eWeek Microsoft Watch
Advertisement
Advertisement
June 25, 2008 5:58 PM

With or Without Yahoo



News Analysis. Online advertising is going to be big, big, big. An IDC forecast indirectly explains why Microsoft didn't let Yahoo go easily.

The analyst firm estimates that Internet advertising spending will reach $65.2 billion this year, and it will increase to $106.6 billion in 2011. Annual estimated growth rate: 15 percent to 20 percent. Impressive, but still small. IDC said that Internet advertising would only account for 10 percent of spending across all media categories this year and 13.6 percent in 2011.

Fortunately for Microsoft, because so much ad money is spent offline, there's still time to get search and online advertising right, with or without Yahoo. Now that could be a U2 song revisited:

See the stone set in your eyes
See the thorn twist in your side
I wait for Yahoo

Sleight of hand and twist of fate
On a bed of nails she makes me wait
And I wait without Yahoo

With or without Yahoo
With or without Yahoo...

And you give yourself away (to Google)
And you give yourself away (to Google)
And you give
And you give
And you give yourself away (to Google)

You get the idea. Microsoft has got to go on either way.

Here's where the "without Yahoo" hurts: Keywords will account for a whopping one-third of online advertising spending through 2011, according to IDC. Combined Microsoft-Yahoo search would have given Microsoft at least a fighting chance against the Google keyword machine.

Something else: IDC said display advertising would account for 20 percent of worldwide ad spending over the next three years. Display advertising is a category where Yahoo actually does well (and Microsoft is doing better).

Microsoft has been throwing out number $80 billion for Internet ad spending by 2010. I stand corrected. I faulted Microsoft's math, but IDC's estimates make that $80 billion just about right.

IDC's forecast is yet another slap in Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer's face. He wanted Yahoo but ended up driving the dot-com pioneer to give itself away to Google—by way of an ad-and-search sharing deal.

I still contend that from an integration perspective, Yahoo would have weighted-down Microsoft to Google's advantage. But reasons for an acquisition look surprisingly stronger now then they did when Microsoft withdrew its acquisition offer:

  • Billionaire Carl Icahn's proxy fight is absolutely undermining the credibility of Yahoo's board (as I said that it would).
  • Important executives are leaping overboard as Yahoo takes on water (I keep thinking of the scene in "Titanic" where steerage passengers follow fleeing rats).
  • Yahoo's executive leadership—once fired up to revive the company—is looking more directionless.
  • In context of the aforementioned problems, Yahoo's stock is finally nearing free-fall.

Microsoft may yet have a chance to pick the search business from Yahoo's rotting bones, although I maintain my opinion that Microsoft's unsolicited takeover hugely contributed to Yahoo's current plight. Before Microsoft's bid—and even a few months afterwards—I saw Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang as steering the company to recovery. I'm no longer confident that he can do it, based on where Yahoo is in the nearly two months since Microsoft withdrew the offer.

Microsoft's alternative, selling search, would have lobotomized Yahoo. But if the body is going to die off anyway—and slowly—maybe a brain transplant would be a good solution. Saving search would preserve something. I must qualify: That's a sensible strategy only if Yahoo can't survive intact. In which case, it's time for Yahoo to fill out that organ donor card, with Microsoft designated as the recipient.

Yahoo's survival and whether or not Google or Microsoft gets some of Jerry Yang's company is an important topic in context of IDC's numbers. While Google, Microsoft and Yahoo are perceived to be competitors, they are not in the greater advertising context. The amount of ad money spent everywhere else, dwarfs Google's online advertising and search dominance.

Google-Microsoft-Yahoo competition is really about jockeying for position to better compete with offline ad spending and to make the biggest bucket for catching those advertising dollars when they finally move online. Right now, Microsoft has a puny bucket compared to Google. According to ComScore, in May, Google's share of worldwide searches was 61.8 percent, compared to 8.5 percent for Microsoft.

Microsoft still has some time, as long as so much ad spending goes offline. It's the bucket's size in three years or even five that will matter more.

