A little more than a week ago, Morgan Stanley kneecapped Demand Media’s stock by downgrading the Santa Monica, Calif., online content company’s prospects.

Some worries: Pressure from algorithm-tweaking Google, upon which Demand relies heavily for traffic; worrisome drops in said traffic due to said tweaking; and not enough uptake on higher-quality, premium stories the company had promised in the fall.

Demand shares fell 6.5 percent that day, to close at $5.93.

It has recovered a bit to $6.13 today, but is still off almost 8 percent since the beginning of the year, and 71 percent from a year ago.

One irony to the tough call by Scott Devitt, of course, was that Morgan Stanley was the investment bank that had taken Demand public in January of 2011, at $17 a share.

In addition, the recent departure of three of the company’s six founders has also worried investors.

All this will presumably be on display today when Demand reports its fourth-quarter earnings. Wall Street analysts are expecting Demand to earn seven cents a share on an adjusted basis on an expected $81.95 million in revenue.

We’ll see after the market closes, as well as what its execs have to say about the key metrics of costs and traffic.

If you thought things were going to quiet down with Yahoo now that it has installed new CEO Scott Thompson in place, think again!

That’s because of a very unusual — well, to be fair, unusual for most companies, but not for perpetually storm-tossed Yahoo — confluence of important events about to take place all at once over the next six weeks.

And, like a very dicey game of corporate Jenga, each has the ability to upend and impact the other significantly, either for the good or, well, for the bad.

Here are the four horsemen of the possible Yahapocalypse, all riding into town very soon:

Q4 Results: Yahoo will report its fourth quarter earnings on January 24th, after the markets close. While sources said the company has managed to turn around what was looking like a first-class disaster, it’s still not going to be a pretty picture when it comes to advertising growth, consumer engagement and other key metrics.

Simply put, Yahoo needs to show investors a fast-growing business. Instead, sources said the Q4 results will likely come in at the bottom of the expected range, which should be unimpressive, even though this has been business as usual at Yahoo for some time.

If Google and others have strong reports, of course, it will make the situation worse.

Along with goosing its ad business again, Yahoo needs to spur innovation and intro some cool new products in new arenas to make Silicon Valley and others perk up.

Proxy Fight?: Weak results will give a nice lift to potential efforts by activist investor Daniel Loeb of Third Point — a major Yahoo shareholder — to wage a proxy fight for control of the company. He’s already here in Silicon Valley this week searching for possible board members for an alternate slate of directors.

As I wrote earlier today, the earliest nominations for directors can be submitted is February 24. Loeb then has a month after that to submit a competing roster.

Worse for Yahoo, many of Yahoo’s major investors are mulling backing Loeb if he initiates a battle for control of the company.

There’s no doubt that Loeb is and means to be a thorn in Yahoo’s side — he already made a lot of noise about its consideration of partial investments from private equity firms, due to low share prices — until major changes take place at the company.

And by major, Loeb’s intent seems to be along these baseball lines: Throw the bums out!

Board in Flux: Speaking of the board, it’s not the pretty picture of solidarity as you might think.

Actually, no one in their right mind thinks that. This board is about as dysfunctional as they come. (It’s like that group on “American Horror Story,” minus the bald dwarf in the basement.)

Right now, several sources report, various factions are jockeying over which board members go and which stay. The Wall Street Journal reported last week on a formal search for new board members to replace outgoing ones, but it’s much more complex than just that.

While some departures seem most obvious — longtime board members Vyomesh Joshi, Arthur Kern and Gary Wilson — the really interesting part will be the possible exit of Chairman Roy Bostock.

While it now is more of a when rather than an if, many sources report, how it goes down is the key part of the move. And who will be the chairman then will be the big conundrum — either an internal candidate, such as David Kenny, or a fresh-eyed outsider.

Another question mark: Whether co-founder Jerry Yang could also move along off the board with Bostock. While Internet company founders usually stick on boards, it’s not a given, especially with all the turmoil at Yahoo, some of which is related to Yang.

For now, make no mistake, Bostock is still in charge of the board and Yang is the only real power behind that power, despite the recent influence of director Brad Smith.

But, with all the pressure by shareholders, some sources suggest that it might finally be time for some significant change at the board level, starting with the pair most associated with all its troubles.

