"TAP não sobrevive se se mantiver pública", garante Pinto Luz

[mat1983]

parece que o acordo nao favoreceu o yahoo...

[AC Investor Blog]

TechCrunch: Yahoo! and Microsoft Talks “In Final Stages”
Posted by Tiernan Ray

TechCrunch this afternoon is reporting that talks between Yahoo! (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT) for keyword Web search are “in the final stages” and “may be signed at any time,” citing a source close to Yahoo!.

TechCrunch says while there’s no guarantee of an agreement, everything they’re hearing says a deal is “highly likely” and that any deal will be announced publicly shortly after papers are signed. TechCrunch says the sticking point has been whether Yahoo! would get a one-time payment up front — on the order of $500 million to $1 billion — or earn that revenue over time.

[limpaesgotos]

http://diariodigital.sapo.pt/dinheiro_d ... ews=108430

segunda-feira, 1 de Dezembro de 2008 | 12:40

Microsoft oferece 15.700 M€ pelo Yahoo!, diz jornal

A Microsoft fez uma nova proposta de acordo com o Yahoo!, para comprar o seu sistema de buscas, por um valor de 20 mil milhões de dólares (15,7 mil milhões de euros). A informação foi divulgada hoje pelo jornal britânico The Times, com base em fontes anónimas.
A Microsoft deverá receber o direito de administrar o sistema de buscas do Yahoo! por dez anos, diz o jornal, além de ganhar dois anos de preferência para comprar essa operação por 20 mil milhões de dólares. A confirmar-se, o Yahoo! ficará apenas com os serviços de e-mail, mensagens instantâneas e conteúdos.

De acordo com o jornal, a negociação também prevê que os empresários Jonathan Miller, ex-executivo-chefe da AOL, e Ross Levinsohn, ex-presidente da Fox Interactive Media, assumam a administração do Yahoo! - a empresa procura um novo executivo-chefe, depois que Jerry Yang anunciou a sua saída do cargo.

[ng37779a]

Obrigado Fibonacci,

Faz todo o sentido que seja exercido ao preco da OPA, mas apenas queria ter a certeza.

Concordo plenament com as limitacoes de financiamento. Nao so as private equities mas tambem se esta a verificar uma descida na percentagem de pessoas a que sao attribuidas credito de habitacao do total de pessoas que se candidatam a esses mesmos creditos. Os bancos estao mais prudentes. Mas a verdade ee que com tantas descidas de juro, a inflacao a subir, fica mais barato obter credito e investir do que nao fazer nada.....

[Fibonacci]

Don Pereira,

Se a OPA ocorrer a um valor acima do strike, os calls vão ser exercidos a esse preço. Logo, ganhas a diferença [ex: (31 - 28)*paridade*taxa de câmbio]. Não há problemas nos eventos corporativos mais relevantes para os warrants.

Gostaria apenas de deixar aqui um comentário: apesar dos juros estarem a descer, as condições de financiamento não estão a melhorar. Isso continua a limitar os fundos de private equity de fazer as aquisições enormes que vimos no ano passado. Inclusive, algumas das aquisições anunciadas acabaram por não se concretizarem devido à obtenção do financiamento necessário para tal (isso aconteceu inclusive com a colossal Blackstone).

[ng37779a]

Tambem tenho seguido a yahoo, e nao me surpreendeu que a Microsoft esteja a tentar uma OPA, mas julgo que o preco nao esta convidativo. Penso que a Microsoft ira subir o preco de $31 para $36 / $37. Com os juros a baixar, uma Private Equity tambem podera entrar na corrida.

Tenho ee uma questao sobre warrants. Se eu tiver warrants sobre a yahoo para dezembro, a um strike de 28 e a OPA acontecer antes de dezembro e eu nao vender os warrants, perco tudo?

Cumprimentos,

[WolfTrader]

Vendi a 29 USD...mais do que 40% de mais-valia vai ser difícil...

[acintra]

Cada um puxa a brasa, para a sua sardinha...

CEO argues the proposed takeover will raise competition in the Web advertising market.

February 4 2008: 10:07 AM EST


Microsoft's $44.6 B bid for Yahoo is sending shock waves up and down California Highway 101.


