Steve Ballmer's letter to Jerry Yang
Here is the text of the letter Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer sent to Yahoo chief Jerry Yang after talks broke down on Saturday.
May 3, 2008
Mr. Jerry Yang
CEO and Chief Yahoo
Yahoo! Inc.
701 First Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Dear Jerry:
After over three months, we have reached the conclusion of the process regarding a possible combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!.
I first want to convey my personal thanks to you, your management team, and Yahoo!s Board of Directors for your consideration of our proposal. I appreciate the time and attention all of you have given to this matter, and I especially appreciate the time that you have invested personally. I feel that our discussions this week have been particularly useful, providing me for the first time with real clarity on what is and is not possible.
I am disappointed that Yahoo! has not moved towards accepting our offer. I first called you with our offer on January 31 because I believed that a combination of our two companies would have created real value for our respective shareholders and would have provided consumers, publishers, and advertisers with greater innovation and choice in the marketplace. Our decision to offer a 62 percent premium at that time reflected the strength of these convictions.
In our conversations this week, we conveyed our willingness to raise our offer to $33.00 per share, reflecting again our belief in this collective opportunity. This increase would have added approximately another $5 billion of value to your shareholders, compared to the current value of our initial offer. It also would have reflected a premium of over 70 percent compared to the price at which your stock closed on January 31. Yet it has proven insufficient, as your final position insisted on Microsoft paying yet another $5 billion or more, or at least another $4 per share above our $33.00 offer.
Also, after giving this week's conversations further thought, it is clear to me that it is not sensible for Microsoft to take our offer directly to your shareholders. This approach would necessarily involve a protracted proxy contest and eventually an exchange offer. Our discussions with you have led us to conclude that, in the interim, you would take steps that would make Yahoo! undesirable as an acquisition for Microsoft.
We regard with particular concern your apparent planning to respond to a hostile bid by pursuing a new arrangement that would involve or lead to the outsourcing to Google of key paid Internet search terms offered by Yahoo! today. In our view, such an arrangement with the dominant search provider would make an acquisition of Yahoo! undesirable to us for a number of reasons:
First, it would fundamentally undermine Yahoo!s own strategy and long-term viability by encouraging advertisers to use Google as opposed to your Panama paid search system. This would also fragment your search advertising and display advertising strategies and the ecosystem surrounding them. This would undermine the reliance on your display advertising business to fuel future growth.
Given this, it would impair Yahoos ability to retain the talented engineers working on advertising systems that are important to our interest in a combination of our companies.
In addition, it would raise a host of regulatory and legal problems that no acquirer, including Microsoft, would want to inherit. Among other things, this would consolidate market share with the already-dominant paid search provider in a manner that would reduce competition and choice in the marketplace.
This would also effectively enable Google to set the prices for key search terms on both their and your search platforms and, in the process, raise prices charged to advertisers on Yahoo. In addition to whatever resulting legal problems, this seems unwise from a business perspective unless in fact one simply wishes to use this as a vehicle to exit the paid search business in favor of Google.
It could foreclose any chance of a combination with any other search provider that is not already relying on Googles search services.
Accordingly, your apparent plan to pursue such an arrangement in the event of a proxy contest or exchange offer leads me to the firm decision not to pursue such a path. Instead, I hereby formally withdraw Microsofts proposal to acquire Yahoo!.
We will move forward and will continue to innovate and grow our business at Microsoft with the talented team we have in place and potentially through strategic transactions with other business partners.
I still believe even today that our offer remains the only alternative put forward that provides your stockholders full and fair value for their shares. By failing to reach an agreement with us, you and your stockholders have left significant value on the table.
But clearly a deal is not to be.
Thank you again for the time we have spent together discussing this.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Steven A. Ballmer
Steven A. Ballmer
Chief Executive Officer
Microsoft Corporation
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 




Ideally his behaviour had a lot to do with Yahoo's rejection.
finally been beaten back. Think about about how far along the
online revolution would be if not for the stifling, monopolistic
behavior of Microsoft. Think of how useful the internet would be
by now if it had not been held back by such a dull, barely
useable piece of crap like Internet Explorer. Think of all the
innovation lost or postponed because Microsoft killed off or
bought up the competition by hook or by crook (mostly crook).