Or, um, not.

If there is going to be any action at all, expect it before February 24th — when Loeb can start making real trouble.

Asian Solution: A lot of the above hinges on whether Bostock and Yang can deliver the promise of a deal with its long disgruntled Asian partners, Alibaba Group and SoftBank.

The trio is now engaged on negotiations about a tax-free deal, in which Yahoo would sell back some of its stakes in its Asian properties and get money and other operating assets in return.

While it’s good news that the talks are finally proceeding with some level of normal functionality, it’s still a complex situation and one with a lot of outstanding questions.

Most important: Which operating assets will be bought in the deal to hand over to Yahoo? And also, what will the valuations be?

Sources close to the situation said that the talks remain slow-going and frustrating — “The stop-and-go of all time,” joked one person involved. But they are moving forward, which is no small thing when it comes to these three.

That’s critical for Yahoo, which can ill afford to disappoint shareholders if no lucrative, cash-rich deal happens in Asia. And, it needs to happen before Loeb can act on a proxy fight too, since a successful end to its Asian issues will negate his momentum dramatically.

Oh Yeah, Running the Core Business Stuff: As usual, a full and fraught month for Yahoo and its directors, who have other things to do, I assume.

But not me and not new CEO Thompson. By the way, the former eBay exec will presumably be very busy doing some significant rejiggering of the core Yahoo business in the meantime.

Could that mean a new product direction for Yahoo, for example, around data? Could it mean a passel of new execs? Could it mean layoffs?

Or, could it mean Thompson will finally solve the ultimate sword-in-the-stone question: What is Yahoo?

And that, in the end, will be the real victory.

Tomorrow, after the markets close, Yahoo will announce its third-quarter earnings, perhaps one of its more important reports in recent years.

Wall Street analysts are expecting the Silicon Valley Internet giant to report earnings of 17 cents per share on $1.07 billion in revenues.

But whether or not Yahoo has beat expectations will be less scrutinized than information about the state of Yahoo’s key search and display advertising businesses, as well as other user metrics.

It is at those numbers that a range of players — including major shareholders, possible bidders and media — will be looking to see just how badly the company’s business has fared with all the turmoil of late.

That has included the firing of its CEO Carol Bartz, a massive strategic review that includes the possibility of a sale to a range of mostly private equity buyers, a persistent attrition problem and a worry that the company continues to drift in its product innovation, even as others have surged.

Last week, I reported that Yahoo had finally selected an executive search firm to help it find a new CEO, which many think is a difficult task given the uncertain situation.

A series of worrisome trends across its ad businesses over several recent quarters has some looking at the company for possible purchase with some skepticism.

“What if it is too broken to fix, what if trends to Google’s and Facebook’s premium offerings is too overwhelming?” said one potential bidder for Yahoo. “There are a lot of what-ifs at Yahoo.”

By comparison, Google posted impressive earnings last week.

Yahoo stock closed at $15.70 today, down 1.3 percent.

Groupon amended its public offering documents today, in a new filing with government regulators, in which it once again changed its accounting treatment.

That includes the way it measures revenue, which will now be reported excluding the money it pays out to merchants.

Some felt the “gross revenue” figure — a term for what are actually gross billings — was not reflective of Groupon’s true performance. It will now use net revenue.

Said the company in the current amended filing, its third:

“We consistently have stated that the amount we retain — rather than bill or collect — from the sale of Groupons is the key measure of the value we create. This change in presentation is consistent with that belief.”

Okkkkaaaay, whatever you say, but the change was requested by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In its second amended filing, Groupon dropped its controversial “Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income,” or ACSOI, metric, which excluded key marketing costs.

In its first amended filing, it told investors to ignore statements made by its Chairman Eric Lefkofsky and also made more accounting clarifications.

In the current changes, Groupon also posted the controversial letter to employees — first published here — that CEO and co-founder Andrew Mason wrote to strike back at the Chicago-based social buying network’s critics. Many felt the missive violated the quiet period before an IPO that companies are required to maintain.

And Groupon has been anything but quiet, as it advances and retreats to its Wall Street road show, which has been delayed and then not delayed (and might still be delayed, but who knows?).