NEW YORK (AP) -- Microsoft Corp.'s proposed $42 billion purchase of Yahoo Inc. would establish the world's largest software maker as a "strong No. 2 competitor" against online search leader Google Inc., Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said Monday.

Speaking to a group of analysts, Ballmer said the acquisition raises competition, rather than eliminates it, in the Web advertising market. Google has said the acquisition would make it possible for Microsoft to gain too much control over the Internet.

"Google's clearly got a dominant position. They've got about 75 percent of paid search worldwide," Ballmer said. "We think this enhances competition. Anything else would be less good from that perspective."

In a reaction Sunday to Microsoft's Yahoo bid, Google chief legal officer Michael Drummond said the deal "raises troubling questions."

"This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It's about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation," Drummond wrote in the company's blog.

Also Monday, Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said he expects a deal with Yahoo to be completed by the end of the year.

Yahoo (YHOO, Fortune 500) so far has had little to say except that its board will carefully examine Microsoft's bid -- a process that "can take quite a bit of time," according to a message posted on the Sunnyvale-based company's Web site.

[acintra]

Wall Street heavy hitter Joe Rosenberg says the Yahoo bid doesn't make any sense for Microsoft shareholders.
By Allan Sloan, senior editor at large


Some of the pieces won't fit

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Most of the analysis of Microsoft's $45 billion hostile offer for Yahoo has focused on technology and the role Yahoo could play in the Microsoft-Google wars. Today, though, let's look at what almost everyone has overlooked: the numbers. More specifically, we'll look at the way that one of Wall Street's biggest hitters, Joe Rosenberg, looks at the proposed deal.

Rosenberg, chief investment strategist at Loews Corp. (LTR, Fortune 500), the giant conglomerate, is one of the most influential voices on Wall Street. In fact, his criticism of Microsoft in a Barron's interview two years ago, in which he criticized the firm's use of capital and suggested a $50 billion stock buyback, was a big factor in sparking the $40 billion buyback program that Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) launched in the fall of 2006.

So Rosenberg's opinion matters. And he thinks Microsoft's offer for Yahoo (YHOO, Fortune 500) is nuts. "This is like a person who's completely lost his mind," Rosenberg told me in an interview. "It's absurd. They're not going to earn anything like a reasonable rate of return on their investment in Yahoo. It just doesn't make sense."

"This deal would do more harm to Microsoft shareholders than any of its competitors can do to it," Rosenberg said. "The company has lost sight of its principal focus, which is to produce value for shareholders."

“This deal would do more harm to Microsoft shareholders than any of its competitors can do to it.”
Joe Rosenberg
Before we proceed, two disclosures. First, Rosenberg told me that Loews owns Microsoft stock. Second, Loews is one of my biggest individual holdings, which means I have money riding on Rosenberg's investment acumen.

Back to the main event. Until the Yahoo bid surfaced, Rosenberg was predicting that Microsoft would earn almost $2 a share in its current fiscal year, rising steadily to more than $4 a share in four years. (A major element in his thinking: Microsoft's sales to "developing markets" such as China, India and Eastern Europe will soar.) So at $32 - its price before news of the Yahoo offer drove its stock down sharply Friday - Microsoft looked cheap to Rosenberg. Now, he fears, Microsoft may be making the same mistake as other companies that did large, failed high-tech takeovers.

No, he's not talking about the 2000 deal that combined America Online with my employer Time Warner (TWX, Fortune 500), which many people have cited as a cautionary tale for Microsoft-Yahoo. Wrongly, in Rosenberg's opinion (and mine). How so? Because America Online's purchase of Time Warner turned out great for AOL shareholders, whose stock fell far less than other Internet issues when the bubble popped. The deal was disastrous for the sellers - the old Time Warner's stockholders - because the value of their shares was eviscerated.

The real parallels to Microsoft-Yahoo, says Rosenberg, citing his 47 years on Wall Street, are two largely-forgotten disasters: Xerox' $1 billion purchase of Scientific Data Systems in 1969 and AT&T's (T, Fortune 500) $7.5 billion purchase of NCR in 1991. In both cases, the acquiring company paid top dollar for firms whose products and technology rapidly became obsolete.

