One more thought on this. I am really glad that I dumped Verizon for another cell provider.
2
Marissa Mayer had her own child care at Yahoo but denied it to other women and men who needed it at Yahoo. With morality such as this, it is no wonder Yahoo is now gone. She doesn't deserve any golden parachute she is now getting. Shame on her, Yahoo Board of Directors, and stockholders.
3
The only way to make Yahoo interesting is as reported her: to clickbait it with Ms. Mayer's name, photogenic photo showing blonde locks, dazzling smile, and tagging-on a puff-piece report NYT style: filling it stale stuff while barely glazing into epic failures.
Speaking of clickbait, let's face it, that's also why Yahoo hired Mayer in the first place, and at least in that department, she is sure to have delivered. Which also explains why Yahoo showered her with cash, and dutifully maintained her tenure to be fire-free, until of course, they finally went belly-up.
And also why boring ISP-utility now basking in new role as the Valley's landfill-of-choice for bankrupt internet businesses, Verizon, agreed to shell $5b + you-look-mahvelous-keep-the-change-$300m.
Who knew women's equality would turn out this way? i.e. Keep the spotlight on them as long as they're clickbaitable/gawk-worthy?
Disappointing as these fluff stories are, fact is, plenty of good analysis waiting to be reported. But first, the NYT has to yank the story out of the media column, & put it squarely where it belongs, in Business and Dealbook. That'll happen when Verizon install a bald, nerd-looking MBA in Mayer's place, who's armed with geek-vision vocab and made-it-from-humble-roots story, who delivers gobbledygook with a near-perfect American accent that nevertheless manages to sound sophisticatedly foreign.
No, not the Microsoft guy, but don't rule out a lookalike. See you at Dealbook. (maybe).
Speaking of clickbait, let's face it, that's also why Yahoo hired Mayer in the first place, and at least in that department, she is sure to have delivered. Which also explains why Yahoo showered her with cash, and dutifully maintained her tenure to be fire-free, until of course, they finally went belly-up.
And also why boring ISP-utility now basking in new role as the Valley's landfill-of-choice for bankrupt internet businesses, Verizon, agreed to shell $5b + you-look-mahvelous-keep-the-change-$300m.
Who knew women's equality would turn out this way? i.e. Keep the spotlight on them as long as they're clickbaitable/gawk-worthy?
Disappointing as these fluff stories are, fact is, plenty of good analysis waiting to be reported. But first, the NYT has to yank the story out of the media column, & put it squarely where it belongs, in Business and Dealbook. That'll happen when Verizon install a bald, nerd-looking MBA in Mayer's place, who's armed with geek-vision vocab and made-it-from-humble-roots story, who delivers gobbledygook with a near-perfect American accent that nevertheless manages to sound sophisticatedly foreign.
No, not the Microsoft guy, but don't rule out a lookalike. See you at Dealbook. (maybe).
2
There is no doubt that Yahoo made a valiant turnaround effort in recent years. Under the leadership of Marissa Mayer, the company made numerous attempts to improve its core business, with a steady run of acquisitions and investments in new apps and services.
...................................................................................
This is reality strange since the only way that Yahoo would make money was through paid advertisements. The board at Yahoo should have never hired a computer CEO since it was not a computer problem but instead a business problem.
Yahoo had enough money to build their own advertising system. This would have meant not having to share fees with middle men. It also would made it possible for Yahoo to be the middle men in advertisement for other web companies.
The blame does not only go on the CEO since the CEO was appointed by board members. Simply another example of a company without a strong management team.
...................................................................................
This is reality strange since the only way that Yahoo would make money was through paid advertisements. The board at Yahoo should have never hired a computer CEO since it was not a computer problem but instead a business problem.
Yahoo had enough money to build their own advertising system. This would have meant not having to share fees with middle men. It also would made it possible for Yahoo to be the middle men in advertisement for other web companies.
The blame does not only go on the CEO since the CEO was appointed by board members. Simply another example of a company without a strong management team.
2
This clearly shows the the failed business structure of Corporate America, when you are rewarded these high sums of millions for failing to produce a single success and receive a large compensation package as the ship is going down.
12
Based on my experience in marketing management at Verizon, I'd say this will be a case of the blind leading the blind. Verizon has so much money to burn- but no real strategy in the consumer space. They've never really 'gotten' the internet/content thing and this is not a company that takes a lot of risk. By the time they got FiOS up and running, the business model for TV consumption was already changing. My guess is that will be a few years of half-hearted efforts to launch new 'products,' and then they'll sell the entire consumer side of the business.