Also today in its noisy goat rodeo: COO Margo Georgiadis is headed back to Google after arriving in April.

I guess things did not work out.

Lastly, the new filing also has added a new metric for “cumulative repeat customers,” showcasing how many customers have bought a Groupon offering more than once. That number is over 12 million.

Here is the full new S-1 filing to peruse and pick apart:

GRPN-20110923-S1A-0

In a blog it just posted, Groupon said its recently hired COO, Margo Georgiadis, “has decided to return to Google (her former employer) in a new role as President, Americas.”

She was only hired in April, just months before the company filed to go public. Georgiadis was previously VP of Global Sales at Google.

(Interesting way to get a better title at the search giant, Margo!)

Georgiadis was in charge of the company’s global sales, marketing and operations at the Chicago-based social buying service.

Sources said that the hiring did not gel on either side.

It might not be Georgiadis’ fault. She replaced Rob Solomon, who was in his job for one year.

And here’s another: PR hire Brad Williams, a longtime Silicon Valley communications exec, who was there and then gone in what felt like 23 minutes.

It seems Groupon does not like Silicon Valley types or, perhaps, vice versa.

Since its IPO filing, in fact, it feels as if it has been a non-stop circus disaster at Groupon.

That has included immense controversy about its sketchy accounting, huge slugs of venture funding going to its founders and a lot of worries about its growth.

Today, in a Friday late afternoon dumping of bad news in hopes that no one notices (I do), Groupon also amended its S-1 public offering filing once again to change revenue metrics and also add a controversial internal letter that CEO and co-founder Andrew Mason sent to employees to counter its many and growing critics.

There appear to be many more shoes dropping soon, said sources, so stay tuned.

Until then, here’s the whole and very terse — for Mason — post:

Update on the Groupon Team

As a fast-growing company, we’ve done a lot of hiring this year, including on our senior executive team. Since the beginning of this year, we’ve made a total of 8 additions — that’s 57% of the total executive team. It would have been great if I could say that we batted 1,000%, but that’s rarely the case; after five months at Groupon, Margo Georgiadis, our COO, has decided to return to Google (her former employer) in a new role as President, Americas.

We’ve built a fantastic team that has proven itself highly capable, so this change won’t have an impact on operations. In fact, we are using it as an opportunity to reorganize in a way that reflects our evolving strategic priorities. Sales, Channels, International, and Marketing will now report directly to me.

Here’s a note from Margo: “Groupon is a great company and I feel privileged to have worked there even for a short time. It was a hard decision to leave as the company is on a terrific path. I have complete confidence in the team’s ability to realize its mission.” We wish her well.

As All Things Digital reported last week, Groupon filed an amended S-1 IPO offering this morning, in which it deemphasized a controversial accounting method.

Instead of a metric called ACSOI, or adjusted consolidated segment operating income, the Chicago-based social buying company noted that gross profit was the “important indicator for our business, because it is a reflection of the value of our services to our merchants.”

But the dreaded ACSOI — which leaves out important costs of marketing — is not completely gone. In its filing, Groupon said it would use it internally, noting:

We exclude those costs because, unlike our other marketing expenses, they are an up-front investment to acquire new subscribers that we expect to end when this period of rapid expansion in our subscriber base concludes. While we track this management metric internally to gauge our performance, we encourage you to base your decision on whatever metrics make you comfortable.

In other words, for the love of Pete, please ignore ACSOI completely.

Groupon also included new financials in its filing for the quarter, with a 36 percent increase in revenue to $878 million from the previous quarter and double a year ago. But its loss was $102.7 million, compared to a loss of $35.9 million a year ago.

The company also reported that its subscribers grew from 10.4 million last year to 115.7 million now.

Costs are also lower by eight percent in the new quarter, with Groupon spending $165.2 on marketing to new subscribers, compared to $179.9 million in the previous one.

The filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission is a critical one for Groupon, whose public offering has been mired in questions about how it accounts for its financial performance.

Of particular concern: ACSOI, which is a number that does not include important costs, such as critical online marketing expenses to attract new customers to Groupon.

Such accounting is called non-GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles).

