<![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix - Valleywag Comments]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix - Valleywag Comments]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> I don't agree Ballmer's reputation is on the line especially if he offers up another good option. MSFT has been criticised for sitting on this huge pile of cash and living off the fat of the land. They need to show they have some more moves.

lestack

]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> $31 was a huge gift, an undeserved bonus to yhoo management. IMO, the pricing issue is a smoke-screen. This is about Yang and some Yahoo lifers holding on to their lifestyle. To these people its career death to report to MSFT and god forbid be accounatable for meeting a much higher bar.

lestack

]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> Microsoft is going to acquire Yahoo. It's when, not if, considering that Steve Ballmer's reputation is on the line.

kenobi

]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> Owen,
I wouldn't characterize the performance as "good but not good enough to be decisive".

Let's take a quick look at the growth rates in the press release:
· We see 9% top line growth, 7% of which is from Ads. The 9% includes the impact of the growth in Fees. You have to wonder how sustainable the Fees line is given the $350 million AT&T settlement.
· Recall that Sue's strategy is to become a leader in off network advertising. Here, they lost ground as the market grew around them. Ooops! So they did better on network, and showed some growth there.
· So, we have Revenue up 9%, 14% after TAC, and Gross Profits up 11%, but Operating Income was down 28%. That's not as bad as it looks, but even backing out the special charges, gets you to low growth.
· Net Income was flat, year over year. The only growth here was attributable to Alibaba, which they don't control. Even the Non-GAAP net income number they show is flat.
· Back out the AT&T payment and you have flat Cashflow from Operations:
· And if you look at Free Cash Flow, Sue's preferred measure of performance, and back out the AT&T payment, the story is more bleak. Without the AT&T payment, 647 goes to 297, which is about a 20% decline:

So, is that "good"? Where are the bright spots that are going to drive growth in this company? It's pretty hard to see from the numbers they present.

xhooter

]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> i would just walk away and let the stock slip back to the teens, then come back and see if they want to talk then.

i am sure the investors will by then kick jerry out of there and replace him with someone that actually is looking in the best interest of the shareholder rather than be in the "i rather die before selling MY company to microsoft" camp.

giddieup

]]> <![CDATA[Why Yahoo's yearning for earnings produced no quick fix]]> but up it to what? It would be one thing if the Y! board came back and said we'll sell at $32, or $31 all cash - but the came back and said $41 or something equally ridiculous. If Ballmer offers $32 all cash, it would just be ammunition for Yang and crew to hold out.

Remember that Yahoo! was trading around $19 (!) before the MSFT offer. If the board won't sell willingly at $31, I can't believe they'll sell willingly at $33.

So disagree with the post. Conceivable that they could have gotten a better price had they sat down earlier, but at this point it's clear they will do anything possible to avoid a sale to MSFT - including, in my opinion, significantly increase the risk to their shareholders without increasing the potential return.

abettertomorrow

]]>