For 18 months since Microsoft’s unsolicited takeover bid for Yahoo, an alliance between the two Internet giants has been the obvious — perhaps only — way for the two companies to compete with Web monster Google.
The buyout faltered when Yahoo chief executive Jerry Yang made what was arguably one of the worst business decisions in modern history, holding out for more than the US$47.5 billion that Microsoft was willing to pay.
Now his successor, Carol Bartz, has picked up the pieces at Yahoo and inked a 10-year search and advertising alliance with the world’s largest software company, in which Microsoft’s Bing search engine provides the technology and Yahoo the sales team.
The strategy espoused by Bartz and Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer is clear — by combining forces, “Microhoo” search will have the breadth, scale and depth to offer Internet users and advertisers a convincing alternative to Google.
However, don’t expect to see executives at the Googleplex quaking in their flip flops anytime soon.
“We’re interested to learn more about the deal,” Google spokesman Matt Furman said. “There has traditionally been a lot of competition online and our experience is that competition brings about great things for users.”
Privately, one Google source said: “We are not writing them off, but we will continue to innovate and they would need to perform the comeback of the century to beat us.”
Analysts were divided about the impact of the Yahoo-Microsoft deal, but seemed to agree on one thing — the best that the two companies can hope for is to remain a distant second in search advertising, the Internet’s most lucrative sector.
Many believed that the two years the companies would spend on executing the deal would actually create a significant market disruption, allowing Google to further consolidate its dominant position. This is especially true if the companies were made to jump through hoops to satisfy antitrust regulators.
Yet, the annals of business history are littered with dinosaurs who once ruled their industries, only to fail — through myopia, hubris and inertia — to adapt to changing market conditions. Humbled automaker General Motors — gone from titan to Titanic — is the latest example, surviving only on government assistance, like one of its own, laid-off assembly-line workers.
As the nature of Internet search changes, “Microhoo” could have a great opportunity to get a jump on Google, said Shar VanBoskirk, a search analyst at Forrester Research.
“Google is a great search engine, but the next wave of search will be more than just finding Web sites,” she said. “Both Bing and Yahoo try to do that and the partnership will help them develop the online concierge experience that they offer.”
That long-term prospect was of little comfort on Wednesday to investors unfortunate enough to own Yahoo shares. The company’s stock price slid as much as 12 percent in morning trading after the deal was announced.
Many commentators said that investors were disappointed that the hook up with Microsoft failed to include an up-front payment to Yahoo, but the real reason for the slide could go deeper. By outsourcing the core of its business, Yahoo could become irrelevant as an Internet player by the end of its 10-year deal with Microsoft.
“Yahoo is essentially getting out of search,” said portfolio manager Eric Jackson, an activist Yahoo shareholder. “I question if this is the right thing strategically.”
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
Republican candidate and former US president Donald Trump is to be the 47th president of the US after beating his Democratic rival, US Vice President Kamala Harris, in the election on Tuesday. Trump’s thumping victory — winning 295 Electoral College votes against Harris’ 226 as of press time last night, along with the Republicans winning control of the US Senate and possibly the House of Representatives — is a remarkable political comeback from his 2020 defeat to US President Joe Biden, and means Trump has a strong political mandate to implement his agenda. What does Trump’s victory mean for Taiwan, Asia, deterrence
The Taipei District Court on Nov. 1 agreed to extend the detention of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for his suspected involvement in corruption involving a real-estate project during his time as Taipei mayor. Different voices are beginning to emerge from within the TPP about how to respond to their extended leaderless situation. Following a string of scandals coming to light since early August, including the TPP’s misreporting of election campaign finances and Ko’s alleged corruption related to the Core Pacific City redevelopment project, Ko on Aug. 29 announced he would take a three-month leave of absence from
RSS