Digital Window Limited, a joint venture between Axel Springer AG and PubliGroupe, bought the U.K.-based unit. AOL (AOL) didn’t disclose a price, but it’s almost certainly much less than the $150 million Armstrong’s predecessors paid for the company back when parent company Time Warner (TWX) was funding an M&A binge.

To refresh your memory, that buying spree included the likes of Bebo, Quigo, Third Screen Media, AdTech, and Tacoda. And almost all of these purchases have been written down and/or disbanded.

A lot of that happened in the pre-Armstrong era, but the former Google (GOOG) executive is still busy remaking AOL to his own specifications. These include remaking the company’s sales team, as well as selling off other properties–“reviewing the list of AOL assets as they relate to the core strategy,” in AOL PR-speak–to raise cash and/or focus energy.

We’re still waiting to hear who walks off with ICQ, the instant-messaging service the company has owned for more than a decade.

But even while AOL is slimming down, it is looking to add bits and pieces when it can. It won’t spend a lot for them–AOL execs have told the M&A community that it won’t be plunking down more than the $36.5 million it spent on video platform StudioNow earlier this year.

Here is the letter AOL CEO Randy Falco (pictured here) has penned to the entire staff about layoffs of 10 percent of its workforce–or 700 people–and other cost cuts, which the online service is announcing today.

“We’re at a pivotal point in AOL’s transformation, and need to be even more strategically focused and operationally efficient as we weather the economic storm,” wrote Falco, in part, about the move.

As BoomTown reported earlier today, Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL is making huge staff cuts, due to the weak economy and the ensuing deep falloff in advertising revenue, but also because of recent structural changes made to refocus the once-mighty service.

The layoffs will take place over the next several quarters, with most of the U.S. cuts to be completed by March. AOL has 7,000 employees world-wide, with most located domestically.

Here’s Falco’s letter:

Dear AOL colleagues,

I’m writing to tell you about some important decisions we’ve made about AOL’s business and why we’ve made them.

The deepening economic recession has affected every corner of the economy, including our own. Online marketers have tightened their ad buying across the board, reducing their spend by hundreds of millions of dollars.

As a result, we will be reviewing our entire organization to further align resources and expenses against the real revenue opportunities in this difficult market. Part of this will involve consolidating groups to gain efficiencies that will unfortunately lead to head-count reductions. We anticipate this will result in a net reduction of our workforce of up to 10% over the next several quarters–and we will attempt to finalize all domestic actions by the end of March. Reducing our workforce is never easy, particularly in the current climate, but our goal in doing this is to provide our core businesses the resources they need to thrive. Please know that, as always, we’ll be doing everything we can to help and support those affected, including offering severance packages and other services.

To further keep employment costs down, we will also forgo merit pay increases in 2009. This is a painful decision, but one that many companies have prudently taken to help minimize the number of layoffs they have to make.

To provide some perspective on these decisions, right now we’re two years into a three-year turnaround plan. Since day one, our strategy has focused on building and growing mutually dependent publishing, advertising and social media businesses to take advantage of the shifting media landscape. We’ve worked shoulder-to-shoulder to make considerable progress during this time.

We acquired best-in-class companies across the digital advertising space (AdTech, Third Screen Media, Lightningcast, buy.at, TACODA and Quigo, respectively) and integrated them with Advertising.com to build Platform-A, the largest, smartest display advertising platform in the world.

We grew our MediaGlow audience via an efficient content development model that in 2008 enabled us to launch more than 20 new sites that are generating significant page view (up 64% year over year in December), engagement (up 39% year over year) and unduplicated user (70+ million) numbers. This momentum will continue in 2009 with our goal of creating an additional 30+ editorially curated sites focused on consumer passion points.

We combined Bebo with our longtime community assets AIM and ICQ as well as newer acquisitions Goowy, Yedda and SocialThing, to build People Networks, gaining AOL a foothold in the critical social media space, with more announcements to come on the next phase of development in both the social media space and in the integration of social and publishing capabilities.

This progress continues to put AOL in a strong position to capitalize on our new business model when the recession ends.

In addition to focusing our investments, a successful turnaround plan also requires us to realign our cost structure against this three-pronged business model–making difficult decisions to cut costs in areas that aren’t critical to our growth. Splitting out the Access business improved the transparency of what’s working and what’s not, and allowed us to make better decisions about exiting businesses that weren’t performing while investing in growth areas. A successful turnaround plan also mandates we control costs, operate with healthy margins and position the company for sustainable growth. As you know, we’ve moved repeatedly to bring discretionary expenses in line to spare across-the-board job cuts.

