According to numerous sources close to the situation, the Tumblr brand will continue on in the wake of its $1.1 billion acquisition by Yahoo.

That includes definitive promises by Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer to once-sale-shy Tumblr CEO David Karp to allow him to shepherd the fast-growing blogging product, with no forced integration with Yahoo’s many other content properties.

That said, sources added, there will be more back-end changes to marry infrastructure, such as undergirding Tumblr’s nascent advertising business and giving it more distribution opportunities.

“At the beginning, at least, it’ll be hands-off,” said one person close to the situation. “It has to be.”

While that is probably no surprise, it’s still good news for Tumblr employees as well as its very opinionated user base, which is not likely to greet a takeover by a corporate giant of the social, iconoclastic user-generated content service.

That said, Yahoo execs discussed and are aware of issues around porn published on the site, although they believe it to be fixable over time.

As Peter Kafka noted:

To spell that out: Tumblr’s advertisers don’t have to worry about their stuff showing up on blogs like We Want Porn. At worst, it’s possible that they’ll end up advertising to a user whose dashboard includes posts from We Want Porn. But in general, they ought to be pretty well insulated from that stuff.

By the same token, if Yahoo wanted to, it could end up scrubbing Tumblr of porn, and losing a lot of users and views — but it probably wouldn’t lose much in the way of monetizable users. Unless it turns out that the majority of Tumblr’s core users have signed on exclusively to use porn.

Or, as a Tumblr investor also told Kafka: “Non-story. Tumblr is the Internet. It’s a dashboard-follower model, opt-in.”

Moving on from porn, sources close to the situation — okay, pretty much everyone is chit-chatting away now — said that Mayer spent a lot of time with Karp (who was in Silicon Valley last week, in fact, visiting her) about the transition, and about how the new ownership would impact him and the service.

One source called them “kindred spirits” on the issue, and that Mayer has been given great purview by the Yahoo board to foster Tumblr to prevent it from turning out like Flickr, Delicious and many other big acquisitions dating back to GeoCities. (I was there covering that deal way back when, and what a mess that was!)

Mayer is well-liked by product and engineering entrepreneurs, and has often focused on them at Yahoo, over the perhaps more important demands of business and advertising execs.

That would appeal to Karp, who once famously said that online advertising made him physically sick. Still, he has recently begun to embrace ad sales at Tumblr.

Within the last year or so, Tumblr has started selling modestly sized “native ads” promoting brands’ Tumblr pages on users’ dashboards, which has shown promise. Tumblr has said it had $13 million in revenue last year, and sources said it could get to up to $100 million this year.

“We’re going to be very careful here,” said a source with knowledge of the acquisition.

A source at Tumblr agreed: “This will be a very delicate dance, since so much could go wrong if done without care.”

Still, some at Yahoo are worried that the company might be chasing the youthful demographic at Tumblr too assiduously. “This is a very fickle audience,” said another high-ranking Yahoo exec. “Chasing a young one is a very tricky thing.”

Yes, indeed, but Mayer thinks she is the one to be able to pull it off and make Yahoo relevant with an even wider consumer base.

AllThingsD broke news of the deal in the offing last week, which has since been approved by Yahoo’s board.

The sum would be the biggest payday for a takeover in at least three years, providing some relief to an industry that has been pinched by sluggish deal-making activity since the financial crisis.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

Wall Street is certainly enthusiastic for such an outcome — even grabbing onto a specious rumor that perhaps Google was sniffing around the troubled Chicago-based social discount deals company, which is currently valued at just over $3 billion. On Friday, Groupon’s stock jumped 23 percent on takeover speculation after Tom Forte of Telsey Advisory Group was quoted as saying: “Where the stock is currently trading, it’s a takeout candidate.”

Actually, the stock has been trading at these levels for a very long time, so the sudden attention is decidedly overwrought. More to the point, sources close to Google — which had offered $6 billion for the company before it went public — said that Google has not been contemplating a second foray into acquiring Groupon.

The same is true for eBay, said sources, and Amazon is an unlikely buyer because it already owns a stake in LivingSocial, the second-largest daily deals provider. Additionally, there are lots of other problems that any purchaser would face in buying the company, which sells everything from bikini waxes to GPS devices at a discount.

In an onstage appearance this morning, CEO Andrew Mason declined to address the thinly sourced rumors of a takeover. “What I have said about Groupon is everything I will say about it,” he said. “I am focused on looking forward.”

Given the non-answer, it’s still prudent to ask, is there actually a buyer for Groupon?

First, let’s address the price. Two years ago, Google offered to purchase Groupon for $6 billion. A year later, it went public at $10 billion, and today, it is trading for $2.9 billion. The company has $1.2 billion in cash, and owes merchants about half of that, or around $573 million.

That said, it is still a relatively low price for a company that includes a customer base of 40 million people who bought something in the past year, a hodgepodge of local retailers and merchants that consider Groupon their online marketing channel, and — perhaps most importantly — a better-than-expected mobile business that now represents a third of its transactions.

But, while it costs much less than it once did, that doesn’t necessarily make Groupon a steal.

That’s because over the past year, the Chicago company has stumbled operationally. Europe is underperforming, the company’s main coupon business is slowing as the novelty of the business is wearing off and it has started investing heavily in selling products, a low-margin business that requires tons of logistics to package and ship items to people’s front doors. On top of that, the board recently discussed replacing Mason, who some directors fear may not be the right choice to continue leading the company. While they ultimately decided to keep him, it was a perceptual blow.

At least one big investor is betting something will happen: Tiger Global Management, which recently bought up close to 10 percent of Groupon. The well-regarded hedge fund and private equity firm may be betting it can’t get worse, and perhaps would even push for a sale.

In any case, here’s a look at some of the scenarios:

Google

When Google made the offer two years ago, the search engine was interested in entering the daily deals business as a way to gain a foothold into all things local, including commerce. Since Groupon rejected that $6 billion acquisition, Google has spent the past two years building Google Offers.

While Google Offers still has a very small piece of the market, it has been pivoting toward an integrated ads model, which is less complementary to Groupon’s approach. Google believes that merchants will pay Google only after a purchase has been made, and the sum will be determined by the consumer. The cost per acquisition model is very different from Groupon, which has the consumer paying up front for a heavily discounted coupon.

As one source with knowledge of the situation said: “The timing would be a bit wacky.”

That said, Nikesh Arora, Google’s SVP and chief business officer, had been a very strong advocate of the original deal and might still want more heft in Google’s corner in the competitive local scene. One major plus is that Groupon could also help build a local salesforce to push Google+ Local, which includes Zagat, the online reviews site that competes against Yelp. Groupon might also support its Google Wallet business, which has largely failed to gain traction among consumers.