8
First, the issue of news commodification was a prediction, not fact. Do I read this article in Google's domain and format? No. News is defined by its key value - immediacy. What's recent is news, and news media sites store that content specifically. Google doesn't.
Second, Yahoo is, was, a search engine. That's its identity, the basis of its value. Google, for all its many projects, makes 80%+ of its income from search-related ads. It's a no-brainer. Users plug into a search engine their desires, as searches. What could be more fruitful for advertisers?
Mayer was brainwashed by her Google tenure, and believed only massive software engineering could make a better search algorithm. Google's core algorithm, and its ad-sense profit machine, were assembled in weeks, if not days. Massive engineering firepower since then adds incremental value, not impressive.
Since Yahoo had a fraction of Google's engineers, Mayer believed it was incapable of searching better. So she focused on media, off the shelf, bought at full price. Money down the drain.
Turn arounds succeed by returning to core missions. Yahoo's search was human-driven, not an algorithm. This doesn't mean today's version should be Ask Jeeves. Search algorithms remain very imperfect. Google search results often suck. All the engineering in the world won't fix that, because it's tied to their basic strategic model. Yahoo could have pursued innovating new search methods, and that would have been a game changer.
Second, Yahoo is, was, a search engine. That's its identity, the basis of its value. Google, for all its many projects, makes 80%+ of its income from search-related ads. It's a no-brainer. Users plug into a search engine their desires, as searches. What could be more fruitful for advertisers?
Mayer was brainwashed by her Google tenure, and believed only massive software engineering could make a better search algorithm. Google's core algorithm, and its ad-sense profit machine, were assembled in weeks, if not days. Massive engineering firepower since then adds incremental value, not impressive.
Since Yahoo had a fraction of Google's engineers, Mayer believed it was incapable of searching better. So she focused on media, off the shelf, bought at full price. Money down the drain.
Turn arounds succeed by returning to core missions. Yahoo's search was human-driven, not an algorithm. This doesn't mean today's version should be Ask Jeeves. Search algorithms remain very imperfect. Google search results often suck. All the engineering in the world won't fix that, because it's tied to their basic strategic model. Yahoo could have pursued innovating new search methods, and that would have been a game changer.
2
It's all Verizon's headache now, while Mayer parachutes out very rich with an outrageous 57 million dollar severance for failing at what she was hired to do.
One thing I never understood about the whole Alibaba stake and the taxes, why wouldn't Yahoo have went ahead and sold it's stake in Alibaba, and pay their $4 billion dollar tax bill out of the proceeds?? Seems like a solution to me, but then again I haven't become super wealthy by failing, either.
One thing I never understood about the whole Alibaba stake and the taxes, why wouldn't Yahoo have went ahead and sold it's stake in Alibaba, and pay their $4 billion dollar tax bill out of the proceeds?? Seems like a solution to me, but then again I haven't become super wealthy by failing, either.
3
Ms. Mayer's PR efforts seem to be in full swing at this point, angling either for a full departure package or continued management role. Not clear she contributed very much to this effort and will walk away with a ton of cash; no credit given either to the previous CEO, Carol Bartz, who contributed enormous behind-the-scenes management and consolidation of a technology disaster into a smoothly running operation, or to Jerry Yang, who provided stability when needed and, I believe, engineered the deal with Alibaba, which is the company's greatest asset. Yes he should have made the deal with Microsoft when offered, but something has to be said for trying to retain a company's own identity. Too bad no one could figure out how to make it work. As for wringing value from this -- along with AOL, as they say, good luck to your liver.
2
i used to work at yahoo!, back in the '90s when that meant something.
this article displays the problems it describes: a focus on personalities, a slaw of meaningless tech jargon, and a failure of focus when looking at the big picture.
i left yahoo! at the time when personalities (= politics) was becoming overhead. in fairness to all who followed, i believe once you cross that line in a corporation it is very hard to return to the humility of fun.
underneath all the jargon, the internet has been and still is an unknown, and like the africa of herodotus it's populated with more mythical than real creatures.
mayer's "atomic unit" monetizes user individuality, not content. news organizations monetize content because they pay reporters a salary, spread costs across many reader interests, and nurture human journalists rather than robotic server farms. google or facebook are the tax farms and customs houses of bitdom. the real "atomic unit" in their revenue model is the captive user -- they sell user information and ad exposure. in the big picture, they transform a cohesive society into the atomic units of corporate digital avatars living in virtual customer veal pens.