Rosenberg doesn't pretend to be a tech maven, but he says it's clear that the market - which sent Yahoo's stock down 45% from October through last Thursday - is saying something negative about Yahoo's businesses and prospects. Microsoft, Rosenberg says, would be well-advised to listen.

Should Microsoft buy Yahoo, Rosenberg says, he, like other folks looking at this deal, expects Microsoft and Google to engage in price wars in the search and advertising businesses. But Rosenberg carries that thought one level further. Such a price war would hurt Yahoo's already-anemic profit margins, Rosenberg says, making a Microsoft purchase even more problematic. Microsoft's future free cash flow per share would be substantially higher if it buys back its own shares, he said, rather than buying Yahoo by issuing about $23 billion of new stock and spending a net $15 billion or so in cash. (That cash number takes into account the approximately $8 billion of cash and marketable securities that Yahoo owns.)

Rosenberg says he's not trying to hurt Microsoft, he's trying to help. "They don't realize that by criticizing this deal, I'm trying to do them a favor," he says. And, of course, to do Loews a favor, too.

[blackjack_CALD]

Bloomberg diz, que a microsoft, pode aumentar a oferta.
Quanto ao eventual recurso á banca, estes são bons pagadores de certeza. È natural, que com este juro, surjam mais ofertas de compra, com o deccorrer do ano.

Podem chegar aos $40 é o que se vai dizendo...mas tb já se ouve numa fusão Yahoo com Google para ripostar e assim já percebo a reacção de ontem da Googlee.

Acho que a fusao Google-Yahoo nao faz sentido porque nunca seria aprovada. A Microsoft seria a primeira a contestar com razao uma fusao que representa ~80% do mercado de search/publicidade. Mesmo que MS-Yahoo se concretize o mercado continuará fortemente dominado pela Google apesar das flutuações na bolsa, investimentos massivos (i.e. espectro 700MHZ)....

[acintra]

Bloomberg diz, que a microsoft, pode aumentar a oferta.
Quanto ao eventual recurso á banca, estes são bons pagadores de certeza. È natural, que com este juro, surjam mais ofertas de compra, com o deccorrer do ano.

Podem chegar aos $40 é o que se vai dizendo...mas tb já se ouve numa fusão Yahoo com Google para ripostar e assim já percebo a reacção de ontem da Googlee.

[TP1]

Bloomberg diz, que a microsoft, pode aumentar a oferta.
Quanto ao eventual recurso á banca, estes são bons pagadores de certeza. È natural, que com este juro, surjam mais ofertas de compra, com o deccorrer do ano.

[Crómio]

04 Feb 2008 at 13:59:04 (GMT)
MICROSOFT SAYS IT'S LIKELY TO BORROW FOR 1ST TIME TO BUY YAHOO

Fonte Best

[DC89]

Yahoo! poderá juntar-se ao Google para derrotar OPA da Microsoft
O portal online norte-americano poderá estar a estudar uma aliança com o motor de busca Google, como forma de fracassar a proposta de compra apresentada pela Microsoft, no valor de 44,6 mil milhões de dólares (30 mil milhões de euros), de acordo com fontes próximas da Yahoo!.

[acintra]

February 4 2008: 6:56 AM EST

It isn't a done deal. But Yahoo's days as an independent company are numbered.
Adam Lashinsky, Fortune senior writer


(Fortune Magazine) -- When Jerry Yang answered the phone on a rainy Silicon Valley Thursday night in January and heard the hoarse voice of Microsoft's Steve Ballmer on the other end, it was simply the last in a string of disappointments the Yahoo co-founder has confronted over the past two years.

Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) had already tried to buy Yahoo a year before -- presumably for billions of dollars more than the $44.6 billion bid Ballmer told Yang about on Jan. 31. Long before Microsoft went public with its offer the next morning, however, it had become inevitable that Yahoo would have to sell. What's more, through a combination of poor execution, missed opportunities, and strategic snafus, Yahoo brought that inevitability on itself, a tainted pioneer too small to compete against Google and too weak to resist a generous buyout.

For a million reasons, Yang didn't want to sell the last time Yahoo (YHOO, Fortune 500) and Microsoft talked. And according to people close to him, he still doesn't. Yahoo is Yang's baby. He nurtured it from birth. Yes, he handed off its stewardship to outsiders, but he always kept a watchful eye from a cube in the executive suite. In Yang's eyes, and for all of Silicon Valley, Yahoo -- not Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) -- is the iconic company of the web. It signifies everything that is fun and exciting and goofy about the Internet, exclamation point and all.