Imagine where we all would be if Microsoft had not flooded the
market with mediocre software and then forced it down people's
throats. It's truly sad that Microsoft even exists. Hopefully their influence is on the wane so the online world can move forward.
I know that Google's mantra is to do no evil, but they're a public company; public companies have little room for goodness unless there's profit involved (and reason for the stock price to go up), bottom line.
Backing MS is hedging that so long as the big gorilla in the house is the biggest gorilla around, we don't need to fear the other one...Google.
Hence, a lost opportunity.
I'm not an alarmist, but Microsoft sees best for what Microsoft sees. The company has demonstrated in the past a complete lack of perspective within the new market and as such as seen practically every innovation (if you could call them that) fail under their leadership.
MS + Yahoo is short term, to the eventual destruction of one at the bequest of the other. Microsoft really is the Borg of this world, as pathetic as that may sound. Good for Yahoo... beat the suckers back and give inspiration to other companies to stand up for themselves and not feel intimidated at this once indomitable, smoking shell of a former superpower.
Stand up to them...its possible to do this! Don't give in!
That's a big "if"
Her parents are going to be so pissed!
I'm glad I own MSFT calls! Booyah!
I wish I owned YHOO puts!!! To bad...
perhaps because unlike a previous poster you have the ability to
envision what might have been if we had not come under MS
innovative ideas. :-)
outrageous price? I sure would!
hands. There's something not quite right about his business ethics.
Google's open source consumer-oriented mindset is more aligned
with Yahoo's. Yahoo's visual ads and Google's text ads should work
together fine as long as they open it to everyone.
This was doomed from day 1
http://techwatch.reviewk.com/
Yahoo in the first place. After all the press. all the employee and
shareholder angst, Yahoo and MSFT are tired and distracted,
Google strengthened and all of us poorer for the aborted attempt.
But after 3 months he finally did do the right thing. Just a slow
learner, Ballmer is.
Unlike Netscape, Google was smart enough to win and keep on
winning.
If Google accepts Yahoo's partnership, this would not benefit
Google's long term strategy one bit, unless they fear a Microsoft-
Yahoo merger (doubtful).
I see yo mouth has cost msft 20% of the search ? ad biz. Oh well.
And it must suk to loose an extra quarter bil a year over last year?s half bil loss on
on-line svcs.
Here?s an idea 4u...and you can tell billy you dreamed it up all on your own:
msft makes lots of prods, even populist garbage for hicks.
Why not give what few customers u have ?hick credits? uhh... ?click credits?
against said garbage 4 usin ur bland me2 svcs?
Or even against what you are already burning through (cash, if I have to draw u a pic).
And Im sure ur ?devs devs devs? can weed out the chronic clickers.
You see, if you cant buy the company, why not buy the customers?
(Buy? I see a glow commin from ballmies bald head)
yeah goog will copy that...but wouldn't that be
cool, to be the copied for a change?
And stop screamin so damn much.
it will make ur hair fall out.
uuhh...nm
Dear Jerry,
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
Developers, developers, developers, developers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE
;-)
- by toddbeckett September 15, 2008 8:29 PM PDT
- Short Microsoft
- Reply to this comment
-
(23 Comments)I have been using vista (with much reluctance) for a couple weeks with office 2007, and I can tell you. The good news is Vista isn't nearly as terrible as it was a year ago. The bad news is, the commercials are wrong, it still sucks. Microsoft has messed up both of their flagship products in short succession. No doubt that open office still sucks worse and google docs aren't really there yet, but MS you picked a terrible time to mangle your 2 best products.
If you think I am wrong, try to paste special or make a graph in excel. Nearly impossible. Worse, it seems the reason for all this change is to make things look cuter. That is right after years of telling the world that function is more important than form ms has veered off into the realm of glidey graphics. Honestly, MS, those ads are correct. You aren't cool. You have never been cool. Frankly when you try to be cool, you look like an idiot. MS, I tell you this from experience and because I feel like I know you, don't bother. Just stick to being the best. Make people's lives simpler, do cheaper (or free), and do it faster.
QWAN Microsoft, QWAN.
In the meantime, I am shorting your stock.
Love Todd
PS - This isn't real investment advice since only a moron shorts a company with a googleplex dollars in the bank.