long gone is the cohesive, very flat, very egalitarian, very talented and very motivated culture of innovation that thrived in the 90's yahoo!. that was a story worth living. the cynically profitable culture of high tech human farming and surveillance ... not so much.
this article displays the problems it describes: a focus on personalities, a slaw of meaningless tech jargon, and a failure of focus when looking at the big picture.
i left yahoo! at the time when personalities (= politics) was becoming overhead. in fairness to all who followed, i believe once you cross that line in a corporation it is very hard to return to the humility of fun.
underneath all the jargon, the internet has been and still is an unknown, and like the africa of herodotus it's populated with more mythical than real creatures.
mayer's "atomic unit" monetizes user individuality, not content. news organizations monetize content because they pay reporters a salary, spread costs across many reader interests, and nurture human journalists rather than robotic server farms. google or facebook are the tax farms and customs houses of bitdom. the real "atomic unit" in their revenue model is the captive user -- they sell user information and ad exposure. in the big picture, they transform a cohesive society into the atomic units of corporate digital avatars living in virtual customer veal pens.
long gone is the cohesive, very flat, very egalitarian, very talented and very motivated culture of innovation that thrived in the 90's yahoo!. that was a story worth living. the cynically profitable culture of high tech human farming and surveillance ... not so much.
2
The internet "like the africa of herodotus it's populated with more mythical than real creatures" - exactly. Mayer was hired because of that mythical view, which you can't expect the Times to be able to penetrate.
Well her main accomplishment was getting it sold and saving the shareholders $40 billion. She failed in growing the company, she didn't inspire the techies to make it happen (leadership failure), and the core software stagnated (email failures is a perfect example)
She gets a D rating as a CEO. The fact she had billions of dollars a captive audience and alienated customers and her workers basically showed in the sale cost of the product. Microsoft offered $44 billion for everything a few years back ... she got $4.8 billion from Verizon for the core ... she provided a roughly 5% return.
She had a tremendously hard job, but in the end ... she is just like all of the other failed CEOs of other Dot-coms ....
I get what Verizon is doing ... but to put it into perspective ... they sold off $8.4 billion of hard assets to get the portal (CA, TX and Florida). So maybe you get add revenue ... but you aren't getting monthly cashs from folks ... and given the implementation failuire of yahoo and Go90 and AOL .... jury is out but I sense an upcoming failuire.
She gets a D rating as a CEO. The fact she had billions of dollars a captive audience and alienated customers and her workers basically showed in the sale cost of the product. Microsoft offered $44 billion for everything a few years back ... she got $4.8 billion from Verizon for the core ... she provided a roughly 5% return.
She had a tremendously hard job, but in the end ... she is just like all of the other failed CEOs of other Dot-coms ....
I get what Verizon is doing ... but to put it into perspective ... they sold off $8.4 billion of hard assets to get the portal (CA, TX and Florida). So maybe you get add revenue ... but you aren't getting monthly cashs from folks ... and given the implementation failuire of yahoo and Go90 and AOL .... jury is out but I sense an upcoming failuire.
8
An inept muti-zillionaire wanna be, just destroyed Yahoo and now is saved by Verizon. For what? To be a cable provider. Well they have a leg up, by not providing support for their mobile services, they well fit into the milieu of existing cable providers. Force packages down customers throats and then raise prices. Their already non-existent customer service, will now get even worse! If that is even possible.
Verizon should think of a new web search engines where you have dictionaries of information. There used to be a web search engine called Scirus that you could use to find scientific information. This was a great web site for information about computers and software. This search engine was better than using a everything type of information search engine.
A dictionary web search engine would have just the information for one topic. This is a way to create advertisements fees where the users would have interest in the topic of the given search engine they are using. Advertisements would be in the information that users views.
A dictionary web search engine would have just the information for one topic. This is a way to create advertisements fees where the users would have interest in the topic of the given search engine they are using. Advertisements would be in the information that users views.
1
So what's her package for her mediocre performance at a once great company. All these execs have change in control packages so that when they screw up their performance they get rewarded for their efforts (or lack of thereof) and get taken out with their pre determined parachutes. Meritocracy, sir you must be jesting!