At least it used to. But as 2006 dragged into a dismal 2007 for Yahoo, a bid from Redmond became increasingly likely. Yahoo, a major prize for a Goliath that wants to build a web empire with a major audience, sizable revenues, and a vibrant brand, simply had screwed up too many times. Fortune has learned that in the fall of 2006, Yahoo failed to buy Facebook for $1 billion - even though Facebook's young CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, already reluctantly agreed to sell to Yahoo.

Shockingly, Yahoo effectively reneged on its offer, say people familiar with the negotiations. In a nasty case of financial "analysis paralysis," former CEO Terry Semel and former finance chief and current president Sue Decker came back to Facebook with an offer of $850 million-even after they had agreed on the larger number. It gave Zuckerberg the out he craved.

Late last year Microsoft bought a small stake in Facebook that values the company at $15 billion. Yahoo also botched the acquisition of YouTube, a deal it had in its grasp but that went instead to Google. And it lost smaller deals as well.

For example, Yahoo looked hard at JotSpot, a startup Google also bought that gives it the technology and people that can be useful in building the type of social-networking applications that have made Facebook such an early success.

Yahoo declined to comment for this story.

Yahoo's flubs weren't just M&A-related. For years now the company has seemed to miss every major industry shift-even as Google somehow anticipated just about everything.

While Yahoo was enjoying fat sales of graphical display ads, Google was building a multibillion-dollar business out of paid search. When Yahoo focused on big advertisers on its own sites, Google figured out a brilliant way to sell ads for other web publishers, an innovation Yahoo is only just getting to in earnest this year.

Since taking over the CEO job from Semel last year, Yang hasn't exactly grabbed the reins with vigor. The 39-year-old promised there'd be no sacred cows, and that he'd conduct a top-to-bottom review of the business within the first 100 days of his taking over last June. But he proceeded to shoot next to no animals, and most certainly nothing sacred.

Yang closed down Yahoo's photo site, for example, given that Yahoo also owns the far more popular Flickr. And he killed Yahoo 360, a social-networking site that had failed to catch on. The 100 days and then some came and went with little to show. No product innovation. transformational deals. management shakeup.

At the Consumer Electronics Show in early January, a listless Yang showed off some me-too products that weren't even ready for consumers to use. Embarrassingly, a beta version of a new cellphone application wasn't ready during a live demo-leaving industry bigwigs in the audience to enter a web address that didn't work on their BlackBerrys. Promised changes to Yahoo's popular e-mail program were shown only in a mockup version, with no release date even suggested.

Then came the financial disaster of fourth-quarter results, which showed that several key Yahoo businesses were slowing, and that the company's turnaround would be a 2009 event at the earliest.

Microsoft was ready to pounce. There are so many ways a Microsoft-Yahoo combination could fail. Integration will be tricky, despite Microsoft's claim that it has already drawn up a plan to pluck leaders from Yahoo for key roles in the combined Yahoo-MSN.

The companies have vastly different cultures. Yahoo's people, already leaving in droves, are unlikely to stick around without tangible incentives, like retention bonuses or promises of greater authority.

And yet Microsoft has little choice but to pursue Yahoo. According to people close to him, Yang has decided recently that he wouldn't take the one step that could have immediately boosted Yahoo's financial fortunes: a deal to allow Google or Microsoft to sell search ads on Yahoo's behalf. Such a move would have strengthened Yahoo's bottom line primarily by drastically reducing the amount of money Yahoo needs for expensive data centers full of server computers, plus product development and other costs.

Indeed, Microsoft has long understood that Yahoo couldn't last independently because of the sheer expense of competing against Google's server farm expansion. By buying Yahoo, Microsoft gets a vastly bigger audience to go with its formidable resources.

There's no guarantee Microsoft will get its prize, of course. It seems likely other bidders will at least kick the tires and that Yahoo will demand a higher price. Microsoft knows and expects this. On Microsoft's conference call with analysts on the morning of the offer, general counsel Brad Smith said that Google won't be able to bid for Yahoo because of antitrust concerns.