But we’ve also had to make many hard decisions along the way. And this moment is no exception. We’re at a pivotal point in AOL’s transformation, and need to be even more strategically focused and operationally efficient as we weather the economic storm.

In addition to the head-count reductions and the 2009 merit pay decision, we are also making changes throughout the organization to improve efficiency and better align it to our three core businesses. This includes a review of our international operations and our global shared-services functions. In addition, we will continue throughout the year to carefully and thoroughly review all our products and services to make sure every one fully supports our strategy and has the potential for growth.

Finally, we are going to realize significant savings by continuing to consolidate our facilities–for example, moving from two buildings to one in Mountain View, from two floors to one in Los Angeles, and leasing unused space on our Dulles campus.

With these and other changes, we will take significant annual run-rate costs out of our business while, importantly, retaining the flexibility to invest in our growth strategy.

I know all this will raise questions, but I wanted to share as much as I could with you now. Senior management will provide more details as appropriate to their teams in the weeks ahead.

As difficult as things look right now, the economy eventually will turn around. Some companies will use this time prudently and make difficult decisions to come out of it in better shape–growing toward areas of opportunity, scaling back in others and maintaining a line on costs all around. Our only choice is to be one of these companies. With your continued hard work and dedication, we will position ourselves to emerge a stronger company ready to lead in a vibrant online market.

Randy

Gone, Tim Tuttle of Truveo. Gone, the Birches of Bebo. Gone, Dave Morgan of Tacoda. Gone, many Quigos.

One of the more interesting little problems that AOL has had over the last few years, in regards to its acquisition of hot Internet companies, has been that it is situated deep in the bowels of the Time Warner (TWX) behemoth.

So, one wonders, will a possible hook-up with Yahoo (YHOO) change that, giving the also-ran Internet outfit potentially valuable stock in Yahoo to better entice valued employees to stay?

AOL has to hope so, especially since it has had an especially hard time loading up new employees it absorbs from acquisitions. This talent pool typically comes from a start-up culture, and they are used to big slugs of stock, with an attractive package of options in order to entice them to stay.

While all Web companies struggle with the hippity-hopping nature of employees, AOL has suffered more than most, sometimes due to its circumstances, sometimes due to its own efforts.

For example, with Time Warner stock staying in a permanent state of stasis over the years and a reluctance to reload too many new employees without generating the ire of old ones, except for the most desired talent, it is harder to keep anyone at AOL for long.

And that’s without the fact that AOL is not exactly the dream job for ambitious entrepreneurs.

For example, one of the stars AOL has lavishly pointed to as an example of how innovative it can be, Tim Tuttle, the CEO of its deservedly lauded video search engine Truveo, recently left to pursue other projects.

According to an AOL spokesperson, Tuttle will remain a consultant, passing day-to-day management to Pete Kocks. That also happened with Dave Morgan of Tacoda.

And AOL’s generous acceleration of vesting when it acquires other companies also often results in brain drain.

Case in point, two of its biggest accquisitions, Bebo and Quigo, in which the options ALL employees had in the companies were fully accelerated upon completion of the deals.

“I was amazed that they insisted on it,” said one person familiar with the Quigo deal, in which AOL paid $300 million for the online advertising company (news of which we broke here last fall). “It seemed designed to give everyone an escape hatch.”

And, indeed, many key Quigo employees have left since the deal was struck, which might have been the point.

It will be interesting to see what happens at Bebo too, where some have been given generous retention packages, but all have gotten their stock options accelerated.

AOL paid $850 million in cash for the third-place social-networking site recently. The two founders of Bebo–Michael and Xochi Birch–grabbed their large payday and were gone, baby, gone.

A Yahoo deal could certainly help the situation, by making AOL–whose assets would presumably be shoved into Yahoo–into a real live Internet company again and give its employees a true ownership stake.

After its AOL division paid out an insane $850 million for social-networking site Bebo yesterday, one had to wonder if the true digital legacy of Time Warner (TWX) will be as the perpetual gravy train for legions of Web players.

It certainly seems that way, from the original AOL execs who “merged” their company with Time Warner in 2000 and cashed out at the peak right after the deal to the series of ad-networking start-up entrepreneurs who got acquired, took their payouts and skedaddled right on through to the two founders of Bebo–Michael and Xochi Birch–who didn’t even stay long enough for a latte after grabbing their chunk of the payday Time Warner was handing out in crisp bank notes for the social-networking site they founded.

