• Wendi Deng Murdoch, MySpace China
• Chris DeWolfe and Tom Anderson, MySpace
• Max Levchin, Slide
• Robin Li, Baidu
• Markos Moulitsas, DailyKos
• Elon Musk, SpaceX
• Ali and Hadi Partovi, iLike
• Mika Salmi, MTV
• Dmitry Shapiro, Veoh
• Quincy Smith, CBS
• Andrew Ross Sorkin, New York Times
• Peter Thiel, Clarium Capital
• Evan Williams, Twitter
• Andrew Zolli, PopTech

• Early April 2007: CBS management visited CNET's offices in San Francisco, met with members of CNET's management team, including Neil Ashe, Chief Executive Officer of CNET. No specific proposals resulted.
• December 2007: Mr. Moonves contacted Jarl Mohn, Chairman of the CNET Board.
• January 2008: Mr. Moonves contacted Mr. Ashe.
• January 30: the CBS Board reviewed CNET.On March 18, 2008, Moonves and Reynolds visited CNET in San Francisco.
• March 31: the CBS Board authorized CBS' management to pursue a business combination transaction with CNET.
• April 2: Reynolds called Ashe. Ashe indicated that the CNET Board might consider a proposal if properly valued. CBS was willing to consider an all-cash transaction at a 40% premium.
• April 9: Mr. Ashe called Mr. Reynolds. The CNET Board considered the CBS price indication to be too low. Reynolds reiterated that CBS' price indication did not reflect any value that might be uncovered in due diligence.
• April 24: Moonves contacted Mr. Ashe to continue discussions.
• May 1: Mr. Reynolds called Mr. Ashe reiterated a price of $10.50 per share and informed Mr. Ashe that CBS had acquired Shares.
• May 2: Mr. Ashe reiterated that CBS' proposed price did not reflect the value of CNET's agreement with Yahoo! Inc. and certain cost cutting efforts. Morgan Stanley called Reynolds and encouraged CBS to present terms in writing.
• May 5: CBS delivered a letter, which specified the terms at $10.75 per Share a 42% premium. Morgan Stanley called Reynolds and noted that CBS' price indication was too low.
• May 7: CBS and CNET entered into a confidentiality agreement allowing CBS to conduct a review of CNET.
• May 8: CBS' legal counsel commenced review of non-public information regarding CNET.
• May 10: Reynolds informed Morgan Stanley CBS was to increase to $11.25 per Share. Morgan Stanleyindicated that CBS would need to increase the purchase price.
• May 11: Mr. Reynolds indicated to the Morgan Stanley representative that CBS was willing to increase its proposed price to $11.50 per Share.
• May 12: Mr. Reynolds noted that CBS' proposed price of $11.50 per Share was CBS' best and final price, but that CBS could agree to a reduced termination fee.
• On May 14 and into the following early morning, CBS and CNET completed final negotiations.

An article on Friday about CBS's $1.8 billion deal to buy CNET Networks misstated, in some copies, the color of the sneakers worn by Quincy Smith, president of CBS Interactive, in an appearance last week at the network's upfront presentation for advertisers. As an accompanying picture showed, they were dark-colored — not his trademark white ones.

Quincy Smith: We like the logo. We may borrow it.

Valleywag: CNET in the eye? It's already yours. That was one of your new employees, Andrew Mager. So Quincy, what do you buy now? There's nothing left.

Smith: What are you talking about? Are you crazy? That's like saying the Internet has stopped.

Valleywag: Have you heard of Jonathan Zittrain? I'm told he's trying to stop the Internet.

Smith: Zittrain and I went to college together, but I don't think he knew me. He was much smarter. I don't want people to think this is one big deal. The Internet is a big new medium, not rebroadcast television. Hey, we have a platform to retaliate now!

Valleywag: What, do I have to watch out for Caroline McCarthy?

Smith: We're going to put the two of you on mixed martial arts. Until you have that platform to really build that out — you've got to make sure you have a footprint. Think about CNET and all the properties they have, not just CNET.com. That's like saying CBS Interactive is just CBSSports.com. There's MP3.com, there's Radio.com, there's Chow, there's UrbanBaby.

Valleywag: So you're saying all the acquisitions you did before CNET are pointless, and now that you bought CNET, you can do more?

Smith: Now I know why no one ever talks to you. No, we did Wallstrip, we launched MobLogic.tv, we bought DotSpotter, which you guys broke, which was really an acquire-hire — those guys are redesigning CBS.com. But we think we're getting a real asset in CNET, there's a real business there. Look, I'm getting the hook, good talking to you!

