Things have certainly quieted down in the swirl of mostly vapor plots about the future of Yahoo, although the pondering, machinating and such on the parts of a variety of players have most certainly continued.

And that includes the introduction of a new character into the drama: Former News Corp. President Peter Chernin.

Let’s be very clear–there is no active plan for Chernin to join Yahoo or its board, nor is he currently part of any possible takeover plan related to the Silicon Valley Internet giant.

But multiple sources from a variety of sides said that Chernin, a well-liked and deeply experienced media and entertainment exec, has been contacted by a number of private equity firms and other investors about his interest in becoming involved should any of the various and sundry scenarios around the Internet giant pan out.

And Chernin, many sources said, has expressed a definite interest in the situation, perhaps because he was deeply involved in a previous deal when running News Corp.

At the time, it involved combining the media giant’s Myspace social networking site with Yahoo and also Microsoft’s portal MSN and creating a new company, code-named “TrafficCo.”

“He is asking a lot of questions and is nosing around, but there is not a plan,” said one source. “Yahoo has always been an interesting opportunity to him.”

Indeed, especially since Chernin has had a longtime interest in being more involved in digital business after a long career in traditional media.

He currently has a Santa Monica, Calif.-based media company, called Chernin Entertainment, which has a lucrative first-look production film and television deal with News Corp.–as well as the Chernin Group, which “pursues strategic opportunities in media, technology, and entertainment.”

And, in recent weeks, Chernin (pictured here) has also unveiled a new media venture in Asia called CA Media, which will “focus on a broad range of opportunities in content creation (specifically, film and TV production), television networks, sports, education, advertising, and digital media.”

But so far, since he left News Corp. in early 2009, Chernin has done very little in the digital arena.

In contrast, at News Corp., he was a key exec behind its co-founding of the Hulu premium video site, for example, among other digital initiatives.

And when Microsoft was vying to acquire Yahoo several years ago, Chernin and News Corp. CEO and Chairman Rupert Murdoch were actively trying to forge some solution that involved the company.

One possibility floated by numerous sources was that Chernin could once again work with Microsoft on settling all the turmoil around Yahoo of late.

In a related matter, sources said he had been in very early talks with the company about doing a subscription original-content channel on its Xbox–a kind of digital-only HBO–aimed at young men. Those discussions have not resulted in any project.

And, in fact, Chernin was a guest speaker at a Microsoft board retreat just yesterday in the Seattle area, where the theme was “Three Screens.”

He reportedly addressed television, the other two screen being the computer and the mobile phone.

A tighter relationship between Chernin and Microsoft would be interesting and possibly helpful to both.

“Microsoft is very worried about making sure there is a stable Yahoo,” said a source close to the situation, who noted the software giant has been quietly eyeing the situation and considering options. “Involving a well-regarded executive like Chernin makes a lot of sense.”

That makes sense given the key online search and advertising partnership Microsoft and Yahoo are now in, which tightly ties their fates together.

Of course, much about the Yahoo situation and any scenario being thought of–from spinning off its Asian assets in China’s Alibaba Group and Yahoo Japan, to taking it private, to replacing its management and board–is, as BoomTown has frequently noted, a lot of shadows and dust at this point.

But–as a longtime admirer of Chernin’s curiosity about the digital realm, refreshingly minus the requisite horror over its growth that is so characteristic of much of Hollywood–his interest is a welcome one into the debate over what Yahoo needs to do to reinvigorate itself going forward.

Asking his thoughts might be a good question at the Web 2.0 Summit conference, where Chernin is being interviewed later today on the topic of content.

If wishes were horses, as the old proverb goes, all beggars would ride.

Or, in the case of the incessant corporate drama around Yahoo: If wishes were deals, all bankers would get big fat fees.

Even BoomTown has been harboring a big wish that there were some new scenario–instead of the same retreads that have been bandied about for more than a month–that was at least possible.

But because making up scenarios about the fate of Yahoo is all fun and games, it goes on and on and on.

Today’s latest intrigue is from Reuters, which reports that the Alibaba Group’s Jack Ma is considering entreaties by moneybags private equity folks to give him the many billions of dollars needed to buy back Yahoo’s 40 percent stake in the Chinese Internet giant and perhaps even participate in a takeover of Yahoo itself.

As has been reported here and in many places many times already, private equity and other investor interest has centered for a while on working with Ma to unlock critical financial value for anyone interested in doing any kind of buyout of Yahoo.

And, as it turns out, Ma has long been explicit about wanting to rid himself of Yahoo and to take back control of Alibaba completely.

There’s no doubt the government of China would also look kindly on that result too, many sources say, given the huge size of the vexing foreign ownership of one of the country’s brightest Internet stars.