Another source familiar with the two companies said running a daily deals business is “operationally intensive, and it’s a muscle that Google doesn’t have, so from a synergy standpoint it would be complementary.” But, “if they are still serious about local, is that the business model for local that they want to pursue?”

eBay

For the past two years, the e-commerce company has aggressively been going after the local commerce market by helping transactions occur online or at a nearby store. Additionally, its PayPal division is moving fast into the physical payments space. Strong merchant relationships, like the ones Groupon has, could go a long way toward making those things happen faster.

EBay recently raised $3 billion in debt financing and has $7.3 billion cash on its balance street. Its stock price also has gone up more than 65 percent in the past year, giving it plenty of fire power to make a big move.

It also has the stomach for acquisitions. However, many of its purchases over the past two years have been about buying technology and talent. It bought RedLaser, the barcode scanning technology for $10 million; Milo.com, a local inventory company, for $75 million; and Zong, a mobile payments company, for $240 million. Over the years, it has also made substantial purchases, including GSI last year for $2.4 billion, Bill Me Later for $1.2 billion and Skype for $2.6 billion.

A few months back, the company entered the daily deals business with the launch of eBay Lifestyle Deals, which runs daily deals in a number of markets, including San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. To do so, eBay teamed up with Signpost, which arranges the deals with local merchants. Interestingly, Signpost is backed by Google Ventures, and already provides deals for Google Offers.

The company is also experimenting with eBay Now, a service that allows consumers to buy something on their phone and have it delivered within an hour. “They continue to be interested in local, and they have this experiment going on right now with eBay Now, but they are still iterating and figuring out the local angle,” one source said.

Likewise, PayPal’s local strategy is under development. It is trying to roll out physical payments to big-box retailers like Home Depot while also offering a credit card reader for smaller retailers called PayPal Here.

The biggest argument against this deal is that eBay may not need Groupon, and that it already has the infrastructure to roll out deals through partnerships — which would cost a whole lot less and be a lot less painful.

Amazon

Simply put, Amazon already has its own troubles with its significant stake in LivingSocial, which just slashed 400 jobs. In the third quarter, Amazon took an impairment charge of $169 million, or 37 cents a share, related to its stake in LivingSocial, resulting in the company reporting an overall third-quarter net loss of $274 million, or 60 cents a share.

Any potential Amazon-Groupon tie-up would then be a merger between LivingSocial and Groupon, creating perhaps an even bigger black hole that would also result in a lot of ongoing integration problems. While together LivingSocial and Groupon would easily make Amazon the largest daily deals company and up its local commerce efforts, it’s still not clear if the online retail giant wants to double down here.

Separately, Amazon has entered the daily deals business on its own with a service called Amazon Local that competes directly with LivingSocial and Groupon. The offers became particularly interesting to the company after it started using them to discount the price of its Kindle e-readers and tablets. If owners don’t want to see the offers, the tablets can cost up to $40 more.

The company has said that it essentially doesn’t need help building the business – it thinks it can get to scale fast in the space because it already has 164 million active customer accounts worldwide (which are defined as people who have made a purchase in the past year).

Perhaps most importantly, though, Amazon has a history of building, not buying.

Visa, MasterCard, American Express

These three payment companies have huge market values, and should not be discounted as players in the local commerce space. In addition, a year ago, all of them started looking for new revenue streams after the Durbin Amendment capped the amount that banks and card networks charge merchants on debit card transactions.

Already, many banks are sending targeted ads or deals to consumers based on their spending habits. However, it’s unclear whether they need to be the actual deal makers, or just act as a distribution system for advertisements and coupons. For example, MasterCard recently partnered with Gilt City, the daily deals division of Gilt Groupe. Through the partnership, MasterCard will be able to offer its users deals for restaurants, concert tickets and travel, and at the same time, help Gilt City get in front of some of the card issuer’s millions of users.

MasterCard may be the frontrunner of the three as a potential suitor. Not only has it shown direct interest in the space, American Express is still absorbing its acquisition of Revolution Money, for which it paid $300 million cash in 2010, and Visa has been active with its purchase of CyberSource for $2 billion in 2010. More recently, it made an investment in Square, the hot mobile payments company.

Other Suspects

A number of other companies could be put on a Groupon acquisition list, such as Yahoo, Microsoft and Facebook.

Microsoft and Yahoo both have the money, but have not done much in the space so far. An acquisition would allow them to catch up quickly, but would be expensive and largely not complementary with what they are doing already — which is almost nothing. Facebook, in particular, tried once to enter the space and failed and might be focused on other lower-hanging revenue sources.

Groupon could also look to private equity firms for a buyout, which would allow it to have some space while it fixed some of its issues.

Internationally, there is Japan’s Rakuten, which owns Buy.com in the U.S., and China’s e-commerce giant Alibaba, which has been looking at ways to enter the U.S. market.

Of course, Groupon might simply keep stumbling forward and hope it can turn itself around. But, at some point, without improved revenue and cohesion at the top levels, something is sure to bring pressure to its options. 

In fact, in afternoon trading today, the rumors continued to keep the stock elevated. Shares closed 3.76 percent higher today at $4.41 a share.

It’s been nice to see all the euphoria at Yahoo about free food and Apple iPhones kicking it up a notch.

But, purple people, guess what? Them’s just your basic table stakes in Silicon Valley these days and pretty much everyone else has had such perks for a long while now.

Thus, as nice as it is to drink your coconut water gratis, after two months in charge, it’s long past time to focus on what new Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is up to besides making much-needed but obvious cultural changes at the troubled Internet giant.

She’s been busy with the expected listening tour of employees and also outside tech players — such as former Yahoo CEO Terry Semel — which is a textbook stop in the turnaround playbook.

Now comes the hard part: Actually beginning to make the significant decisions about how she’s going to turn around Yahoo and what the key issues of strategic focus need to be.

In a series of recent meetings, according to numerous sources inside the company, Mayer has begun to outline what those are to top staff.

Not surprisingly, they are many of the same thorny issues that Yahoo has been facing for a long time and which center primarily on making the company relevant again in a wide number of ways.

I’ll get to many of them over the next week in a series of What Will Marissa Do? posts — including looking closely at her new hires, when and how Mayer will deal with inevitable layoff decisions facing the company, where the sale of Yahoo! Japan stands and, finally, what she’s cooking up for key Yahoo products.

But the focus has to fall first of all on search and advertising, the two arenas that Mayer has been studying most closely, according to numerous sources close to the situation.

That has included a recent meeting and numerous discussions with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer about improving Yahoo’s search advertising partnership, said sources at both companies.

That deal has been largely disappointing since it was struck under the regime of ousted CEO Carol Bartz several years ago.

Many reasons are given for the poor performance of the entire arrangement, including lack of improvement of cost per click and share growth for both parties. That means bid density and numbers of advertisers remain too low, especially compared to Google’s offering of access to a larger, more active and lucrative market.

Simply put, despite massive spending by Microsoft on search, users and advertisers get significantly better results overall with the search leader Google.

(You can read a great piece by Search Engine Land’s Danny Sullivan from last year, which exhaustively looked at the issues until then.)