In 2010, Groupon reported that it lost $413.4 million using standard accounting practices. When it excludes some costs from its calculations using ACSOI — including online marketing expenses to attract new customers — it recorded a profit of $60.6 million in 2010.

The new results were stronger, to be sure. Such growth is important, especially given investor scrutiny of Groupon in the current economic turmoil.

As I wrote last week:

And, indeed, questions from the media, investors and, most importantly, the Securities and Exchange Commission about how Groupon accounts for its revenue and profits using ACSOI were swift and decidedly negative.

Hence, a furious debate — along with much internal tension — within Groupon about what to do. At first, in another S-1 amendment, the company backed away from using ACSOI as a “valuation metric.”

But that was apparently not enough for the SEC or anyone else, so Groupon’s top managers finally thought it best to rid itself of the term entirely.

Presumably, with a cleaner S-1, Groupon can concentrate on a whole new set of issues around its IPO, such as the tumultuous state of the markets.

According to numerous sources close to the situation and after regulatory pressure, Groupon will amend its S-1 public offering filing to remove references to an unusual accounting treatment that has attracted controversy.

Sources said the new filing by the social buying company, which is helmed by CEO and co-founder Andrew Mason (pictured above), will likely occur as early as Monday.

It can’t come a minute too soon regarding a metric called ACSOI, or adjusted consolidated segment operating income, which the Chicago-based Groupon used when it filed its S-1 documents in June.

As I wrote at the time about the odd use of ACSOI:

Let’s be clear, this is a number that does not include important costs, such as critical online marketing expenses to attract new customers to Groupon.

Such accounting is called non-GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles).

In 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, Groupon said its Adjusted CSOI was $60.6 million and $81.6 million, respectively.

On a GAAP basis, Groupon lost $413.4 million for 2010 and $113.9 million in the first three months of 2011.

And, indeed, questions from the media, investors and, most importantly, the Securities and Exchange Commission about how Groupon accounts for its revenue and profits using ACSOI were swift and decidedly negative.

Hence, a furious debate — along with much internal tension — within Groupon about what to do. At first, in another S-1 amendment, the company backed away from using ACSOI as a “valuation metric.”

But that was apparently not enough for the SEC or anyone else, so Groupon’s top managers finally thought it best to rid itself of the term entirely. That will happen next week, sources said.

And, in coming weeks, sources added, the company will be filing additional financial information about both its growth and costs, which will undoubtedly also be put under a microscope by the media, investors and regulators.

A Groupon spokesman declined to comment when asked about the removal of ACSOI from its public offering documents.

Earlier today, CNBC reported that the regulatory review of Groupon’s questionable use of certain accounting metrics in its IPO filing was delaying its offering until later in September.

While more questions from the Securities and Exchange Commission about how it accounts for its revenue and profits might indeed eventually push the IPO debut out, according to sources I have interviewed for months now, an offering in mid to late September was actually when the social buying company was planning to take its company public.

It makes sense, since August is seldom used for road shows for companies headed for an IPO — think Wall Street in the Hamptons and you’ll get why.

That said, the continued scrutiny by the SEC is not a welcome development for Chicago-based Groupon, which filed its S-1 documents in June.

In coming weeks, sources said, the company will be filing new financial information about both its growth and costs, which will undoubtedly be put under a microscope by investors and regulators.

That’s no surprise since the contents of the original filing immediately caused controversy, especially over the amount of its venture funding paid out to insiders and also over an unusual accounting treatment called adjusted consolidated segment operating income, or Adjusted CSOI.

As I wrote at the time:

Let’s be clear, this is a number that does not include important costs, such as critical online marketing expenses to attract new customers to Groupon.
Such accounting is called non-GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles).

In 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, Groupon said its Adjusted CSOI was $60.6 million and $81.6 million, respectively.

On a GAAP basis, Groupon lost $413.4 million million for 2010 and $113.9 million in the first three months of 2011.

Said Groupon about its accounting in its S-1 filing: “We believe Adjusted CSOI is an important measure of the performance of our business as it excludes expenses that are non-cash or otherwise not indicative of future operating expenses.”

Definitely sketchy enough to attract an SEC look-see, which caused Groupon to back away from Adjusted CSOI as a “valuation metric” in a recently amended S-1 filing. Groupon also stepped back a sloppy comment made after the filing by its Chairman Eric Lefkofsky — in a interview he apparently thought was off the record — that the company would be “wildly profitable.”