But, as most also know, wishing–and even offering a giant pile of money–doesn’t make it so, unless Ma can convince Yahoo to sell to him.

And, of course, he also does not have to do anything either, since Yahoo management has little say over his actions at Alibaba, in spite of the large stake Yahoo holds.

As you can see, you can spin these ideas all day long, which is what bankers apparently get paid so much for.

Luckily, I will do it for free.

You could, for example, add Microsoft into the Yahoo mix once again. Would it engage, in order to get the search business in China from Alibaba? Or to finally unload its pricey MSN unit?

And what of News Corp., with its extensive ties in Asia and interest in trading its weak digital properties, such as Myspace, for something better? Wasn’t CEO Rupert Murdoch sniffing around before?

There is also a renewed scenario for Demand Media to become involved.

Of course, let’s not leave out the old faithful plots about how tiny AOL, with its high-Q-quotient CEO Tim Armstrong, could still be a contender.

Just for fun, I will add another interesting idea I recently heard: Comcast. Could the cable and now media giant swoop in at some point and pick up a lot of digital assets it might need going forward?

Don’t forget Disney either–the Hollywood entertainment giant, which has a key interest in moving into the digital space even more boldly.

On consolation: Google is probably out, having been burned before, because of all the antitrust issue inherent in any hookup with Yahoo.

Of course, it will not be a party until Twitter gets here, with its date Zynga.

Finally: Where, oh, where is the holy union of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Apple CEO Steve Jobs when you need them to knock this corporate drama into the stratosphere?

Until it is all sorted out for real, here is a reprint of some of the many similar scenarios I cooked up way back in late September–most of which were investor fantasies, but now are being taken more seriously–in a post titled “Could AOL Merge With Yahoo? Could News Corp. Make a Play? Takeover 2.0 With a Little Help From China’s Alibaba?”

Enjoy–although, as you will see, it’s the same scenarios floated then as now:

Today, as news of the departure of Yahoo’s U.S. head Hilary Schneider and two other top execs got around Wall Street, investors and dealmakers were actually thinking of things other than executive turmoil.

As in: Does the uncertainty, along with a naggingly lackluster stock price and weak growth, create pressure on its CEO Carol Bartz and its board to do something dramatic?

In addition, does the messy public situation even provide an opportunity to put Yahoo into play, despite its market cap of $19 billion?

These and many more are the scenarios being debated in boardrooms of big media and Internet companies today, as well as at private equity firms, investment banks and even in Asia.

That’s because many are focusing on Yahoo’s Asian investments. Yahoo itself owns almost 35 percent of Yahoo Japan and a 40 percent stake in China’s Alibaba Group, assets that now make up–along with cash on hand–most of the company’s valuation.

Alibaba and Yahoo have recently gotten into an ugly public tussle over the Chinese firm’s desire to buy back the shares now, with Bartz holding out for more appreciation.

Now, she might have to do a deal with Alibaba, according to one theory, because a sale of its stake would give Yahoo’s stock a significant boost.

One problem: Alibaba CEO Jack Ma has made it known to anyone who will listen that he loathes Bartz personally, after a series of awkward encounters. That said, he has a close relationship with former Yahoo CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang, who is on both companies’ boards.

That puts Ma in an interesting position, according to another theory, because other U.S. companies with an interest in Yahoo might try to make a deal with him to do some kind of deal with Yahoo.

Most frequently mentioned by big investors in Yahoo: AOL and its CEO Tim Armstrong.

Armstrong, said sources, has not shied away from the idea of Yahoo acquiring AOL and installing him as CEO with Bartz as chairman. AOL’s valuation is just $2.65 billion.

Although AOL has also been trying to turn itself around and is in a much less powerful position than Yahoo, Wall Street likes Armstrong’s story for AOL as a modern-day media and media distribution company.

“At least he has a narrative that is believable,” said one big investor in both companies. “Bartz has no vision.”

Another plus for Armstrong: His friendly and Don Draper-smooth demeanor, in contrast to Bartz’s tough-talking and now too-often curse-laden patter.

And while, Armstrong has assembled an experienced staff. And he himself has deep online advertising sales experience, given his last job as head of U.S. sales at Google.

Also likely to be interested: News Corp. The reason is that its own digital efforts, especially at the MySpace social networking site, have gone sideways.

And there’s history: News Corp. tried to facilitate a merger of MySpace, MSN and Yahoo into a company codenamed “TrafficCo” at the time Microsoft was attempting a takeover of Yahoo.

It was supposed to be headed by former Microsoft exec and now Juniper Networks CEO Kevin Johnson, another possible Yahoo CEO candidate.

That plot did not pan out and News Corp. has been trying mightily to revive MySpace ever since. It certainly would trade it into Yahoo for some stake.