The irony abounds that it’s up to Mayer to fix this problem of improving revenue per search with Ballmer, since she has been among the executives who have made Google the search behemoth it has become.

Her particular expertise has been on search experience for consumers, which is just the area that Yahoo desperately needs to improve after handing over technology duties to Microsoft.

That move was controversial at the time and some feel it was a big mistake. But, most also think there is no going back at this point, given the enormous cost of running a serious search enterprise.

Such an idea is still being raised inside Yahoo, although it seems more nostalgic than a realistic possibility, given the enormous price and, more importantly, the departure of the company’s core search engineers in recent years.

That doesn’t mean Yahoo under Mayer can’t be key to helping solve Microsoft’s search tech problems. She certainly knows the entire arena, which has already given Yahoo increased credibility among Microsoft’s search engineers.

“None of Yahoo’s many CEOs knew anything about search technology and that’s certainly not the case here with Mayer,” said one person close to the situation at Microsoft. “When she walks in, she instantly has status among the geeks as someone who knows what she’s talking about.”

It still may be a losing battle, due to Google’s overwhelming dominance, but if anyone at Yahoo can spot areas of even small improvement — which can yield big returns — it could be Mayer.

In addition, she can spearhead Yahoo’s own efforts to reverse — or perhaps simply stop — search market share declines via delivering a better consumer offering.

That’s still heavy lifting, no matter the exec, since both Microsoft’s Bing and Google are better equipped to win here, too.

“It hard to imagine we are going to slow down in any way,” said one former colleague of Mayer’s at Google to me recently in a rather ominous tone. “We’re only going to get more competitive.”

Pressure much?

And more: Mayer is under a time limit, since guaranteed payments Microsoft agreed to pay Yahoo for the shortfalls on what was promised will be running out next year. The pair has renegotiated that deal before, and it will likely have to do so again.

Of course, Mayer could try to walk and threaten to take Yahoo’s search business elsewhere, a move that former CEO Scott Thompson was mulling before his ouster.

That’s not a surprising ploy, except it is probably impossible to pull off, a fact acknowledged by top Yahoo execs.

“It might feel good to say we have options in search,” said one person close to the situation. “But that ship sailed years ago.”

Indeed, especially since Google is the only choice of possible alternate partners and such a move is rife with major obstacles.

There is the issue of the contract with Microsoft, which could lead to a potentially explosive legal struggle Yahoo can ill afford.

“They can try to get out of the deal,” said one high-ranking person at the software giant. “But that’s a lot easier threatened than done.”

And, there is the clear regulatory hairball any search hook-up between Google and Yahoo would lead to.

That’s happened before, which Mayer knows well since she was a top exec in Google’s business when it tried to partner with Yahoo as a way to prevent Microsoft’s hostile takeover bid for the company.

While times might have changed, Google is currently facing a likely battle with the Federal Trade Commission over its powerful search business, and trying to get Yahoo’s business now is a non-starter.

Thus, finally fixing the Microsoft partnership is key to Mayer’s success since it represents a little over one-third of revenue of Yahoo (see the chart below).

The bigger part of Yahoo’s business, as you can also see from the chart, has been display revenues. And that, too, has been a sorry tale of declines and ever more disappointing results.

A report by eMarketer on display market share had this depressing chart for Yahoo:

As is clear, the march downward for one-time leader Yahoo has been swift, and the prospects for the future are worse as Google and Facebook vie for leadership.

The reasons for this have been myriad, but Mayer has apparently decided that it’s been due in large part to the broken Yahoo ad tech platforms and their ever weaker performance.

As we have previously reported, she has determined that it’s now time to invest in improving them, both by funding internally and external acquisitions.

For that, she has formed a tight group of execs to scan the landscape for tasty and innovative treats for Yahoo to gobble up.

That includes: Scott Burke, SVP of Yahoo’s advertising and data platforms; Brian Silver, who runs the company’s Right Media Exchange; Xuhui Shao, a key engineering VP under Burke; and Mark Morrissey, the longtime tech exec who previously ran the company’s search business and was key to integrating the Microsoft search deal into place.

The cerebral Burke especially has been pushing ad platform improvement for a while and finally seems to have won the battle against detractors of the big and possibly grandiose plan by appealing to Mayer’s interest in not giving up.

Thus, the tabling of plans by Thompson, as well as interim CEO Ross Levinsohn, to outsource some of the automated parts of the display business to Google.

Those talks were very serious, as well as others to sell off Right Media, but they are done for now.

One major issue — the people in charge of the ad platform turnaround could also be seen (and most definitely are) as mired in Yahoo’s legacy of lackluster results and poor performance.

“It is kind of funny that the guys responsible for the decline now have the responsibility for fixing it,” said one source at Yahoo.

It’s a fair point to be made.

But that’s water under the bridge, apparently, since the group has been making the rounds, helped by Yahoo’s M&A execs, with a wide range of companies in many different ad tech area being considered (and some dismissed), including: Mediaocean, Turn, Criteo, PubMatic and Millennial Media.

Millennial is the most interesting, because it is a mobile ad play, where Yahoo is exactly nowhere (to be fair, less than nowhere) after years of botched efforts.

As with other companies, this is a critical arena for Yahoo, and yet one more that Mayer needs to focus on.

Lastly, Mayer has to make sure Yahoo’s premium display business remains strong. This is much more based on relationships with large advertisers than on major sponsorship and branding offerings, as well as creating consumer products and content that is appealing to marketers.

This area is now headed up by former Google exec Michael Barrett, who has publicly said he was staying put for now at Yahoo as its chief of revenue.

In fact, because he is in charge of all sales, he occupies the second slot under Mayer on Yahoo’s now strangely configured, punctuation-impaired and information-free management page.

But numerous sources inside and outside Yahoo said Barrett has also told many people that he is still not fully committed to staying in the role for the long haul.

If he eventually gets a lucrative exit package — something the new boss is not being very generous with overall, said sources — that will mean Mayer will need a high-profile and well-regarded ad exec to replace him; sources said Mayer has already begun reaching out to some candidates.

The pickings are slim, with only a few names on the list of those capable of taking on such a job. That includes: Demand Media’s Joanne Bradford, who was also a former top Yahoo exec; Microsoft’s Yusuf Mehdi; OWN’s Kathleen Kayse; MLB.com’s Bob Bowman; and any number of Google execs.

In that regard, as with all the other search and advertising overhaul efforts at Yahoo, it is a matter of attracting serious talent into the company going forward.

More on that — and more — to come.

Mike Callahan, Yahoo’s longtime and powerful general counsel, is leaving the company.

According to an internal memo, which is embedded below, Callahan does not have another job. But sources said that he has been considering departing the Silicon Valley Internet giant since the beginning of the year.

Ron Bell, who is now deputy GC for products and the Americas region, has been named interim GC reporting to interim CEO Ross Levinsohn.

It’s all very interim (except me — I started covering Yahoo in the mid-1990s and I never go away!).

