18 a share for a stake of just under 20 percent in what is called a PIPE (Private Investment in Public Equity) arrangement.

But the low price, and worries about lawsuits and even a proxy fight related to such a deal, have slowed down the momentum significantly, said sources.

Instead, Yahoo has told bidders it will get back to them in the coming weeks about the direction it will take. Thus, the focus on lining up CEO candidates and plans related to reviving Yahoo.

Some of those possible execs have put their hand up, while others — like Kilar — are being solicited. In addition, some still think that Yahoo board member David Kenny remains an internal option, especially if the board of Yahoo gets a refresh, despite his recent announcement that he has no intention of seeking the job.

In general, this shift should not come has a surprise for the hurry-up-and-wait board of Yahoo, which has struggled over the years to make good choices for the Silicon Valley Internet giant.

That drift has resulted in a downturn in its prospects, even as other companies have surged.

Those troubles were brought into sharp focus in a recent report by new Goldman Sachs Internet analyst Heath Terry, who strafed Yahoo in his “sell” recommendation.

Among the gems by an analyst whose investment bank is currently an advisor to Yahoo on its strategic options:

Yahoo simply faces too many competitive and structural headwinds to believe any kind of meaningful turnaround is possible. While there is significant asset value on the balance sheet and in the company’s large, though increasingly less engaged user base, we continue to believe, as we have since before the first Microsoft offer, that the segment of management driving the company is intent on trying to revive Yahoo as a company, regardless of the cost to shareholders.

And, noting the need for a new CEO:

We would become more positive if we felt there was a likely event in the near term that might unlock the value of the balance sheet assets at Yahoo. While we believe the aggregate value of those assets is above the value reflected in YHOO, in order to be more positive on the stock we would need some proof that management is willing and able to take the steps necessary to unlock that value either through a sale or distribution to shareholders. Meanwhile, the declining profitability of the core display advertising business is masked by a search business that continues to lose share and relies on artificial support from Microsoft. We would become more positive on the core Yahoo business if the company is able to find a new CEO capable of focusing the business on its core advertising and communications opportunities, rationalizing costs, and driving growth. This would require user growth and especially engagement improvements in both online and mobile, improving monetization of advertising inventory, and stabilizing its search business.

In other words: Wanted, one unicorn to work magic against increasingly troublesome dragons. Ability to sparkle a plus.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111220/yahoo-intensifies-search-for-ceo-with-hulus-kilar-as-dream-unicorn-candidate/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111028/cbs-warner-sell-gossip-girl-and-other-shows-again-this-time-to-hulu/ http://allthingsd.com/20111028/cbs-warner-sell-gossip-girl-and-other-shows-again-this-time-to-hulu/#comments Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:56:38 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=137837 CBS and Time Warner’s Warner Bros., who just did a large rerun deal with Netflix for their CW network shows, have sold the same programming again. This time the buyer is Hulu, who is paying for the rights to show the stuff, soon after it airs on free TV, for the next five years.

It’s important to note upfront that Hulu is paying cash for the programming. While the video site — a joint venture between Disney, News Corp., Comcast and Providence Equity — has discussed bringing in another equity partner, that’s not happening with this particular deal.

I don’t have a price estimate for the deal so far, except that it’s going to be significantly less than the value of the Netflix deal — pegged at perhaps $1 billion (maybe more! maybe less) over an eight-to-12-year period — signed earlier this month.

That’s because Hulu will only have access to a year’s worth of content at any given time, while Netflix will eventually have multiple years’ worth of shows available for its subscribers.

Things to note on a Friday afternoon:

• Hulu’s core value is that it aggregates primetime broadcast shows from its three corporate owners: Disney’s ABC, News Corp.’s Fox and Comcast’s NBC (News Corp. also owns this Web site). But CEO Jason Kilar has pushed hard to expand the site’s appeal beyond programming from that trio. Until now his biggest non-network deal has been a Viacom pact for Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report.” This one could be bigger, simply because it’s three years longer.
• The fact that Hulu has announced any deal at all is interesting given the flux surrounding the site. Until recently, its owners had it on the block, and now that it’s no longer for sale, the next step is to figure out who’s staying and who’s going — both in terms of owners and management.
• While the deal means more content for Hulu visitors, it’s also another part of the Great Free TV Web Pullback of 2011. That’s because unless you’re paying for Hulu Plus, you’ll have to wait eight days after the shows air to watch them online. You can debate the TV guys’ logic here — in short, they think that holding stuff back increases its value, even though lots of people assume it will make it much more likely to be pirated — but this is increasingly going to be the norm.