Another hook: Its digital head Jon Miller, who used to be CEO of AOL, almost was CEO of Yahoo, during that same takeover fight. But a noncompete agreement with Time Warner was enforced by CEO Jeff Bewkes at the time.

Both AOL and News Corp. could certainly make approaches to Ma or Yahoo Japan’s Masayoshi Son to agree to help them get back their Yahoo stakes.

Son was the one who made the move recently to switch out Yahoo search for Google in Japan.

And, by the way, Son was one of Yahoo’s earliest investors.

Confused? Well, it is certainly shaping up to be a lively Silicon Valley goat rodeo, as there are also all kinds of private equity companies with spreadsheets already figured if Yahoo shares decline enough.

And there are other ideas spinning on spins into Yahoo, such as Demand Media, which is prepping an IPO, and its perpetually enthusiastic CEO Richard Rosenblatt.

One unlikely player is Microsoft. The once hostile suitor is now a partner to Yahoo in search and online advertising.

Of course, the last and biggest question is what happens between Bartz and the board. While they seem to have backed her this far, she has not performed as she has promised and now seems to have gotten publicly grumpy about all the pressure to do so.

Will the directors, who proved themselves pretty ineffectual in the past, continue to support her? Or will they find some self-protecting way to ease her out?

Some directors are definitely unhappy, sources said, but no one seems to be in charge or particularly influential.

Which could mean even more confusion as Yahoo moves unsteadily forward.

Today, as news of the departure of Yahoo’s U.S. head Hilary Schneider and two other top execs got around Wall Street, investors and dealmakers were actually thinking of things other than executive turmoil.

As in: Does the uncertainty, along with a naggingly lackluster stock price and weak growth, create pressure on its CEO Carol Bartz and its board to do something dramatic?

In addition, does the messy public situation even provide an opportunity to put Yahoo into play, despite its market cap of $19 billion?

These and many more are the scenarios being debated in boardrooms of big media and Internet companies today, as well as at private equity firms, investment banks and even in Asia.

That’s because many are focusing on Yahoo’s Asian investments. Yahoo (YHOO) itself owns almost 35 percent of Yahoo Japan and a 40 percent stake in China’s Alibaba Group, assets that now make up–along with cash on hand–most of the company’s valuation.

Alibaba and Yahoo have recently gotten into an ugly public tussle over the Chinese firm’s desire to buy back the shares now, with Bartz holding out for more appreciation.

Now, she might have to do a deal with Alibaba, according to one theory, because a sale of its stake would give Yahoo’s stock a significant boost.

One problem: Alibaba CEO Jack Ma has made it known to anyone who will listen that he loathes Bartz personally, after a series of awkward encounters. That said, he has a close relationship with former Yahoo CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang, who is on both companies’ boards.

That puts Ma in an interesting position, according to another theory, because other U.S. companies with an interest in Yahoo might try to make a deal with him to do some kind of deal with Yahoo.

Most frequently mentioned by big investors in Yahoo: AOL (AOL) and its CEO Tim Armstrong.

Armstrong, said sources, has not shied away from the idea of Yahoo acquiring AOL and installing him as CEO with Bartz as chairman. AOL’s valuation is just $2.65 billion.

Although AOL has also been trying to turn itself around and is in a much less powerful position than Yahoo, Wall Street likes Armstrong’s story for AOL as a modern-day media and media distribution company.

“At least he has a narrative that is believable,” said one big investor in both companies. “Bartz has no vision.”

Another plus for Armstrong: His friendly and Don Draper-smooth demeanor, in contrast to Bartz’s tough-talking and now too-often curse-laden patter.

And while Bartz is losing execs, Armstrong has assembled an experienced staff. And he himself has deep online advertising sales experience, given his last job as head of U.S. sales at Google (GOOG).

Also likely to be interested: New Corp. The reason is that its own digital efforts, especially at the MySpace social networking site, have gone sideways.

And there’s history: News Corp. (NWS) tried to facilitate a merger of MySpace, MSN and Yahoo into a company codenamed “TrafficCo” at the time Microsoft was attempting a takeover of Yahoo.

It was supposed to be headed by former Microsoft exec and now Juniper (JNPR) CEO Kevin Johnson, another possible Yahoo CEO candidate.

That plot did not pan out and News Corp. has been trying mightily to revive MySpace ever since. It certainly would trade it into Yahoo for some stake.

Another hook: Its digital head Jon Miller, who used to be CEO of AOL, almost was CEO of Yahoo, during that same takeover fight. But a noncompete agreement with Time Warner (TWX) was enforced by CEO Jeff Bewkes at the time.

Both AOL and News Corp. could certainly make approaches to Ma or Yahoo Japan’s Masayoshi Son to agree to help them get back their Yahoo stakes.