It's ironic that Smith, who has fought Microsoft's antitrust wars for years, would offer such advice. All the same, he's probably right. But just because a Google-Yahoo combination would meet resistance from regulators doesn't mean Google won't try to be creative.

It could partner with another media company -- a News Corp., for example -- in a move that might deflect antitrust concerns. European telecom giants Vodafone or Nokia could bid for Yahoo-and pay a hefty premium due to the weakness of the dollar. Longtime Yahoo partner AT&T (T, Fortune 500) also might see a way to come to its friend's rescue. Who knows? Maybe even a sovereign wealth fund from Asia, where Yang has an extensive network of contacts, could attempt to be Yahoo's white knight.

Based solely on their ownership in Yahoo, about 10% of outstanding shares, Yang and his co-founder, David Filo, can't do much to stop a takeover. Yang's influence in particular, both with the rank and file and the board of directors, long has exceeded his ownership stake. This is effectively why he's the CEO in the first place and probably why Yahoo headed into 2007 an independent company.

In an interview earlier this year in Las Vegas, I asked Filo if he and Yang ever wished they had emulated the Google co-founders and created a separate class of stock so that their control or their ability to invest for the long term would have been greater. "That thought comes up a lot," the notoriously soft-spoken Filo replied.

But getting back to the inevitability of it all, at least two things are clear from Microsoft's lightning strike. One, despite the previous courtship from Redmond and a persistent swirl of rumors that Yahoo was ripe for the taking, the bid clearly caught Yahoo off-guard. Two, these two companies are simply in different leagues as far as overall sophistication goes.

Microsoft is the seasoned Pro Bowl team to Yahoo's junior varsity squad. Hours before Microsoft launched its bid, Yahoo was busy setting up routine meetings with magazine and newspaper editorial boards for later in the month. Meantime, according to a source from Microsoft's camp, the software giant's representatives were pushing information on Wall Street suggesting AOL was in play-all to make sure hedge funds didn't catch wind of a Yahoo bid and drive up the company's stock.

The JV vibe extends to Yahoo's board, which hasn't bathed itself in glory either. It may have been quite correct in dumping Semel, who had clearly outlasted his usefulness.

But rather than recruit an experienced manager, the board chose a universally beloved figure who had never run a small organization, much less a 14,000-person company-and who proceeded to squander his time and opportunity.

Yahoo will undoubtedly go down swinging. No one who has been around deals expects Yahoo to meekly acquiesce to Microsoft's offer. But for months now Yahoo has appeared clueless, plodding, and just not that passionately concerned about its own survival.

Last fall Thomas Weisel Partners analyst Christa Sober Quarles ran into Yang at an event at the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco, which Yang and his wife have supported generously. Quarles asked Yang if Yahoo was going to be able to turn things around. "He said, 'Ya know, I just don't know,' " Quarles recalls. "And that wasn't the answer I wanted to hear. I wanted to see the will to win." For Yang and Yahoo, having the will to win may now matter less than getting the best price for their shareholders.

[WolfTrader]

ATENÇÃO:

Noticia da CBS: google pode OPAR yhoo

[arnie]

Se há coisa bonita de se ver é uma empresa que tem o monoplio de um mercado dizer publicamente que está preocupada com a possibilidade de uma outra empresa ganhar terreno nesse mesmo monopolio

Dai-me paciência, dai-me paciência

[acintra]

February 3, 2008, 3:51 pm

By Todd Woody

SAN FRANCISCO — In a preview of what could shape up to be a fierce antitrust fight over Microsoft’s $45 billion offer for Yahoo, Google’s chief legal officer on Sunday made clear that the search giant would not sit on the sidelines, questioning whether Microsoft would “now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC.”

Writing on the official Google (GOOG) blog, David Drummond, the company’s senior vice president for corporate development and chief legal officer, argued that a combined Microsoft (MSFT) and Yahoo (YHOO) “raises troubling questions” and would pose significant competitiveness issues. “Could the acquisition of Yahoo allow Microsoft — despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses — to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet?” he wrote.

Drummond sketched a future where a MicroHoo controls an “overwhelming share of instant messaging and web e-mail accounts.”

“Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’ e-mail, IM, and web-based services?” he asked. Making clear that he was directing that rhetorical exercise at regulators in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere, he wrote, “Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions — and consumers deserve satisfying answers.”

Repeatedly calling the software giant’s bid on Friday for an iconic Silicon Valley company “hostile,” Drummond portrayed the Internet itself as at stake. “This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another,” he wrote. “It’s about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation.”

Of course, as Google has expanded its hold over the Internet through its dominance of search and online advertising, observers have questioned whether the Mountain View, Calif., company itself poses a Microsoftian threat to online openness. In fact, on Friday a number of Silicon Valley movers and shakers welcomed the Microsoft offer for Yahoo as a potential counterweight to Google’s ambitions.

In his blog post, Drummond also seemed to signal Google’s interest in a white knight riding to its Silicon Valley rival’s rescue. “We believe that the interests of Internet users come first — and should come first — as the merits of this proposed acquisition are examined and alternatives explored.”

A Google spokesperson said that the company would have no further comment “for the time being.”

[lugopt]

Será que os $31 proposto inclui um prémio assim tão grande? Eu acho que não. Aliás, foi admitido por ambas, Microsoft e Yahoo, que há cerca de um ano as conversações terminaram por a Yahoo considerar que não era o tempo oportuno para a fusão.

Alguém se lembra a quanto estava a Yahoo em Fevereiro de 2007? Oscilava entre os $28 e $32. Passado um ano, a Microsoft oferece $31 e acham que o prémio é elevado? Eu acho que é uma compra estratégica e em saldo.

Obrigado,

[Evv]

Faço votos que esta opa contribua para a inversão do sentimento negativo que se tem constatado nos ultimos tempos nos mercados.

Uma OPA significa várias coisas:
- há quem tenha confiança no futuro
- há empresas que estão a ficar a preços atractivos
- O Mercado funciona

Ouro sobre azul era mesmo uma opa sobre uma grande empresas do PSI, aí teríamos um bom reboundem várias empresas.

Haja confiança!

[atomez]

Microsoft Bids for Yahoo: Do Two Losers Make a Winner?

Microsoft's bid to buy Yahoo for $44.6 billion, or $31 per share, could finally position the software giant to compete with Google in the advertising market that Microsoft has been aggressively pursuing for years. But it's not a slam-dunk.

"Microsoft and Yahoo's offering would make them much more competitive, but I do think that individually they've been losing share," says Zorik Gordon, CEO of ReachLocal, a local ad provider that works closely with Microsoft, Yahoo and Google. "While the combination will help, it doesn't address why they've been losing share."

Microsoft has spent the last decade desperately scrambling to build an online business. Despite the millions -- if not billions -- of dollars thrown at its online properties, including MSN, Hotmail and LiveSearch, the company is little more than a third-tier player online.

Key to that business, many experts think, is an advertising platform that can compete with Google's AdWords. Google's technology platform enables businesses of all sizes to purchase highly targeted advertisements that appear across a wide network of participating sites. In return, Google provides its advertisers with vast amounts of data on how those ads are performing. Both Yahoo and Microsoft have struggled to develop ad platforms that compete with AdWords, and Google is still widely regarded as the technology and market leader.

...

[Capitão Nemo]

Microsoft and Yahoo deal will never consummate

Commentary: It's a bad idea, plus EU regulators will have a field day

BERKELEY, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- If anyone thinks the Microsoft Corp.-Yahoo Inc. deal is getting past the European Union regulators, then they are crazy.