One thing is certain: There will surely be more amending of the Groupon S-1 in the weeks ahead as it stumbles toward its IPO, which will be one of the most prominent of the Web 2.0 era.

That Internet sprite, Groupon Co-founder and CEO Andrew Mason, continued in his quest to be the cleverest little entrepreneur on the Web with a very funny post on the Chicago-based start-up’s blog yesterday titled: “No Comment!”

Mason is well known for his hipster-ironic-cute no-comment responses to the media, such as one he gave the New York Times recently:

“Andrew Mason, Groupon’s chief executive, declined an earlier interview request, adding that he would talk ‘only if you want to talk about my other passion, building miniature dollhouses.’”

Buuuuuurn, NYT!

In his latest rumination on life as a digital celebrity, Mason more fully outlined what he would not comment on, including everything even remotely interesting you might want to know about the social buying company, including:

* Plans relating to capital-raising, including a possible public offering

* Pre-announcements of new products

* Our competitors or the competitive landscape

* Statements on core business metrics, including margins or profitability

* Any projections regarding revenue, growth rates or other financial metrics

*Strategic transactions or partnerships with other companies

Thank goodness any metrics we want about how many discounted stripper pole lessons Groupon has sold in Omaha is on-limits!

Mason–who appears to want to become the Midwestern version of comic Jackie Mason, except Jackie would have taken the $6 billion from Google–is now styling a very scruffy Jeremiah-Johnson beard on this blog post, which you can see above.

BoomTown’s query on that: Why, dear God, why?

Here is Mason’s full “No Comment!” post:

No Comment!

As press interest in Groupon has grown, I’ve found myself increasingly uttering two words that have always annoyed me: “no comment.” We like to be as transparent with our customers as possible, but, just as people don’t walk around naked, there are some things that we as a company don’t talk about (for obvious reasons).

The least we can do is be transparent about the things we won’t be transparent about, which are listed below:

* Plans relating to capital-raising, including a possible public offering

* Pre-announcements of new products

* Our competitors or the competitive landscape

* Statements on core business metrics, including margins or profitability

* Any projections regarding revenue, growth rates or other financial metrics

* Strategic transactions or partnerships with other companies

While we’ll clam up when asked about the above business-y stuff, we’ll always be straight forward about things that affect the experience we’re creating for customers and merchants.

Corning’s Gorilla Glass is a key component in many tablets and smartphones, and according to James Clappin, president of the company’s Glass Technologies Group, demand for it is spiking. “We expect the number of these devices using cover glass to quadruple over the next four years, presenting us with a significant opportunity for growth,” he said, adding that Corning estimates tablet sales could grow from roughly 20 million units in 2010 to almost 180 million by 2014.

That’s an 800 percent increase in four years.

That’s according to Susquehanna analyst Jeffrey Fidacaro (and AT&T, which confirmed that percentage to me), who doesn’t see the launch of the iPhone on Verizon as a catastrophic event for AT&T at all. He thinks the carrier stands to lose two million iPhone users at most to Verizon–hardly a mass exodus.

AT&T’s decision last year to accelerate upgrade eligibility for iPhone customers, making it easier for them to get the iPhone 4 when Apple released it, is proving a wise move indeed. What better deterrent to switching networks than the carrier’s $325 early termination fee?

In all likelihood, iPhone subscriber churn will be no worse at AT&T than it has been at other carriers that have lost iPhone exclusivity. As Matthew Key, CEO of Telefónica Europe, said during a February 2010 earnings call, “Ever since Vodafone has started selling the iPhone in January, we see absolutely no evidence of people leaving us, churning on the iPhone going back to Orange or Vodafone, so [we are] very comfortable with our iPhone volumes. We continue to out-trade the market and no sign of churn whatsoever.”

This is the first time Apple’s cracked 10 percent in the Japanese market since the iPhone debuted there, so this is something of a milestone. More so when you consider that the company is now in spitting distance of incumbent Kyocera (12.7 percent) and not too far away from market leaders Sharp and Panasonic, which hold about 18.8 percent and 16.6 percent of the market, respectively.