And, more importantly, after one digital misstep after the next dating back to its Pathfinder days–which I have likened to watching someone fall down an endless staircase–one also has to wonder if Time Warner will ever see any of the upside of the Internet itself.

I remain dubious.

And after interviewing numerous sources close to the company yesterday after the Bebo deal was announced, I am even more certain of more trouble ahead.

Here’s why:

1. While I have always admired Bebo for its innovation and cool ideas about content (I love its “KateModern” online series, as you can see here), AOL essentially just forked over all that money for an audience of primarily teenagers in England, which is Bebo’s biggest market by far (but where Facebook has pulled to No. 1 in a year).

And while Bebo execs would argue with me about this, especially since international aspirations were touted by AOL yesterday, it has no more international traction than much more powerful leaders Facebook and MySpace. More significantly, its size in the important U.S. market, which is hoped will be helped by a marketing boost from AOL, is small and further traction remains questionable.

To be fair, AOL also touted the high engagement levels, which Bebo does have in terms of both minutes and page view per user.

2. Sources close to the company say AOL CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant–who are none-too-lovingly called Burns and Smithers at AOL–kept the deal a relative secret from most other execs, including those who might be majorly impacted.

It is not abnormal for acquisitions to be done in a tight group, but was apparently excessive in this case, and reminds one of the sneakiness of former Time Warner CEO Jerry Levin in the troubled AOL merger.

3. Sources said Falco had repeatedly told execs at AOL that he had to do a “big property” acquisition to move the needle, which has not been exactly moving at the unit of late, in order to show Wall Street that AOL had a social-networking strategy. “It’s like constantly scrambling eggs, by doing big new moves, you can hide the problems,” said one exec.

4. The turmoil in its online advertising unit, dubbed Platform A back in the fall, is real and profound and extraordinarily troublesome, given that it is supposed to be the engine to make the Bebo financial projections work at AOL. As I wrote earlier, Bebo needs that jump-start given its small revenues and profits.

The recent departure of three of the key executives who were supposed to be part of Platform A’s success–VP of Marketing Solutions Kathy Kayse and EVP for Global Advertising Strategy Dave Morgan in February, as well as Platform A President Curt Viebranz last week–is worrisome, even though it has been floated by AOL as a housecleaning.

But, curiously, all get good marks for competence from many and had, in fact, been recently touted as saviors by AOL. They do share one thing in common, said several sources: Run-ins with Grant, over cuts in spending and disagreement over aggressive sales projections in a recessionary economy.

In addition, all the key execs from its Tacoda acquisition are gone, along with those from its Quigo buy.

And, while its Advertising.com top exec Lynda Clarizio has taken over Platform A and is considered a strong exec and a “go-getter,” many sources told me she also reportedly had similar testy run-ins with Grant, before he recently was quoted on her promotion: “There is no one better qualified to do this than Lynda, whose track record at Advertising.com has been nothing short of stellar.”

While corporate departures and infighting are also common at many companies, especially over budgets and performance expectations, the level of rancor at AOL has been high.

5. Perhaps most importantly, it remains a mystery to me and many others I talked to yesterday that AOL has not truly attempted to take its very powerful properties like AIM and ICQ and make them more social, building applications on top of already robust ones and partnering around the Web.

“Didn’t AOL invent the social graph with Buddy Lists?” said one perplexed Silicon Valley luminary to me. Yes, indeedy, it did.

Thus, I am still trying to figure out why AOL–which was built on the pillars of community, communications and connectivity–has consistently not been able to leverage its still-valuable assets.

I suppose it is sexier to do a big, splashy deal, of course, which takes focus away–for a while at least–of the essential need to take hits, while doing the slow block-and-tackle work it will require to really build a strong ad and social network.

Buying Bebo, the third-ranked social network, for so much and trying to turbocharge it is a very lofty goal, of course, but the real problem with the acquisition is that it feels like an answer in search of a question.

While Bebo President Joanna Shields–who will enter the AOL exec team as part of the deal–and the Birches have clearly built a very interesting property, the weight of Falco’s calling it a “game-changer” on which AOL’s future rides could turn out to be much too much for Bebo to carry.

That is, especially with that heavy bag of Time Warner cash it is also shouldering.

In an interesting move, AOL made its second acquisition in a week by buying Yedda, an Israeli question-and-answer service with social elements.