Callahan has been around a long time too, serving as the top lawyer at the company for almost a decade, after arriving at Yahoo in 1999. In his job, he has been in charge of legal affairs and public policy globally.

In addition, he has played a very powerful role on a range of strategic, corporate governance and transactional issues at Yahoo.

That has included everything from Yahoo’s nasty hostile takeover battle with Microsoft to its eventual search and advertising partnership with the software giant. He has also been a key adviser to Yahoo’s musical chair series of CEOs over the last few years.

Callahan has also been deeply involved in Yahoo’s current patent settlement negotiations with Facebook — which, by the way, he was integral to waging under former CEO Scott Thompson.

Those talks are ongoing, although complex, with a likely cross-licensing agreement at some point in July.

Sources said that Callahan’s departure has nothing to do with the current investigation into the circumstances around the fake computer science degree on Thompson’s bio that caused a firestorm at Yahoo.

Several directors are looking into the controversy, most especially how the false information got into Yahoo’s legal filings.

That aside, the quiet and self-effacing Callahan has certainly been one of the steadier members of the management team over the years and his departure from Yahoo is a major one.

Here’s the memo that Levinsohn just sent around to the troops:

From: “Yahoo! Inc.”
Reply-To: “Yahoo! Inc.”
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:00:14 -0700
To: All Worldwide
Subject: Executive Changes

Yahoos:

I’m writing to let you know about a change in our executive ranks and to wish a long time Yahoo goodbye. After twelve and a half years with Yahoo!, and almost nine years as our General Counsel, Mike Callahan has notified me of his decision to leave Yahoo! so that he can move on to new opportunities. We would like to thank him sincerely for his time at the Company.

During his time as General Counsel, Mike helped structure, recruit and retain a world class global team of legal, public policy, intellectual property, compliance and other professionals. Mike and his team have set the industry standard for substantive excellence, business partnership, creativity and, importantly, have had fun doing it. The long tenure of many of the legal and policy team is a credit to the organization that Mike has built. He has focused on team building, communication, and trust between department members and they have been a great contributor to the company at large.

In my time with Yahoo!, Mike has been a leader and great partner to me and the entire executive team and we will miss his calm demeanor and practical, results oriented advice. Along with the Board, I would like to thank Mike for his loyalty and service, and wish him well in whatever comes next for him.

With Mike’s departure, I am pleased that another long time legal Yahoo, Ron Bell, currently Deputy General Counsel for Products and the Americas Region, has agreed to serve as interim General Counsel reporting to me. Ron joined Yahoo! in July 1999, and over that time has served in numerous senior roles in the legal department, including as a Deputy General Counsel for the last 9 years — and has made his mark on many of our most strategic deals and initiatives over the years. Please join me in thanking Ron for stepping up into this new role and welcoming him to the executive team.

Ross

ross
Levinsohn

Interim CEO
& Head of Global Media

And here is the regulatory filing on Callahan’s departure to make it officially official:

YHOO-20120629-8K-20120628

“I continue to believe in Best Buy and its future — and care deeply about its customers, employees and shareholders,” Mr. Schulze said in a statement on Thursday. “There is an urgent need for Best Buy to reinvigorate growth by reconnecting with today’s customers and building pathways to the next generation of consumers.”

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

Yahoo is in the final stages of selling a large chunk of its stake in the Alibaba Group back to the company — in a complex deal that is set to include a multibillion-dollar share buyback to investors of the Silicon Valley Internet giant and an eventual IPO of the Chinese company — according to multiple sources close to the situation.

The deal has yet to be officially approved by the boards of both companies, but sources said it is likely to be, and could be announced as early as Monday.

This all could change, of course, since negotiations between Alibaba and Yahoo have taken place in a variety of ways in recent years, without success and with much acrimony. Talks over a tax-free deal — also involving Yahoo’s Japanese partner, SoftBank — collapsed in February, for example.

But the 324th time is apparently the charm — so here are the details of what looks to be a nearly complete agreement that I have ferreted out thus far from lots of relieved sources familiar with the situation:

Yahoo will sell half of its roughly 40 percent stake in Alibaba, in a taxable deal. The transaction is likely to value that portion of Yahoo’s holdings at about $7 billion — or 20 percent of Alibaba’s $35 billion enterprise valuation. Alibaba is in the midst of raising capital to fund the sale.

After taxes of upward of 35 percent are paid on the long-term gains — remember that Yahoo bought the now-lucrative Alibaba stake for a fraction of that, many years ago — the company will likely use the funds to buy back its own shares. That stock has been caught in the mid-teens doldrums for quite a while.

A shareholder dividend is also being considered. It’s not clear if some of the cash will be held back for acquisitions by Yahoo, sources added, but it is unlikely.

As part of the deal, sources said, incentives have been put in place for Alibaba to move forward with a public offering, which sources stressed is without the contractual obligation or a time frame. Alibaba execs have already been publicly indicating such a direction recently, but this will put them more firmly on that path.

In return, Yahoo has agreed to sell the remaining quarter of its current holdings when that IPO does occur. It would then have an only 10 percent stake of Alibaba, which it could sell at any time after the IPO.

If finally struck, the transaction will finally bring to an end one of the more protracted and disputed relationships in the Internet world.

Once close, the pair have been wrangling over the large Yahoo ownership, which Alibaba CEO Jack Ma has been trying to dislodge in a variety of nice and not-so-nice ways. It has resulted in a number of very public disagreements.

That included a nasty back-and-forth over its Alipay unit with now-fired CEO Carol Bartz, threats of takeover of Yahoo with private equity firms and, more recently, making friendly with its just-ousted CEO, Scott Thompson.

Those talks with him in recent weeks, which included a visit to China by Thompson, led to the new deal, which was negotiated primarily between Yahoo’s CFO Tim Morse and legal head Mike Callahan and Ma and Alibaba’s Joe Tsai.

The talks continued even as Thompson was suddenly engulfed in a controversy over a fake computer science degree on his resume that quickly led to his departure from Yahoo on Sunday.

Ironically, the error was first discovered by activist shareholder Daniel Loeb, who will now vote on the deal as a newly named director of Yahoo, after successfully helping to oust Thompson.

He owns almost 6 percent of Yahoo, and is expected to approve the transaction.

But the final decision to approve the deal will be in the hands of a very new board of Yahoo, which has been drastically reshaped in recent weeks. It is meeting tomorrow and perhaps over the weekend to vote on it.

While the deal with Alibaba looks to be nearing an end, Yahoo’s talks to sell its 33 percent stake in Yahoo Japan is not part of this agreement. That’s due to what Thompson had called a “valuation gap,” which sources said is still an outstanding issue.

New interim CEO Ross Levinsohn has not been involved in the Alibaba deal in any significant way. But he certainly will benefit from its halo effect, if approved, especially given that it will likely boost Yahoo shares.

Next up for Levinsohn, who has just rejiggered Yahoo management again, other sources said, is an effort to settle the patent-infringement lawsuit with Facebook, and also to renegotiate its search deal with Microsoft.