And people said the iPhone would never be big in Japan….

[Image credit: iPhonAsia]

That’s according to Chitika, which has been tracking iPad adoption rates on its ad network (three billion ads served monthly across more than 100,000 sites) for some time now.

As of this month, the iPad accounts for 0.83 percent of all traffic on Chitika’s network, research director Daniel Ruby tells me. And at current growth rates, which have been steady since the device’s launch, it should hit 2.3 percent by the end of next year. To get that metric, Ruby took the past two months’ data trends for iPad growth relative to the full network’s traffic and, after accounting for spikes and dips, built out a growth line for the next twelve months. And while Chitika has taken some flak in the past for inaccuracies with its iPad sales counter, Ruby says he’s confident about this particular projection because he’s predicting a metric Chitika can directly measure.

Said Ruby, “For the sake of perspective, the iPad is already on par with Linux in terms of Internet usage market share [in North America] and is on pace to more than double its presence by the end of 2011.”

[Image credit: Gizmodo commenter ModestMouse]

Nokia reported better-than-expected earnings for its third quarter–net income of 529 million euros from a loss of 559 million euros a year earlier. That’s well ahead of the 229 million euro consensus forecast and a sign that the company, whose stock has lost more than 70 percent of its value over the past three years, is finally turning the corner.

But that progress has a price: Layoffs. Nokia plans to sack around 1,800 employees, cutting them loose so that it can better “accelerate the company’s transformation towards a leading mobile solutions provider.”

That transformation is, of course, in desperate need of acceleration. That said, Nokia does seem to be making some progress. It sold 26.5 million smartphones during the third quarter, up 61 percent compared with the same period last year.

A nice metric for Nokia’s new CEO, Stephen Elop, to mull as he strives to drag the company up out of the mud. “In the five weeks since joining Nokia, I have found a company with many great strengths and a history of achievement that are second to none in the industry,” he said in a statement. “And yet our company faces a remarkably disruptive time in the industry, with recent results demonstrating that we must reassess our role in and our approach to this industry.”

Here’s how Yahoo’s top brass and board–with the help of its newly re-engaged crisis-management PR firm, Abernathy MacGregor–are already trying to spin the latest executive turmoil to hit the company:

Trashing those on the way out, to take focus off those remaining who have been just as responsible for driving the Internet icon and claiming that this is all part of yet another well-planned reorganization at Yahoo (YHOO).

Don’t believe most of it for a second. Some of it is corporate politics as usual, some of it rejiggering of events, some just not true at all.

After BoomTown’s scoop earlier today that Yahoo’s U.S. head Hilary Schneider, as well as Audience head David Ko and VP of Media Jimmy Pitaro, would be departing the company–all of which Yahoo is still planning to announce after the markets close on Friday–here comes this gem in a follow-up story in The Wall Street Journal:

“[Yahoo CEO Carol] Bartz, who joined Yahoo in January 2009, is in the midst of a turnaround effort. People familiar with the matter said she is removing the company’s old guard to assemble a new team.”

Let’s parse this ridonkulous spin-addled blame game, shall we?

Bartz is, in fact, the very person who picked all those execs for prime responsibility in her last reorg.

If they were so incompetent, why not dump them much quicker? After all, it’s not like the problems have not been mounting for months and months, with more and more talent taking off.

In addition, the exec exodus at Yahoo over the last year has been unrelenting and broad, encompassing way too many employees for her to act as if it were all planned and okay.

As to the “midst of a turnaround effort” canard that Bartz keeps insisting on, even comparing herself to Apple (AAPL) CEO Steve Job’s epic journey to return that legendary company to health?

Um, we are deep in the second year of the Bartz regime, and there appears to be no iPod-like save in sight, and it’s a little long in the tooth to keep using the turnaround excuse for all that has not yet happened under her command.

Which is to say, stock with a pulse and real growth across all metrics, as Facebook and Google (GOOG), to name a few, are showing.

In addition, it was Bartz herself who handed over a lot of the responsibility for the revival of Yahoo to Schneider.