Microsoft's 2008 problem: Its bucket wouldn't be as big as Google's, with or without Yahoo.

Related Posts:

TrackBack

TrackBack

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/cgi-bin/mte/mt-tb.cgi/14087

Comments (7)

portuno :

Hey Joe.

How long do you think a Microsoft engineer can hold a breath?

http://reddevnews.com/news/article.aspx?editorialsid=10002

n0neXn0ne :

portuno Says :
"How long do you think a Microsoft engineer can hold a breath?"

@_ : _ http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/leeds/lamp.do _
"...the demand for LAMP ..."

Don't count us out so quickly! We will still have Yahoo!

portuno :

@ nOneXnOne:

I see your LAMP demand chart peaked immediately after April 2007 and has subsided since then. Wouldn't that chart be going UP instead of down at this point is LAMP was a ready-to-wear solution?

I think LAMP is a patchwork effort to climb a technological mountain and LAMP workers are finding just as Microsoft MVP's that traditional procedural methods have unseen mismatches with the whole of the construction ecology that bring about bottlenecks causing traditional procedural software to fail at scaling, at facility, and at breadth of usefulness.

n0neXn0ne :

portuno Says :
"I see your LAMP demand chart "peaked" immediately after April 2007 and has subsided since then. Wouldn't that chart be going UP instead of "down" at this point is LAMP was a ready-to-wear solution?"

@portuno :
It's called a bell curve. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics

1) Those stats are from the UK only
2) It was a LAMP only bell curve, not WAMP or SAMP
3) It's all about the stack

"The "stack" is set of applications typically required by an organization. A typical "enterprise" application stack would include the basic office functions (word processing, spreadsheet, database, etc.), as well as a Web browser and e-mail and instant messaging programs. "Stack" has become a popular term for suite, set or group of software."

layta...

n0neXn0ne :

portuno Said :
"I think LAMP is a "patchwork" effort to climb a technological mountain..."

@portuno :
Apache is "A PAtCHy server". It was based on some existing code and a series of "patch files".

I would say Apache have climbed that slippery mountain. eh?

chips :

I think Microsoft will continue to pour its profits into the online advertising business, chasing Google like a dog chases a car. It will be a lesson in futility, no doubt, as many people are just sick of using Microsoft bloatware in any form, including the online ones.

Ballmer sees the profits from Windows and Office starting to gradually decline now, or peaked. Therefore, MS needs a new direction, and Gates and Ballmer have correctly decided that the money is in online advertising. Too bad they so far are so incompetent in competing fairly with google to get that market. When they have to compete fairly with a strong company, without the MS Lock-in, they lose.

While at the same time, we see the possibility of the XBox360 now being subbed out to be manufactured by OEM's. That after a big cutback on spending on the Xbox360 development and development of new Xbox360 games. Which seems to mean that MS is cutting its loses in the XBox department, and will go back to a formula for the XBox, that might turn a profit, someday. After all, the XBox series is only a 4 Billion dollar loser overall.

EGM Rumor Mill: Xbox 360's not made by Microsoft coming soon

http://www.topix.com/who/panasonic/2008/06/egm-rumor-mill-xbox-360s-not-made-by-microsoft-coming-soon
--------------------------------------------------
Where Microsoft wants to go, is to make the Xbox profitable. They also want to make Windows, a secure system, but to do so, they will most likely end up breaking almost all the software ever written for Windows. This is the reason (that and DRM) for Vista's half baked UAC which broke at least half the 3rd party apps. MS wanted to break the other half with Windows Seven but decided they needed to keep the user base locked in for awhile. Expect the next Windows beyond Windows Seven to finish breaking pre-Vista apps and games almost completely. But the trade off there could be that its almost secure at that point. In about 4 years that is, and cost which any sane person would not want to think about for the users.

Post a Comment

 
 


RSS Syndication

Advertisement
Advertisement
Microsoft Watch     Contact Us | Advertise | Site Map
Ziff Davis Enterprise