I'm stunned that Microsoft and Yahoo think they can actually do this deal. Stunned.
I admit that over the past year, despite warnings and rumors, I said that would not make the mistake of buying and attempting to merge with Yahoo. It would be an impossible pill to swallow, a corporate culture marriage-nightmare, and an admission by both companies to ultimate defeat at the hands of Google
I was convinced that these two companies cannot be so stupid as to not know this deal is a bad idea.
I was wrong. That said, I also admit to being suspicious of Yahoo's Susan Decker who was given the president's job although her real specialty is mergers and acquisitions.
That in itself probably means that with a little tweaking, this should be a done deal. But is it really?
So let me stop the column right here.
Listeners to my podcast already know I was going to write about Microsoft and the inability of the company's stock to get a break despite the amazing profits pouring in from sales of Vista and Office.
In this regard I was going to praise Ballmer for turning on the jets and blame the EU competition commissioners for keeping a black cloud over the head of the company. Then this happens.
The EU must have a red alert horn sounding in Brussels now that this deal was announced.
If the EU is already throwing a wet blanket on Microsoft's party and, according to reports, plans more actions against the company regarding its browser strategy, then this merger will stop them in their tracks.
Heck, the directorate general for competition in the EU, Neelie Kroes, said she was going after the company in a recent BBC interview. She flatly said that the U.S. anti-trust folks are doing nothing about anything, so the EU has to step in.
Now it's always possible with Microsoft that this Yahoo deal was never meant to be finalized. This happened with the Microsoft attempt to buy Intuit some years back. It may be a ploy to steal Yahoo technology or key employees.
It may be just to give the EU commissioners something big to chew on.
(You should note that with the Intuit deal Microsoft was never told not to do the deal. Once an investigation began, the company bailed out on its own. Why take a chance when you really do not want to do the deal in the first place? This model may be at work here.)
If the EU kills this merger, as it should, Ballmer will get out of this deal smelling like a rose and looking like an aggressive CEO doing what he can. He can say it was the meddling EU that ruined the deal. He can forever point the finger at the EU and perhaps get some leeway in future EU investigations.
That said, this is a merger of two of the most popular Web destinations and search sites in the world as well as being dominant players in free email, search, groups and content delivery. How is this NOT an anti-trust violation in someone's eyes?
Whatever happens this cannot be good for Microsoft stock, and if I held Yahoo I'd be out of it now while it's propped up by this deal.
The biggest risk for both companies, for sure, is that this deal does go through and they continue to collectively lose more and more market share to Google. It will be the ultimate humiliation for both Microsoft and Yahoo executives and become their final legacy.
So I will personally be stunned if this deal, in the end, passes muster and is actually consummated. In the process it could send the undervalued Microsoft stock into the tank where it can be fished out later.
Besides, what are they going to call this new company? Ya-soft? Micro-hoo? Yahmicrohoosoft? Yeah, that works

Fonte Market Watch
Cumprimentos,
CN

[Sestercio]

A coisa pode não ser tão linear.

Há shareholders da Yahoo que acham o preço oferecido muito baixo porque é só 15% acima da média anual das acções e que por si própria terá capacidade para subir mais no médio prazo do que a MSFT oferece agora.

De facto a oferta é baixa. Eu próprio, que sigo esta empresa há algum tempo, tinha estabelecido para mim um preço objectivo (de médio prazo) superior aos 31 usd que a Microsofre oferece.
Claro que me agrada uma subida de 48% em dois dias, mas preferia 60 ou 70 a doze meses.

[TP1]

Em quais das situações devemos "encaixar" a surpreendente OPA lançada hoje pela Microsoft sobre a Yahoo? Para já, a reacção é a esperada: Subida meteórica da Yahoo, queda da Microsoft e o resto do mercado ao rubro com uma notícia que apaga por completo os maus resultados ontem da Google.

Ulisses, desculpa a minha ignorancia mas havendo uma opa n deveriam subir as duas acçoes?! pois se tiver o resultado esperado a msft irá ter outras areas de negocios que porventura serão melhor para esta....

Cumps[/b]

Não sou o Ulissses, mas aqui fica, não. O "opante" desce, pois, vai gastar muito dinheiro. O "opado" sobe pelos motivos óbvios. Agora, nas próximas sessões é natural que a microsoft inicie a subida, pois, vai começar a negociar com expectativas das sinergias.

[mlra]

Em quais das situações devemos "encaixar" a surpreendente OPA lançada hoje pela Microsoft sobre a Yahoo? Para já, a reacção é a esperada: Subida meteórica da Yahoo, queda da Microsoft e o resto do mercado ao rubro com uma notícia que apaga por completo os maus resultados ontem da Google.

Ulisses, desculpa a minha ignorancia mas havendo uma opa n deveriam subir as duas acçoes?! pois se tiver o resultado esperado a msft irá ter outras areas de negocios que porventura serão melhor para esta....

Cumps[/b]