Which meant Schneider had to be thrown under the wheels of the bus in the Journal by dragging out a very old–and tangential to the much larger flat revenue crisis at Yahoo–newspaper deal as pretty wet cannon fodder:

“Ms. Schneider is leaving because officials haven’t been satisfied with her performance, according to people familiar with the matter. Ms. Schneider was responsible for a 2006 deal with industry group Newspaper Consortium, in which Yahoo sold ads for newspaper websites and print editions. The effort continues but has not met Yahoo’s expectations, according to a person close to the company.”

Memo to readers: “People familiar with the matter,” I am guessing, would be current Yahoo execs.

The fact of the matter is that there have been both critics and admirers of Schneider at Yahoo, which comes as no surprise for one of its top execs. Some consider her smart and canny, while others complain of indecisiveness and slowness to act.

And, she has definitely had some very big whiffs, including the newspaper consortium, but most especially not finding an ad sales chief to replace Joanne Bradford, who left in March, about which I gave her a hard time when a very squishy structure was announced.

And, right now, sources tell me, Yahoo’s upcoming quarterly report could be an even tougher one.

And that falls to Schneider, of course, who has been in charge of its many partnerships, as well as advertising sales across the key Americas region.

Perhaps good reason for an ouster, except I have been tracking Schneider’s status for many months now, since hearing from many sources–not her, ever, in case you wanted to know–that she had told Bartz she wanted out.

Maybe that is what began to sour the boss on Schneider. But to now suddenly call her performance poor seems unusual, especially when you can just as easily point to Yahoo’s disastrous and pricey marketing campaigns–it is definitely not You!–helmed by CMO Elisa Steele, which has failed to move the needle on key user metrics.

But she has a tight relationship with Bartz, so she’s all right, jack? I am dizzy from all the spinning.

In other words, execs make mistakes and there is a lot of blame to go around and–as the old saying goes–the buck really does stop with Bartz.

But, guess what? Perhaps it should be noted that Bartz has also misstepped badly of late by making a series of wild remarks that have seriously angered many partners and other companies in Silicon Valley.

And I have heard from countless and very significant investors, all of whom are deeply concerned about her tone and recent public comments.

Just ask Yahoo Japan’s Masayoshi Son. Or Alibaba’s Jack Ma in China. Or the fine folks over at Apple in Cupertino, Calif.

And, I can also report that several execs at Yahoo’s new search technology partner, Microsoft, are also increasingly alarmed. Said one to me yesterday: “It is becoming a little unsettling.”

I can say for certain that Ko, who will doubtlessly be the next to get dinged, left on his own motor, telling Bartz himself recently.

He was quickly followed by Pitaro, who, as I reported earlier this week, is headed to another big company. No matter what the spin, his departure is a big loss, as he is well-liked inside and outside the company.

Then Schneider rounded out the latest trio of execs to go.

Thus, sources said, Yahoo is about to go on the offense, which is the expected thing to do, ready to announce a plan to move most of the product organization under Chief Product Officer Blake Irving.

The former Microsoft (MSFT) online exec is as sharp as a tack, in my experience, and clearly an even sharper corporate player, recently bringing in a series of his old cohorts from the software giant to take over big jobs at Yahoo.

He’s obviously now won some version of a corporate power play, and is now in favor with Bartz. But that means he’s being handed the entire thing.

Apparently, Irving has told numerous people that he plans to “rip it all down” and streamline the whole organization.

More rearranging at the company that has moved around the corporate living room umpteenth times over the past several years? Except it is still essentially the same room and same house.

Okay, Irving should probably have his choice of where the sofa goes, but as one exec wisely told me tonight: “Yahoo needs to build great products, not have another reorg….It needs a win.”

Indeed, just as board member Eric Hippeau apparently said at a recent meeting to deal with the latest executive kerfuffle.

Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock–who has presided over so many stumbles over the years that I have lost count–said to the room: “We need crisis management.”

Countered Hippeau, a longtime Internet exec who is now CEO of the Huffington Post: “What we need is revenue.”

Indeed. And innovation. And a vision. And, most of all, spin-free leadership.

The executive turmoil at the very top of Yahoo continues, with the company poised to announce the resignations of three top execs, including U.S. head Hilary Schneider (pictured here), according to sources close to the situation.