And, oh yes, fix Yahoo’s rocky core-advertising business, which is still in distress and needs a major overhaul to push it back to growth.

But that, as they say, is yet another episode of Yahoo’s ongoing reality show.

T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG, has slated the airwaves, or spectrum, for its development over the next several years of a high-speed mobile broadband network to keep pace with its larger rivals. The spectrum will bolster T-Mobile’s network in 12 large U.S. markets, according to a statement from the Bellevue, Wash.-based carrier.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

AT&T said it would turn over the airwaves, or spectrum, along with $3 billion in cash to T-Mobile parent Deutsche Telekom AG after pulling out of the deal as opposition mounted from the FCC, Justice Department, state attorneys general and rival carriers.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

Shares in the company rose some 5 percent Thursday on market chatter that it’s looking for buyers. The latest story making the rounds: RIM has hired Goldman Sachs to explore strategic options.

Is there any more truth to this rumor than the ones that preceded it? It’s certainly possible, though, as we’ve said before, RIM’s not a takeover target if no one wants it.

“There are several roadblocks that make an acquisition of RIM unlikely,” Morningstar analyst Michael Holt recently wrote. “We believe RIM should entertain all options at this point, given the serious challenges facing the firm, but there is little evidence to suggest RIM’s board is open to offers at this point in time.”

(Image courtesy of The Joy of Tech)

I really can’t say if I like this video or I am completely freaked out by it.

T-Mobile, which didn’t get sold to AT&T, hired Hollywood director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon and “surprised” shoppers at the Chicago area’s Woodfield Mall with a flash-mob performance of “(There’s No Place Like) Home For The Holidays.”

It’s like the gals from television’s “Glee” cloned themselves and went wild, while stealing a 1980s look from the classic teen movie “Pretty in Pink.”

Except even stranger and up to more than four million views on YouTube.

Now, who knows what the mobile carrier will do next with all those billions from the scotched takeover deal? An unholy combo of HBO’s “Boardwalk Empire” with the even more grating kid’s film I barely endured, “Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked”?

Until we find out, enjoy, and then please get back to work tomorrow, everyone:

Though last week’s reports were overblown and premature, it certainly might come to that at some point if past is prologue — Alibaba CEO Jack Ma has declared his interest publicly a number of times and has certainly been busy lining up his financial and strategic partners to do so.

This is one very sharp sword of Damocles hovering over Yahoo that could drop at any time and very quickly. It has impact, too, because every day there are unsettling Wall Street whispers that the bid is coming — I got three today, in fact, that it would happen Monday.

Actually, the day it is most likely to happen is the moment after Yahoo once again turns down the pair’s latest offer to buy back their shares in a complex tax-free transaction.

This has been a multi-year effort on the part of the trio, one littered mostly with recrimination and tears. Lots and lots of tears.

But this time, it’s critical to the Asian partners to strike the deal with Yahoo — and before its current board does another deal with current private equity bidders it is now contemplating.

Because once new leadership is in power, Ma’s leverage goes buh-bye. Now, it is a quantum level higher with the old Yahoos than with the next ones, who will have much more control and power over the company.

Thus, the threat of a possible whole company bid at a higher prices — a tasty treat to disgruntled shareholders — keeps the pressure on Yahoo’s current directors not to make a partial deal that is considered wanting.

This bird in the hand is seen as critical to Alibaba and SoftBank, who want only to get back their stakes and not to engage in what would turn into an ugly and hostile battle for control of all of Yahoo.

As one source told me last week: “The threat of a takeover is more useful than the damage an actual takeover would cause for everyone. No one wants this to be unfriendly.”

Perish the thought!

Yahoo board member Brad Smith — who is Intuit’s CEO and president in his spare time — has become the key man in this whole complex sales process and has also taken up the central role in dealing with the Asian proposal, along with Yahoo’s interim CEO, Tim Morse, and its legal head, Mike Callaghan.

They have to wrangle what to do with Yahoo’s 40 percent stake in Alibaba and a 35 percent holding in Yahoo Japan, which makes up a great deal of the company’s value and has become its most vexing Gordian knot.

Still, after a number of previous efforts failed miserably, Alibaba and Softbank brought yet another proposal to Yahoo in early October that would spin off the stakes to them and also avoid a big tax bill.

The sides have been talking on and off amid the other noise at Yahoo of late, which this week centered on low-priced bids for a partial investment in Yahoo from two separate PE firms, Silver Lake and TPG Capital.

Now what Yahoo does with its Asian assets matters to them, too, as both have their own plans for the dispensation of those stakes as key elements of their deals.

So it is not clear what would happen if the Alibaba and SoftBank shares were sold before either deal was done.

But it is unlikely to be a positive thing.

“The Asian assets are downside protection if the core Yahoo business is melting faster than anyone thinks,” said one person. “Without it there, Yahoo might be a lot more risky to buy into.”

Like, you might say, trying to catch a falling knife.

What an amazing coincidence.

On the very day Yahoo’s board is considering actual bids from two private equity firms interested in deals to buy close to 20 percent of the company for between $16.50 and $17.50 a share, comes a spate of eerily similar breathless media postings that there’s another bid in the making for $20!

That’s totes better, right? I mean, how can Yahoo’s directors accept a real live lesser-priced bid now when there’s a prettier one in the fog just ahead?

No, really, it’s there — if you squint really, really hard.

Except it’s not even close, when you actually check with two of the key members of the group of alleged buyers, which would apparently be Blackstone, Bain Capital and Yahoo’s Asian partners, Alibaba Group and SoftBank.

Sources close to Blackstone and Alibaba said while there have been talks, which have been previously reported weeks ago here and elsewhere, there is no bid in the offing that is close to fruition and at that price.

In an unusual public statement, in fact, Alibaba’s John Spelich said flatly: “Alibaba Group has not made a decision to be part of a whole-company bid for Yahoo.”

This from a company whose voluble CEO Jack Ma is prone to making giant and noisy speeches to signal his interest in finding a way — any way — to get back shares of the Chinese Internet giant from Yahoo.

Not this time, and several sources close to Alibaba reiterated that it was nowhere near close to any bid as yet and that a price is still up in the air. In addition, sources added, Alibaba might decide to work with another PE group, such as Providence Equity.

In addition, sources noted that if Alibaba could strike an adequate deal with private equity bidders to get a large chunk of the stake back, it would be highly preferable to a hostile takeover of Yahoo that could end in tears and little else.

“The threat of a takeover is more useful than the damage an actual takeover would cause for everyone,” said one person close to the situation. “No one wants this to be unfriendly.”

So why the rumors — doubtlessly being spread around by hopelessly cynical Wall Street types interested only in stock manipulation — surfacing today?

Simple: To get some easy-to-play media outlet to bite, report it as speculative fact and cause the stock of Yahoo to take flight tomorrow.

Hey, it could happen!

Sadly, this junior-league trick has already worked — Yahoo shares were up a dollar to $16.72 in after-hours trading tonight.

