Microsoft-Yahoo: Did You Hear The Bubble Pop?

Writing by Nick Stamoulis on Sunday, February 10, 2008 Leave a comment

Well, it happened. Yahoo told Microsoft to buck up and get real. I knew they would. But the week has been interesting.

You could call this week “The Underdog High Hopes Week” as just about every Google hater in the world came out of the woodwork to encourage Yahoo to accept Microsoft’s feeble takeover bid. Conventional thinking on the matter has been this: Yahoo isn’t fulfilling the needs of the search community very well and Google is big and powerful and strong, therefore, Yahoo needs someone to come and save them, like a damsel in distress, and make the world a better place for plutocracy.

WebProNews wrote at least 15 articles on the subject in the space of two days. Some of the titles were just ridiculous. The editorial stance on most of them – and WebProNews is an editorial broadsheet more than a news website – was in favor of the acquisition. Writers for WebProNews wrote their stories as if they expected Yahoo to accept Microsoft’s offer or wrote as if they were encouraging Yahoo to accept the offer. Interestingly, after I pointed out that there are other things online to write about, WebProNews started writing about other topics. Thanks to Rich Ord for stepping in to offer a belly laugh.

But diversions aside, Yahoo didn’t do as everyone expected. They asked for more money. And once again, Spanky and Gang is chastising the company for looking out for its own interests. Yahoo execs said right off the bat that they were not just going to jump on the offer. They were exploring all their options. They said that as soon as their press release writers could finish running spell check. And now they are the bad guys because they are seriously competing with Google and don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of doing so. Nevermind that a Microsoft-Yahoo merger wouldn’t have any better a chance – Spanky just doesn’t like Yahoo.

Rich Ord, in the first “Breaking” news story since Yahoo made its official announcement to spurn Microsoft’s advances, editorialized:

This rejection is likely to spark shareholder lawsuits if Yahoo’s stock price plummets back down to pre-offer levels.

After hyping up the news as the story of the century, Rich Ord must feel let down that Yahoo executives rejected the sexy swinging offer from one of his wilder than wild fantasies. But he’s not the only one talking, of course.

A venture capitalist in New York suggests that Yahoo restructure their business and squeeze every dime out of it that they can.

A writer for Marketing Pilgrim, which is often more objective than the “news site” WebProNews, tries to be at least a little level-headed about the deal:

Sure, the thought of two important companies teaming up in order to put an end to Google’s reign, in order to make the Web a better place for advertisers, publishers as well as regular users is more than interesting, but aren’t we being just a little bit too optimistic?

Well, yeah. How about “pie in the sky?”

Microsoft’s bid for Yahoo! Shouldn’t necessarily be seen as the solution which will somehow save us from Google’s domination, but rather as something which could add a little spice to the search engine equation. Do we even need to be protected from Google? And would Microsoft, out of all companies, actually be the perfect solution we have been waiting for? Of course not, as I am convinced that any person with a little common sense will agree.

Finally, someone who agrees with me. The underdog cheerleaders who think that a Microsoft-Yahoo union will somehow to put a magical end to Google dominance are fooling themselves. Google rose to prominence in the first place because they provided better search tools than any other search engine. With all of their faults – and one would be a fool to say that Google doesn’t have faults – they still do. Would a little competition make everyone’s search tools a little better? Yes, of course they would. But is that Google’s fault? Perhaps it is Yahoo’s and Microsoft’s fault for not being more competitive in the first place. And the Peanut Gallery somehow thinks a merger will change that overnight.

This is on the same level as taking two second-rate quarterbacks from the NFL and expecting their combined skills to outplay Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. It isn’t going to happen. While Alan Jackson seems to think that knocking Google off the hill will improve search, I don’t think so. I think what will improve search is for people to get real about what we have to work with, learning to use the tools at their disposal, and discussing what they want with each of the search engines so that those marketplace desires might be met by a provider who can deliver. Could more competition make that happen? Possibly. But so could better communication between consumers and providers.

Leave a comment                      Category: Search Engines                      

Read similar posts in Search Engines

• Bing Gets Serious About Link Building
• Google Predictions Video by Matt Cutts
• The State of Google's Index
• Is Google Quietly Tweaking Local Search
• Are You Ready For Some Caffeine?

Subscribe to our RSS feed

No comments yet.