Sites like Engadget and Gizmodo (the latter published, like Valleywag, by Gawker Media) seemed too small to matter when they launched; by the time CNET got around to trying to compete with the tech blogs, it was too late. In the meantime, having deluded themselves into thinking they had conquered tech publishing, CNET managers pursued off-brand expansions into baby and food sites, areas in which it had no particular experience or other value to add.

CNET was at its sharpest when dueling with rival ZDNet, the online publisher of once-formidable tech publisher Ziff-Davis. Since it merged with ZDNet and became a conglomerate of online brands — hence the "CNET Networks" name — it has devolved into soft, bureaucratic mediocrity, a trend only accelerated by the departure of cofounder Shelby Bonnie in 2006. If buying CNET was Smith's one big idea, we'll gladly lend him another: Shuffle current CNET CEO Neil Ashe out the door as soon as possible.

(Image by Andrew Mager)

Digg recently inked a $100 million, multiyear ad deal with Microsoft. On those revenues alone, Digg's acquirers could easily justify a $300 million to $400 million purchase price; if Microsoft is paying about $30 million a year for Digg's banner-ad inventory, paying that price would mean a modest 10x to 13x multiple on revenues.

So who is it? A source rules out all the big Internet players — not Microsoft, not Google, not Yahoo. CBS, a big Web acquirer of late, has taken itself out of the running. So who could it be?

Two possibilities: The New York Times Co. and the Washington Post Co. Both the Times' Arthur Sulzberger and the Post's Donald Graham are big believers in a digital future. And both can see firsthand how much traffic Digg contributes to their websites. If I were to place a bet on those two? I'd say the Post, which already owns Slate and has close dealings with Microsoft; Digg's Microsoft ad deal would not discomfit Graham the way it might other businessmen. The Post also has a stronger balance sheet, with a market cap four times the Times'.

That's pure speculation, of course. Acquisition talks fall apart all the time — and for Digg, especially, with its history of almost-but-not-quite deals, I wouldn't be surprised if nothing came of this latest rumor. Still, it's telling that the Valley's talk about Digg has changed from scoffing at its overinflated valuation to talking about who's willing to meet Digg's terms.

Digg CEO Jay Adelson gave me the standard noncomment about "rumors and speculation." But given his transcontinental commute from New York to San Francisco, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd be glad to put his company up for sale. For founder Kevin Rose, a sale would be more emotional. He'd have to be comfortable with whoever buys the company, since he'd likely stay involved. His Diggnation podcast, which draws on headlines from Digg, is one of the centerpieces of his other startup, Revision3. Digg's contentious audience, too, might not take to the site's new owners. That's the biggest obstacle, I suspect, to any deal happening. Those who would profit from the wisdom of crowds must contend with their madness, too.

(Photo by briancaldwell)

Digg, of course, was infamously profiled in BusinessWeek last August, which assigned the company a value of $200 million. Most of Silicon Valley found that number spurious, but the credulous executives who run big media companies actually believe what they read in magazines. With Rose launching Pownce, a new Twitter-like file- and bookmarks-sharing service, and Adelson increasingly focused on Revision3, now would be a good time to offload Digg, whose noisy community of users is just getting more and more fractious.

Then there's Marc Andreessen and Gina Bianchini, the chairman and CEO, respectively, of Ning. Ning, long an ill-defined Web 2.0 startup, has found its purpose in life — making Facebook apps and other social-networking tools easier to build. Along with the purpose came $44 million in funding, in a round orchestrated by Allen & Co. And hence the invite. It's a bit early for Andreessen to sell, so we'll bet he'll content himself with hawking his build-your-own-MySpace tools to everyone besides Rupert Murdoch.

Why build when you can buy, though? Facebook, the former college-kid social network which has been growing spectacularly since it opened its doors to everyone last fall, has all the buzz right now, prompting Murdoch himself to diss MySpace. Facebook, of course, has been showing every sign of wanting to go public. The IPO option gives CEO Mark Zuckerberg, rumored to be attending Sun Valley this year, more leverage in any negotiation.

Rounding out the tech corps: Bill Gates of Microsoft; Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang, CFO Sue Decker, and even the gone-but-not-gone Terry Semel; and Mike Volpi, the former Cisco executive who's now running online-video startup Joost. Oh, and the usual old-media suspects.

There's one puzzling omission on the guest list, if reports are true: Quincy Smith, president of CBS Interactive. Smith is himself a former Allen & Co. dealmaker, which makes his absence curious indeed. Anyone know why people are saying Quincy won't show?

(Photo by briancaldwell)