Dear Yahoo! You're Fired! | Hacker News Reader

Dear Yahoo! You're Fired!

techcrunch.com

42 pointsstatikpulse20 comments

And now we have all learned to never piss off Carl Icahn... the dude swings with a big bat:

> "I have therefore taken the following actions: (1) during the last 10 days, I have purchased approximately 59 million shares and share-equivalents of Yahoo; (2) I have formed a 10-person slate which will stand for election against the current board; and (3) I have sought antitrust clearance from the Federal Trade Commission to acquire up to approximately $2.5 billion worth of Yahoo stock."

Which translates to:

"Oh by the way, I bought 59 million shares last week, and I feel like buying $2.5 billion more just so I can fire you and sell your company to Microsoft."

Amusing to say the least.

Incredibly amusing ... and a powerful lesson that reinforces my decision not to let other people get involved in control of my company.

Yahoo's actions weren't in the best interest of its shareholders, but I think they were in the best interest of its user base. How disappointing that the shareholders care so little for Yahoo's users, or its identity as a company.

It seems to me like if something like this were to succeed - Icahn forcing the current board out and replacing it with a group whose primary qualification seems to be that they'd approve a sale - Yahoo would lose a lot of leverage to negotiate a favorable price for its shareholders. Does anyone know how that's dealt with? Would he already have agreed to terms with MS before initiating this?

It will still be the boards responsibility to get the best deal for the shareholders. It is also unlikely that MS could go down from their $33/share bid that they already committed to. But I do see your point.

Yahoo lost a lot of leverage when they flipped the bird at Microsoft. A $33/share offer was gold and they left a lot of money on the table. Yahoo is in a really tight corner now with pissed off shareholders. I wonder how likely a merger with Google is at this point of if that would make any sense for Google.

Mark Cuban looks like the only guy on the proposed slate of directors with any direct experience running a web/software business.

Hilariously, his company long ago was sold to Yahoo, and he promptly ditched his shares. He didn't want anything to do with it then.

I think the idea here is to sell it, not run it. So the main qualification of the new board would be: can phone MSFT and ask them to again offer $33/share.

Can I be on the board then? I'm sure they'll all get a sweet payoff from the deal.

No way MSFT offers $33+/share again. Yahoo's pride/arrogance/stupidity cost their shareholders a lot of money.

I wish gossip whores like Arrington wrote the way angry corporate raiders (or their secretaries, maybe) do.

I understand that you have issues with TC and Arrington, but I'd think this post would least compel to point something like that out. He merely posted a letter that I happened to find interesting. Save those lines for the moments when they are really necessary.

I believe John C Dvorak had this right: MS lacks direction. They should stop becoming Web 2.0 masters and instead focus on releasing a simple, effective, high-quality OS (which they've failed with since W2K/XP imo).

Interesting to see that Mark Cuban is in the board nambed by Ichan.

I thought the same thing. I love it.

Icahn is not infallible when it comes to internet companies. While Time Warner is not 100% tech, it should be noted that his proxy war never came to fruition.

"completely botched"? Can you be a little less technical please?

It's obvious that the MS offer of $33/share is superior to Yahoo's "standalone" prospects? Really? Long-term, who do you think is on the decline and who isn't? Between the two, I'd bet Yahoo over MS.

You're basically saying you think the stocks are mispriced significantly. If that's true, there's a huge opportunity to buy Y! and sell MS, and you'll make a killing. Why aren't you taking it?

> The server at www.techcrunch.com is taking too long to respond.

Perhaps it's TechCrunch that should be fired. The site responds less often that Twitter.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com