It is likely to go even higher tomorrow, which could cause the board of Yahoo to delay accepting either of the partial bids from Silver Lake or TPG Capital, even if they were the best thing for the company and its employees.

Except that the job of the Yahoo board is to evaluate what’s before them and not what is perhaps, someday, soon, wait-by-the-phone, really soon, I promise is going to be delivered.

In fact, several sources noted that it’s not clear if the Yahoo board has even asked for parties to submit whole-company bids yet.

When and if Yahoo’s board does that and if something better actually does come down the pike, with a much fatter price tag of $20 or more, then the directors can mull that over.

That would be the prudent thing to do for the company, its employees and its shareholders, even if Yahoo’s stock gets a temporary lift now.

Maybe I am just a hopeless Silicon Valley romantic and not a hardened Wall Street M&A type, but the survival of Yahoo is the real point here, rather than the lining of bankers’ already fee-stuffed pockets.

And anything other than that is just fog.

In a statement Friday, AT&T said commissioners won’t be able to vote a proposal announced Tuesday from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski that the $39 billion merger be sent before an administrative law judge. The carrier announced it had withdrawn its FCC application in the early hours of the Thanksgiving holiday in the U.S.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

One of Yahoo’s biggest problems — brain drain — has turned out to be an asset for private equity firms and other players interested in figuring out their best moves related to the Silicon Valley Internet giant.

A plethora of ex-Yahoos, including many former top execs, are getting buttonholed by those who want to know more about the inner workings of the company that might not be obvious from its copious financial data available publicly.

That includes former Americas head Hilary Schneider, who has a longer-term consulting gig with TPG Capital, one of the several PE firms that has recently signed a non-disclosure agreement with Yahoo; former COO and President Sue Decker, who has had a longtime informal relationship with Blackstone, which has not signed the NDA and has been in talks with Yahoo’s Asian partners, China’s Alibaba Group and Japan’s SoftBank; and even former CEO Carol Bartz, who sources say has also been contacted to get her insights.

She is one of many in that regard, in a large pool of former Yahoos, such as: LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner, who had run Yahoo’s media efforts; Chegg CEO Dan Rosensweig, former Yahoo COO; SurveyMonkey CEO Dave Goldberg, who ran swathes of Yahoo’s entertainment properties; Criteo CEO Greg Coleman, former Yahoo sales head; former CEO Terry Semel, who is now an investor; former communications exec Brad Garlinghouse, who is now at AOL; and Demand Media Chief Revenue Officer Joanne Bradford, who also was a top Yahoo advertising exec.

Not all are cooperating with the requests for a chitchat about Yahoo, but there is much incoming interest in ex-Yahoos and what they might know.

There’s lots more where that came from, from all parts and all levels of Yahoo, given the breadth of the exes now doing very well — thank you very much — throughout the tech and media industries.

Thus, calls from PE firms, from Silver Lake to Bain Capital to Providence Equity Partners, as well as interest from major and majorly irritated shareholders, such as activist hedge fund investor Dan Loeb.

It’s a smart idea to tap this rich vein of information, as all contemplate possible multi-billion-dollar investments.

While some of these execs have not worked at Yahoo in many years, all have significant knowledge about the challenges and also the culture that cannot be gleaned from spreadsheets.

They also know a lot about the internal politics and personalities of the existing inside players, too. More importantly, several were involved in similar previous major business decisions at Yahoo.

Decker, for example, was a key exec in the Yahoo takeover attempt by Microsoft several years ago; Schneider and Bartz were deeply involved in striking the advertising and search partnership with Microsoft.

“Between everyone, it’s a good way to figure out where all the bodies are buried,” said one person close to the situation. “And there are a lot of bodies.”

AT&T said in a regulatory filing it expects to close the $39 billion takeover of T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG, by the end of next year’s first half. It had originally expected the deal to close by the end of March. The carrier said its purchase of Qualcomm’s spectrum should be closed by the end of next year’s first quarter, a change from its prior expectation for year-end.

A range of major players interested in acquiring all or a large piece of Yahoo have been prepping possible bids and have been in touch with the Internet giant’s board over the last several days.

While Yahoo has publicly said it was not for sale, according to numerous sources both inside and outside the company, it has been receptive to the interest and its Chairman Roy Bostock and Co-founder Jerry Yang have spoken to several.

Among the possible players: Silicon Valley venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, which is working with private equity firm Silver Lake, in a deal that also might include Russia’s DST Global and Yahoo’s Japanese partner Masa Son; former News Corp. exec Peter Chernin, who is partnered with Providence Equity Partners; and the possibility that Yahoo’s Chinese partner, Alibaba Group, might consider entering the fray in what could be a reverse merger of sorts.

Also being rung up by some of the parties: Microsoft — Yahoo’s advertising and search partner — which is being seen as a possibly moneybags in any deal.

The movement among these investors is against a backdrop of increasing pressure for Yahoo’s board, after it fired CEO Carol Bartz last week. In the wake of the dramatic move, shareholders have upped criticism of Bostock and the board and have been looking hard for alternatives.

Today, that included hedge fund investor Daniel Loeb of Third Point, which has a 5.1 percent stake in Yahoo. In a filing this morning, he said he might increase that amount, and described a testy hour-long phone call he had earlier this week with Bostock that ended abruptly with a hang-up from Yahoo.

Sources said Loeb called Bostock a “fool,” among other not-so-nice names, on the call and asked for Yang’s help in dumping him.

This comes as exactly no surprise, given his previously strong letter in which Loeb called for Bostock’s ouster.

Loeb has been calling out Bostock — who is also on the boards of Morgan Stanley and Delta Airlines — for a series of gaffes at Yahoo since he became chairman in 2008 (he’s been on the board since 2003).

Those have included: Yahoo’s bungled effort to stave off a takeover by Microsoft several years ago; the too-long enthusiasm for Bartz, who was hired in early 2009 and fired last week; sitting unusually still as competitors such as Facebook, Google and more have out-innovated and outgrown Yahoo; and, of course, the falling knife of a stock, which has dropped precipitously since Bostock has been in charge of the board.

As Loeb wrote in a letter he sent to the company last week:

“It is time that certain members of this Board were held accountable for its past failures and their individual roles. Accordingly, we insist that Mr. Bostock, who championed Ms. Bartz’s hiring and led the charge against the Microsoft deal, promptly resign from the Board.”

Loeb is likely to add to that later today at a high-profile investor conference in New York, where the colorful but tough-talking investor is sure to add more logs to the fire.

But it not only him. Other major shareholders of Yahoo are also in touch with possible outside buyers, seeking a change at the long-troubled company, after its shares have remained in the doldrums, its attrition rate of employees has spiked and its product pipeline has slowed to drip.

This has all been taking place — of course — during one of tech biggest and most innovative booms, in which Yahoo competitors have grown strongly.

Enter Marc Andreessen, the well-known entrepreneur who has transformed himself into one of Silicon Valley’s most powerful venture capitalists.