The price for the start-up, founded in 2006, was not disclosed, although it recently raised $2.5 million. Last week, AOL confirmed it has bought the Quigo ad network at a price tag of upward of $300 million, a development we first reported in BoomTown.

The site automatically matches questions to related ones and topics and also to a wider pool of “expert” users. There have been a lot of sites in the genre, and Yahoo has had a genuine success with its own Answers product too, so it is a good arena for AOL to try to differentiate itself in.

I spent a lot of time at the Monaco Media Forum talking to Dave Morgan, newly installed as AOL’s EVP of Global Advertising Strategy. The former CEO of Tacoda, the behavioral ad network that AOL also snapped up, was bullish on AOL’s new prospects now that Time Warner has given Jeff Bewkes the nod as CEO.

We’ll see about that, of course, but it is nice to see the typically moribund AOL showing some signs of competitive energy.

(If you want to see Morgan in action, here below is a video interview Rafat Ali of paidContent did with him this week.)

As expected, from a story we broke in BoomTown more than a week ago, AOL confirmed it has bought the Israeli content-targeting ad network Quigo.

The sale price, said sources, was a lofty $300 million, around what Yahoo paid for data analytics ad network BlueLithium in September.

Well, it’s probably a good thing for AOL as it tries to turn itself from the onetime online digital home for consumers to what amounts to a glorified ad network.

That’s probably a good idea, given that the service has lost about one-third of its paying subscribers this year, which is no surprise after it went free. AOL now has just over 10 million, but is banking less on them than on selling ads all over the Web for its future.

Still, as sites like Facebook and others add users to their services, it is also more than a little depressing to me, given AOL’s history of pioneering the idea of a robust Internet community, where users created what former AOL top exec Ted Leonsis used to call a “permanent online presence.”

At the time of the merger between AOL and Time Warner at the turn of the century, AOL had more than 30 million such users, an audience that was bound to decline, given the lack of ability to take advantage of many opportunities for the company over the years.

I have always likened Time Warner’s handling of its AOL subsidiary–which I think comes a bit from its lingering corporate rage over the disastrous merger–to watching someone fall down stairs very slowly and deliberately.

At first you feel bad, and then you’re simply annoyed at the sheer waste of a once-great brand.

For example, it never built an ad network of its own (although former CEO Jon Miller’s purchase of Advertising.com was a lifesaver); it never spun the service off when it could have benefited from being on its own in terms of innovation; and it never made the kind of key acquisitions that would have kept its features fresh for users and prevented an exodus.

In my second of two books about AOL, called “There Must Be a Pony in Here Somewhere,” I jokingly referred to Dick Parsons, who recently stepped down as CEO, as a “noncarbonated beverage,” whose greatest legacy at Time Warner will doubtlessly be steadying the situation at the company after the merger mess.

Well, that’s been a good thing, of course, but it has also meant a stultifying recent record for AOL in years that have seen a really substantive boom in the Internet space.

In fact, the only real corporate focus thus far seems to be on jobs cuts, which is fine, but not exactly what I would call a vision for the future.

Nonetheless, in his new job as Time Warner CEO, Jeff Bewkes (pictured here) still has a lot of opportunity going forward. The ad network is a good idea, as I said, but AOL faces a lot of competition in the arena from companies like Google, Yahoo and now Facebook and MySpace. And no slackers here.

And it is encouraging when AOL invests in interesting subsidiaries like Truveo and UserPlane, as well as holding a piece of content sites like TMZ.com.

Why not more focus on drastically improving its email and communications tools? Why doesn’t AOL double down in the fast-growing mobile market? And it still has great assets in pieces it owns like ICQ.

Even more interesting would be a spinoff of AOL or even a sale to a Yahoo or Microsoft, creating a more powerful entity in which Time Warner could own a big stake.

Incredibly, after horses that have left the barn at AOL, there is a lot AOL can be going forward.

The question is: Does Bewkes have some fizz in him to do it?

As far as bubbles go, I suppose that’s fine, since average investors are safe from the machinations of investment bankers and venture capitalists this time and the only ones at risk are the big companies overpaying by doing the acquiring.

Are Plaxo and Digg among the latest targets?

We’ll see. But as we wrote last week, for example, AOL confirmed it bought the content-targeting ad network Quigo (for $300 million, said sources) yesterday, for example, and most expect more buys to occur in the hot ad-network space that includes start-ups like AdBrite and Tribal Fusion.