Son was the one who made the move recently to switch out Yahoo search for Google in Japan.

And, by the way, Son was one of Yahoo’s earliest investors.

Confused? Well, it is certainly shaping up to be a lively Silicon Valley goat rodeo, as there are also all kinds of private equity companies with spreadsheets already figured if Yahoo shares decline enough.

And there are other ideas spinning on spins into Yahoo, such as Demand Media, which is prepping an IPO, and its perpetually enthusiastic CEO Richard Rosenblatt.

One unlikely player is Microsoft (MSFT). The once hostile suitor is now a partner to Yahoo in search and online advertising.

Of course, the last and biggest question is what happens between Bartz and the board. While they seem to have backed her this far, she has not performed as she has promised and now seems to have gotten publicly grumpy about all the pressure to do so.

Will the directors, who proved themselves pretty ineffectual in the past, continue to support her? Or will they find some self-protecting way to ease her out?

Some directors are definitely unhappy, sources said, but no one seems to be in charge or particularly influential.

Which could mean even more confusion as Yahoo moves unsteadily forward.

Until it all settles down, please enjoy this video of an actual goat rodeo:

Like the zombies in “Night of the Living Dead” who will not die, the notion of a big, sloppy deal for Microsoft to buy Yahoo is revived yet again in an article in The Wall Street Journal today.

Unfortunately for both Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT), it mostly serves to point out once again just how messy and pathetic the proceedings have been and continue to be.

But, as to the central idea, that Microsoft is aching to do a multi-part deal with various partners that would render Yahoo asunder, BoomTown is altogether dubious that this will ever come to pass.

Nonetheless, the very idea of something, anything happening served its main purpose–to buck up Yahoo’s sinking stock, which got a nice pop from the article, after falling below $20 a share on yesterday. (It is now back at $21.55!)

I have argued many times that Microsoft should just make an offer for Yahoo whole, because it has few other such powerful options in its quest to compete with Google (GOOG) in the search space, even given the checkered history and bruised feelings evidenced in the piece in the Journal.

Still, as was posted here earlier this week, Microsoft is considering sweetening a search-ad proposal, including buying a big chunk of Yahoo and improving terms, and News Corp. (NWS), Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL and even Comcast (CMCSA) might enter the picture.

But the idea of engineering a giant Internet group hug among and between these players is a daunting task.

In fact, that plan is an oldie (but maybe not such a goodie)–for Microsoft to buy the search and search-ad assets of Yahoo and for the rest to be spun off into some sort of online content/software/social-networking company and mashed up with assets from either News Corp.’s MySpace or Time Warner’s AOL.

That second company, in a previous scheme, was called “TrafficCo,” which News Corp. head Rupert Murdoch acknowledged in an interview Walt Mossberg and I did with him at the sixth D: All Things Digital in late May. (Murdoch actually says it outright in this video of the interview.)

Clearly, such a deal would be good for News Corp. (owner of this site) and Time Warner, as they try to figure out how to maximize their Internet assets.

And linking them with Yahoo–still, despite all, one of the most significant sites on the Web–might be just the ticket.

But getting there is the real problem, with a very inept board of Yahoo floundering about and with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in a bit of a pique over the situation.

Yahoo’s regulatory filing related to its upcoming proxy fight with billionaire investor Carl Icahn, for example, in which the company slapped Microsoft’s behavior in the takeover battle and called it “unresponsive and inconsistent,” really irked the folks at Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., HQ.

In fact, the level of dysfunction and crossed signals in the Yahoo-Microsoft relationship, as depicted once again in the article, should give anyone pause.

Case in point, as I noted here: That Yahoo thought it was a good thing to send Yahoo Co-Founder David Filo–think Silent Bob and then think even more silent and of someone very unlikely to support a sale–with Co-Founder and CEO Jerry Yang to the key meeting with Microsoft to negotiate over a possible takeover pretty much encapsulates it all for me.

And then, with Yang offering to sell for $37 a share–while also adding he and Filo wanted $38–even though Microsoft had never gotten past $33, the situation actually worsened, if possible.

That meeting was immediately–within hours–followed by a complete Microsoft pullout.

But, like someone who cannot seem to stop falling down an endless series of stairs, there were even more comical meetings after that, with Yang, Ballmer, as well as Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock and board member Ron Burkle, in which Yahoo essentially prostrated itself and was rejected again.

And yet hope–which I might call something else–lives on.

The last sentences of the Journal piece are particularly interesting in this regard:

“They believed that we needed them much more than they needed us,” one person close to Microsoft says. “Ultimately, we called their bluff.”

If that’s the case, people close to Yahoo say, they wonder why Microsoft continues to knock on their door.

Memo to Yahoo: Actually, it’s called Ding-Dong Ditch.