The other execs also leaving, which Yahoo (YHOO) is planning on revealing Friday: U.S. Audience head David Ko and, as BoomTown previously reported, VP of Media Jimmy Pitaro.

While some at Yahoo are trying to spin it as an ouster, sources close to the situation said that Schneider–who presides over media and advertising sales at Yahoo–has wanted to leave the company for a while, but was convinced to stay on by CEO Carol Bartz.

Schneider will, in fact, stay at Yahoo while it searches for her replacement. Heidrick & Struggles had already been headhunting candidates for her job in recent weeks.

Why Ko, who works directly for Schneider, is leaving now is uncertain, although sources said a lot of product control over properties under him is being moved over to Chief Product Officer Blake Irving.

Irving was hired several months ago by Bartz, and he has brought in many former colleagues from Microsoft (MSFT) to top product jobs at the company. And he’s appeared to have won the latest corporate power play too.

This entire mess–and that’s precisely what it is–calls into question the tenure of Bartz, a tough-talking, cost-cutting exec who was brought in to clean up Yahoo after the maelstrom around the failed takeover attempt by Microsoft several years ago.

She replaced co-founder Jerry Yang and came in with guns blazing and styling herself as an agent of change.

Except not too much as changed–except for finally striking a search technology deal with Microsoft–as the exodus of talent from Yahoo increases, advertising revenue growth is anemic, innovation is stalled, metrics are weak and the stock remains moribund.

In addition, Bartz’s frequent shoot-from-the-hip remarks appear to have alienated a number of partners, most recently in Asia.

This week, according to sources, some board members had an emergency meeting at Yahoo’s Sunnyvale, Calif., HQ to try to figure out how to deal with the burgeoning management issue.

Some speculate that they will hire a second-in-command to Bartz, who might be able to take over for her when her contract is up in 18 months.

Yahoo declined to comment.

I’m pecking this out from the bowels of the New World Stage, where Day Two of the Twitter-centric 140 Character Conference is meandering along. But the most interesting Twitter-related news is coming from outside the conference: Data from comScore (SCOR) showing that Twitter-related search has become both measurable and meaningful.

Well, measurable, at least.

From Citigroup (C) analyst Mark Mahaney:

Twitter Becoming Meaningful–Search volume on Twitter in May was 30.1MM, (.001 percent U.S. market share), with 4.2MM searchers, and 39.4MM Result Pages, exceeding the 22.2MM searches conducted on Time Warner Cable.

Normally, we don’t even bother to dismiss companies that have less than one percent of U.S. search market. We never write about them, period. But given that Twitter boosters continually try to position the company as a real-time search engine–one that theoretically can threaten Google’s (GOOG) search monopoly, if you listen to some pitchmen, this may be the single most important metric to watch for the next few years.

It’s certainly more important than the number of Twitter followers of Oprah or even Twitter’s overall growth rate, which is going to spike up and down over the next few months as the media hop on-and-off the story (it’s back on again this week, with the Tehran protests, but we’re entering the dog days of summer, and us media folks have twitchy attention spans).

And it’s probably more important than any revenue Twitter generates over the next couple of years–the Twitter dudes have raised $55 million and have spent little of it, so they have time to create a business.

But if Twitter really is going to become an important player in search–or at least an attractive acquisition candidate for the likes of Google or Microsoft (MSFT)–it’s going to have to show a steady increase in search share.

And the nice thing about owning .001 percent of the market is that it gives you plenty of room to move up.

A bit of good news today amid the chip industry’s seemingly endless procession of bad.

Sales of semiconductors rose 6.4 percent globally from March to April to $15.6 billion, according to the latest metrics from the Semiconductor Industry Association (click on the chart below).

But at $15.6 billion, they were still about 25 percent below the $20.9 billion reported last April. So while a better month than March, April is still a tremendous disappointment–although the SIA is hoping it signals a return to normal sales patterns, albeit at a lower level.

“The better-than-expected 6.4 percent sequential increase in April sales was driven by moderate improvements in a number of end-demand drivers and inventory replenishment,” said SIA President George Scalise. “The PC market–a major consumer of semiconductors–has been stronger than predicted earlier in the year.”

Good news for chip vendors like Intel (INTC) and AMD (AMD), right? One question, though: Since when is inventory replenishment growth?