THE CW AND HULU SIGN FIVE-YEAR LICENSING AGREEMENT FOR CURRENT SEASON PROGRAMMING In-Season Episodes of The CW’s Drama and Reality Series To Stream on Hulu and Hulu Plus

(October 28, 2011) –The CW Television Network, a joint venture of CBS Corporation and Warner Bros. Entertainment, announced today a five-year licensing agreement with Hulu for the rights to stream in-season episodes of The CW’s programming on the Hulu Plus subscription service and the free, ad-supported Hulu service.

With this agreement, Hulu Plus will be the only online subscription service to carry in-season episodes of The CW’s drama and reality series, with the five most recent episodes of each show available to subscribers the next day after broadcast. Users of the free, ad-supported Hulu service will be able to watch five episodes of current season programming eight days after airing on The CW.

Available later this year, programming on Hulu and Hulu Plus will begin with the nine series on The CW’s Fall 2011 schedule, including new series “Ringer,” “Hart of Dixie” and “The Secret Circle,” as well as returning hits “The Vampire Diaries,” “Gossip Girl,” “Supernatural,” “Nikita,” “90210” and “America’s Next Top Model.”

“Our new arrangement with Hulu only affirms the incredible value of The CW’s series, as well as amplifying the immense power of the broadcast network model,” said Mark Pedowitz, President, The CW. “As we increase the amount of year round original programming on The CW, this deal provides our shows with greater exposure on a new platform, helping build even more awareness that will drive viewers back to the network and its affiliates. We see this as a win for everyone involved, the network, the stations, Hulu and ultimately, the viewers.”

“The CW programming is a great example of the kind of in-season content we want to make available on our service – high-quality, engaging, serialized shows that fans passionately love,” said Andy Forssell, SVP of Content for Hulu. “Making these shows available on Hulu and Hulu Plus will allow new and existing fans to get their fix of The CW’s great shows anytime and anywhere.”

The new agreement with Hulu delivers more ways for viewers to catch up with The CW’s serialized dramas and reality series, and provides the network with valuable off-air promotion and marketing to grow its brand, as well as increase awareness for its series. The CW’s content can also be made available online through authenticated cable providers.

The CW, which last year introduced an innovative digital convergence strategy for broadcast and online ad sales, will continue to present its programming on cwtv.com with a full complement of advertising, prior to streaming on the free Hulu service.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111028/cbs-warner-sell-gossip-girl-and-other-shows-again-this-time-to-hulu/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111013/exlcusive-yahoo-hires-heidrick-struggles-for-ceo-search/ http://allthingsd.com/20111013/exlcusive-yahoo-hires-heidrick-struggles-for-ceo-search/#comments Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:53:18 +0000 Kara Swisher http://allthingsd.com/?p=132200

According to sources close to the situation, Yahoo has hired Heidrick & Struggles for its CEO search.

It will be a dicey job, since the effort is on a separate track than the Silicon Valley Internet giant’s wide-ranging strategic review, which is looking at a range of options including the sale of the company.

That’s why many see the move as window-dressing for Yahoo’s board, rather than any real interest in hiring a new leader.

Sources said that will make the search a difficult one for Yahoo, since any CEO candidate would be coming into a very volatile situation. In addition, Yahoo has been struggling — Struggles, struggling, get it? — to recharge its advertising and search business and also its product innovation cycle.

That’s the reason — among several others — that the board of Yahoo suddenly fired its former CEO Carol Bartz last month.

Heidrick has worked for Yahoo previously, in the now ill-conceived placement of Bartz by partner John Thompson. A different partner will be handling this assignment, sources said.

The pool of possible CEOs to lead Yahoo is not a large one, but could includes execs such as Juniper Networks CEO Kevin Johnson, Chegg CEO Dan Rosensweig, Skype CEO Tony Bates, John Pleasants of Disney’s Playdom, Hulu CEO Jason Kilar, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg and any number of top Google execs, as well as Yahoo board member and Akamai President David Kenny.

(I am, of course, waiting by the phone for the call.)

A Yahoo spokeswoman declined to comment.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111013/exlcusive-yahoo-hires-heidrick-struggles-for-ceo-search/feed/ 0