But with the $240 million mega-investment that Microsoft recently made in Facebook that values the company at $15 billion, look for more deals in that hot space or in related areas.

There’s talk, for example, that Plaxo–which calls itself a universal digital assistant–might get snapped up soon (two sources close to the company said that cable giant Comcast has been in talks with it), although another similar player, LinkedIn, is considering going public (we have a video interview with new CEO Dan Nye, which we will post soon).

And Valleywag had an interesting post on speculation around the fate of Digg, citing rumors that have been swirling for a long time now about the online news discovery site.

The price? The ubiquitous $300 million, which is about 10 times the revenue Digg is now getting from its recent guaranteed sweetheart ad deal with Microsoft.

As we said, money from big companies like Microsoft are propping up the bottom lines of Web 2.0 players, keeping Bubble 2.0 from popping, and leaving average investors to fret about bigger stock worries like subprime mortgages.

In the interest of time-saving, we will group them all here in one easy list that you can clip and save.

DEALS AFOOT?:

Yes, there is always a lot of sniffing around out there, especially given that a lot of Web 2.0 companies are more likely to be acquired than go public.

Do look for smaller ad networks to be bought up in the wake of a spate of bigger sales of late–DoubleClick to Google, aQuantive to Microsoft, Right Media and BlueLithium to Yahoo).

Now, it looks like AOL might get into the game again, after presciently grabbing Advertising.com way back in 2004 for $435 million. The new target, in a deal that a source close to the company said is “80% there,” is Quigo–the content-targeting ad network. The price? About $300 million.

Less likely for action are some other names being bandied about.

WordPress (the blogging software and hosting company AllThingsD.com uses), for example, has some suitors and is contemplating a sale after some offers. But don’t bet on it.

And RockYou is not being bought by, say, Yahoo–at least not this week. While rumors of wild valuations for the No. 2 maker of widgets on Facebook (Slide usually outranks it) have been bandied about, it has not had any significant talks with anyone.

GOOGLE GETS FRIENDLY (EXCEPT TO FACEBOOK):

As we wrote in a post yesterday, contrary to rumors, the Google project (codenamed Maka-Maka, doubtlessly by that wacky pair, Graham Spencer and Joe Kraus, pictured here, formerly of JotSpot and Excite, who worked on it) was imminent. As in now. Right now. This instant.

Officially named OpenSocial, it is a way to create a social graph over the Web that is open to third-party apps friendly and, as I wrote, is indeed both a “real attempted assault on the Facebook platform or more of a way to widely spread the gospel of social networking (and, thus, an assault on the Facebook platform).”

While Google has signed a bunch of prominent partners, it has yet to grab the No. 2 social-networking site Facebook (unlikely) and the No. 1 MySpace (much more likely, but don’t hold your breath). But it’s definitely a put-up-or-shut-up dare by the search giant, especially given Facebook’s professed love of openness.

Who knows if it will catch on, given that it is clear it is all in the hands of the apps developer community. If not, it will surely be a big black eye for Google, if it can’t motivate widely beyond search.

FACEBOOK IS A BIG BOY NOW:

It looks like former Yahoo Mike Murphy–who heads ad sales at Facebook (and is pictured here)–is finally getting his ducks in order with a new ad offering to be called SocialAds next week at its big confab in NYC.

Unlike the competition’s contextual ad programs, this will be squarely aimed at people’s self-expressed interests and demographics.

And, of course, Microsoft will be Facebook’s partner in serving the ads, for now at least. Good lord, it has bought and paid for this date many times over, so a fine time must be had by all!

I can’t tell you how thrilled we are that Facebook (and that nice boy Mark Zuckerberg) is finally putting some meat on its skinny little business model to take advantage of its fast-growing popularity.

But let’s keep in mind that it remains to be seen how lucrative this kind of ad network is and how scalable it is across the Web (and not just on Facebook).

It will also be interesting to see if the offering is truly innovative and different than existing solutions–or if it just serves up some dumb and useless ad for blood supplies, because you happen to be playing Vampire a little too much.

(We’re teasing, Mark, but not very much at all.)

OH, YES, THAT GPHONE:

More open verbiage from Google, which will roll out a mobile-phone operating system of software and services for a new kind of open cellphone sometime in this millennium (are you as sick of the speculation about the Gphone as I am?).

Since we’re talked out, here’s a much better Wall Street Journal Online video on the subject:

BOVINE UPDATE

Yahoo’s holy cows? Still sacred and going strong!

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.