He and his partner Ben Horowitz recently pulled off another similar deal — with Silver Lake — to take control of a then-troubled Skype. They later flipped it to Microsoft for a large return.

Sources familiar with the situation said the pair have become increasingly intrigued by the situation at Yahoo and believe that its assets and brand are still strong, despite its management turmoil in recent years.

One problem is the huge cost of almost any kind of takeover and also the complexity, given much of Yahoo’s $18.5 billion valuation is due to its Asian assets.

The sale of those shares, as well as the selling off of some of Yahoo’s less core properties, makes for a very complicated situation for anyone.

Said one person looking at the company: “It is one of the more massive hairballs around.”

That is a common sentiment among many of those looking at Yahoo, which has hired Allen & Co. to manage the process.

Also of worry is a bid that would include too many players. Yahoo has long been plagued by indecisiveness on the part of its execs and, mostly, its board.

But one thing all the possible buyers of Yahoo, as well as an increasing number of its shareholders, agree on: The Yahoo board needs a major shake-up.

As Loeb wrote last week, which many I interviewed also echoed:

“This letter details our principled demands for sweeping changes in both the Board of Directors (the “Board”) and Company leadership, and outlines the hidden value of Yahoo, which has been severely damaged — but not irreparably — by poor management and governance.”

The Yahoo board will be meeting in Silicon Valley tomorrow to discuss a wide range of worrisome issues facing the troubled Internet giant.

Meanwhile, several sources said, even more private equity investors are weighing making major investments in the company, all pretty much aimed at ousting said directors.

So far, that has only been Third Point’s Daniel Loeb, whose massive hedge fund now owns 5.1 percent of Yahoo.

Loeb appears tomorrow at the high-profile Delivering Alpha investor conference in New York at 2 pm PT, where he is expected to take another swing at Yahoo’s board.

His next moves, sources said, could include buying up more shares to put the pressure on and also presenting his own alternate slate of directors, much as activist investor Carl Icahn did several years ago at Yahoo.

Translation: Forget AOL’s CrunchGate — this is big-boy corporate battling!

Add that to the pile on Yahoo’s board meeting agenda, along with some other critical issues that include: Outlining the criteria for any CEO candidate and a discussion of headhunting firms to hire; a review of strategic alternatives, including a presentation by its investment advisors, Allen & Co.; and how to stabilize the company and reassure its dusting-off-their-resumes employees.

Finding answers to these questions is going to be difficult enough, but the ever increasing pressure from outside investors is going to make it even harder.

Some definite tire-kickers reportedly looking at a bid include Providence Equity Partners, Silver Lake, Blackstone, Texas Pacific Group and even KKR.

While KKR has reportedly close ties with Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock, he is now the main target for pretty much everyone else.

That includes Loeb, as well as other major Yahoo shareholders.

That’s no surprise: Bostock, who is also on the boards of Morgan Stanley and Delta Airlines, has presided over a series of gaffes at Yahoo since he became chairman in 2008 (he’s been on the board since 2003).

Those have included: Yahoo’s bungled effort to stave off a takeover by Microsoft several years ago; the too-long enthusiasm for CEO Carol Bartz, who was hired in early 2009 and fired last week; sitting unusually still as competitors such as Facebook, Google and more have out-innovated and outgrown Yahoo; and, of course, the falling knife of a stock, which has dropped precipitously since Bostock has been in charge of the board.

As Loeb wrote in a letter he sent to the company:

“It is time that certain members of this Board were held accountable for its past failures and their individual roles. Accordingly, we insist that Mr. Bostock, who championed Ms. Bartz’s hiring and led the charge against the Microsoft deal, promptly resign from the Board.”

Said another source with knowledge of the situation: “Under Roy’s leadership, this weak and bumbling board took too long to fire a clearly failing CEO and now has no plan, except throwing up their hands and hoping someone comes along.”

Here is one certainty: Someone is going to come along and it is not going to be pretty.

T-Mobile — that company we want to buy for $39 billion — is doing just awful.

We understand the argument tactically. AT&T also has said it wants to buy T-Mobile for its wireless spectrum, and not so much for its operational prowess. But AT&T’s soft diss of its merger partner does have a strange ring.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

You see, the takeover or breakup of Yahoo has been an endless string of failed efforts, pitches, rumors and stupid ideas. For more on this, we turn to the moment of Original Sin: Microsoft’s February 2008 unsolicited offer to buy Yahoo for $45 billion, or about $31 a share.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

The firing of Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz leaves open one of the bigger and more difficult jobs in tech — one that has taken its toll on many.

Nonetheless, rapper Snoop Dogg stepped right up to the Twitter plate yesterday, as soon as news broke of the ouster.

Tweeted Snoop Dogg:

“Im takn over as tha CEO of Yahoo. Need sum of tha Snoop Dogg content ya digg. Nuff Said.”

Not nearly nuff!

Thus, while the Yahoo board has yet to begin a search, I have already been hard at work on selecting the next CEO.

(Last time, the company took none of my suggestions, but after the most recent result, the directors might want to pay mind!)

Sources said Yahoo is looking for an experienced Internet type, either from inside or outside the company.

“Yahoo has put its flag in the ground as a digital media company with a technology base,” said one source. “The job requires big buckets of expertise and needs someone who will grow the company.”

Here I go with the outsiders:

Peter Chernin: The former News Corp. exec has been eyeing Yahoo for a possible takeover with other investors. Both Yahoo and I had picked him when co-founder Jerry Yang stepped down as CEO almost three years ago, and he had declined the offer. This time, perhaps a big chunk of the company and total autonomy would work, even if making a hit like “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” is more fun.

Sheryl Sandberg: The COO of Facebook is sort of the anti-Bartz, with a smooth and efficient persona, and she is an experienced tech exec. But the former Google exec is at a place of growth at the social networking site, and is unlikely to want to leave the big show, especially since a blockbuster IPO is looming.

Jason Kilar: The Hulu CEO is in the midst of the process of selling the premium video service, with Yahoo as a bidder. While he has some tense relations with the studios, Kilar is top notch in his dedication to consumer products, and has a lot of experience from his stint at Amazon, too.

Dan Rosensweig: Currently CEO of IPO-headed Chegg textbook rental service, the former Yahoo exec never got a chance to run the company as its top leader. Well-connected and still well-liked by the troops at Yahoo, it still would be pretty hard for him to go home again.

Dave Goldberg: Sure, he’s married to Sandberg (see above), but the savvy CEO of polling phenom SurveyMonkey is one of the sharpest thinkers in Silicon Valley. He sold his music company to Yahoo many years ago and has a strong background in consumer online services.

Jon Miller: The chief digital exec at News Corp. almost got the CEO spot years ago when Carl Icahn was agitating for change at Yahoo, before Time Warner blocked him via a noncompete. With the mishegas at the media giant, and dwindling digital businesses there, it might be a good escape hatch for Miller.

Susan Wojcicki: The accomplished Google exec, who runs all its ad products, has the kind of calm, cool, collected persona that Yahoo could use right about now. The search giant was founded in her garage, and she has been a key part of its success since then. Wojcicki is also an understated class act in hey-look-at-me Silicon Valley.

Todd Bradley: The Hewlett-Packard exec just got blindsided when the company kicked webOS to the curb. While he is in line to run a possible spinoff of the device business, Bradley might also want to jump out of the frying pan into the fire.

Mike McCue: The CEO of Flipboard would certainly energize Yahoo with his intense focus on quality and consumer delight. The news app start-up could be a good addition to Yahoo, and McCue, the former Netscape and Microsoft exec who is well-liked in the Internet scene, would be, too.

Joanne Bradford: The former Yahoo advertising head bolted Bartz’s regime early on to run revenue for Demand Media. Well-liked in the ad business, she also knows where all the bodies are buried at Yahoo. Since ads and media are key at the company, she’d make an interesting choice.

Yusuf Mehdi: The Microsoft online exec would also be a left-field candidate to run Yahoo, given his even-keeled personality and longtime experience in the sector. And, though pricey, Mehdi’s impact on Bing search has been important. But he’s also been involved in the software giant’s lackluster ad and search partnership and still has not turned around the situation at MSN.

Kevin Johnson: The former Microsoft exec and current CEO of Juniper was once slated to be the CEO of Yahoo, had Microsoft managed to win the company in its hostile takeover attempt. In fact, Johnson was the architect of the idea of Yahoo running the media and Microsoft running the tech.

Tim Armstrong: Well, he might have been a good candidate before the downward slide of AOL and a recent series of questionable judgments. If Armstrong can’t keep a loud tech blogger in line, it’s not clear he can wrangle the Yahoo beast.

And here’s the insider scoop:

Ross Levinsohn: The former News Corp. exec is running the Americas for Yahoo, which puts him in charge of the company’s key businesses. But he’s still struggling to turn the ad business around, and how well he does that could be a major determinant of his success. But fantastic hair!

Blake Irving: The former Microsoft exec has an amiable nature and is well-liked at Yahoo, but he still needs to show that the company can ship some innovative products, and quickly. Like Livestand, the news reader, which is muchly late.

David Kenny: The Yahoo board member is now president of Akamai, which might preclude him from the job. But the well-regarded exec — he’s a snazzy dresser, too — ran one of the Internet’s top digital ad agencies and now has tech chops from the content delivery network.

Memo to Yahoo board: I have a million more ideas, from former Viacom exec Tom Freston to former Yahoo board member Eric Hippeau. Or why not bring back a passel of former Yahoos to advise, such as former CEO Terry Semel or former president Sue Decker?

Or Oprah! I hear Winfrey will be in Silicon Valley later this week, and she has a lot more free time now.

Like Snoop Dogg, she would fo shizzle be the bomb to cover.

Related posts

• As Yahoo Continues to Wobble, Investors (And Board) Eye Options
• Exclusive: Carol Bartz Out at Yahoo; CFO Tim Morse Named Interim CEO
• Carol Bartz’s Last F%*& You — Now Aimed at Yahoo Board
• Yahoo’s Statement on Bartz Ouster
• Wall Street Likes Bartz’s Firing — Yahoo Stock Spikes on News
• My Picks for Yahoo’s Next CEO — Maybe Snoop Dogg, Ya Digg?

In the last month, the stock of AOL has declined just over 50 percent.

But that drop is not just due to the turbulent markets of late. AOL stock had a 50 percent drop over the last six months, a 57 percent decline since the beginning of the year, and a 56 percent plunge since it went public in late 2009.

Which is why some in the industry — at private equity firms and bigger companies — have noted to me that the price of AOL might have gotten low enough for a very cheap takeover.

“You have to look, even with all the problems they have been struggling to fix,” said one person, who also underscored the advertising and other challenges that AOL faces. “But it is so inexpensive, it’s also an interesting idea.”

Said another large investor: “It’s almost free, given its cash on hand.”

Indeed, since in its recent second-quarter earnings report, AOL said that, as of June 30, it has $458.7 million in cash.

That matters, since at $10.22 a share — a far cry from its $28.45 high of all time in late April of 2010 — the market valuation of the New York-based Internet giant is only $1.09 billion.

You do the math.

To give that number perspective, AOL paid out $315 million in cash to buy the Huffington Post in the beginning of this year. And, let us not forget, under different management, AOL forked over $850 million in cash to buy the Bebo social network in 2008, and sold it for a song last year.

Even AOL thinks the price is low, announcing a $250 million stock buyback program this morning, just as shares hit their lowest point ever yesterday.

The stock is up today, though still in the basement.

To be fair, comparable companies’ valuations have also taken a hit recently. Yahoo shares are down 29 percent since the beginning of the year, giving it an affordable $15.3 billion valuation; and Demand Media’s stock has dropped 63 percent in that period, making its current price tag only $703 million.

Calling all shoppers?

You would think the settlement of a major dispute would goose the stock of a company, but Yahoo’s deal with its Chinese partner Alibaba Group on Friday did exactly the opposite.

Despite the clearing of an obvious overhang to its shares, the stock of the Silicon Valley Internet giant dropped almost three percent Friday to close at $13.10. While the ongoing federal budget wrangling was partly to blame, it was only a very small part with an overall market decline of under one percent.

A tepid reaction to the deal — in which Yahoo, Alibaba and Japan’s SoftBank came to terms over the spinoff of Alibaba’s Alipay payments unit after much wrangling over the move — came quickly from Wall Street analysts.

A report titled “Yahoo Inc: Alipay Agreement: Better than Nothing, But Not That Great,” by J.P. Morgan’s Doug Anmuth, was typical. Pointing to no clarity on an IPO of the Chinese assets of Alibaba and that “prior to the divestiture, Alibaba Group owned 100% of Alipay and all of its income, which is now reduced to 37.5% ownership of Alipay and 49.9% share of the pre-tax income,” he noted that Wall Street “has recently assigned no value to Yahoo!’s share of the asset.”

Well, less than zero, if the stock decline is taken into account, which means Yahoo’s market cap is now just over $17 billion.

According to sources close to the situation, especially since Yahoo’s Asian assets make up more than $9 billion of that valuation, private equity investors and others are pulling out their spreadsheets once again about a possible takeover or privatizing of Yahoo.

Several months ago, for example, former News Corp. exec Peter Chernin had been contemplating a friendly bid with partners such as Providence Equity Partners and others. While there have been rumors recently that he has reengaged in that effort, that is unclear.

Sources also note that Yahoo’s top execs, especially CEO Carol Bartz, and also members of its board, are perplexed that the settlement in China — a positive development — had the opposite effect on the stock.

It’s part of a continuing decline. Yahoo shares are down almost 26 percent in the past three months. Most Web stocks — such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft — are strongly up in that period. The only other obvious laggard is AOL, which is down almost 16 percent in the past three months.