1
Marissa Mayer's downfall happens because she has not used every one of the Yahoo products she pushed so she has no ideas what real people use Yahoo for. She made a few great changes and offset it with a lot of look good but operational time sucking changes. There are so many die-hard Yahoo users but they all get beaten down by too rich to care Yahoo employees who don't even use their own work products.
For example, I used Yahoo since 1995 and still using some of its product today. I stopped paying for their premium personal and business services in 2008 when my email account was hacked and they keep sending the resetting password to the same email address that was hacked. How am I going to access that? After 2 months back and forth with photo ids and credit card info submitted, they refused to send the reset password to the secondary email address in my Yahoo profile. Then their big shot account security send me an email telling me not to contact her and she will not help me get back my email account because the person who hacked my account has rights. That is when I realized that Yahoo employees are getting too rich to care about small business account users. They could have learn from my case and pioneer the secondary recovery email feature and the two steps security ahead of Google and AOL in 2008.
For example, I used Yahoo since 1995 and still using some of its product today. I stopped paying for their premium personal and business services in 2008 when my email account was hacked and they keep sending the resetting password to the same email address that was hacked. How am I going to access that? After 2 months back and forth with photo ids and credit card info submitted, they refused to send the reset password to the secondary email address in my Yahoo profile. Then their big shot account security send me an email telling me not to contact her and she will not help me get back my email account because the person who hacked my account has rights. That is when I realized that Yahoo employees are getting too rich to care about small business account users. They could have learn from my case and pioneer the secondary recovery email feature and the two steps security ahead of Google and AOL in 2008.
1
Marissa Mayer was successful in one important thing at Yahoo; making as much $ as she could for herself. No one will ever hire her as CEO again, but she's got enough money not to care.
3
Marissa Mayer's worst move, out of many, was to 'improve' Yahoo email, the portal for millions of users, by making it much slower and a lot more difficult to user.
Thanks for destroying Yahoo's core business.
Thanks for destroying Yahoo's core business.
3
The narcissistic Ms. Mayer was an abject failure as Yahoo CEO. She was callous to the rank-and-file Yahoo employees. Yet, she is handsomely rewarded for her failure. I hope the same media that fawned over her for so long now bathes her in ridicule.
2
Another overpaid, underproducing elitist CEO who takes credit for others ideas and accomplishments to pad their resume and then get a huge buy-out when the company fails. Why do companies still believe in the all-star CEO and overpay them? She was a horrible hire from the beginning and her elitist ways alienated everyone in the company. Why do CEO's have little if no people skills?
The only content she has created was to update her resume for future idiot companies looking for a high profile CEO. Crazy!
The only content she has created was to update her resume for future idiot companies looking for a high profile CEO. Crazy!
2
I used to be a Verizon customer. I was the first on my block with FIOS. I'm not a big watcher of TV or movies, and I liked the company mostly for the breadth of its cell phone coverage and the speed of its internet service. The idea of Verizon as a media company seems far-fetched.
I wasn't their only customer, obviously. Maybe buying Yahoo was a good move, but you don't find many people praising the phone companies (or the cable companies) for their interest in serving their customers, or caring much about what they want.
I wasn't their only customer, obviously. Maybe buying Yahoo was a good move, but you don't find many people praising the phone companies (or the cable companies) for their interest in serving their customers, or caring much about what they want.
3
Verizon might consider the idea of reducing the Verizon cell phone charges of their users when they access Yahoo.
Verizon should also get rid of the idea of using an outside firm for advertisements. Time for large companies to have in-house methods for the delivery of advertisements. This would make it impossible for users to avoid seeing advertisements. This would allow for Verizon to obtain payment for any time a user views an advertisement. There would be extra advertisement charges for when a user presses a button to view a "New Products From (IBM, Apple, etc.).
Verizon is smart and will not make the same mistakes of the computer stars CEO's. In business you need a good management team else you have a new CEO who at the beginning is totally lost and comes up with totally bad ideas.
The companies that fail usually do not have a good management team,
Verizon should also get rid of the idea of using an outside firm for advertisements. Time for large companies to have in-house methods for the delivery of advertisements. This would make it impossible for users to avoid seeing advertisements. This would allow for Verizon to obtain payment for any time a user views an advertisement. There would be extra advertisement charges for when a user presses a button to view a "New Products From (IBM, Apple, etc.).
Verizon is smart and will not make the same mistakes of the computer stars CEO's. In business you need a good management team else you have a new CEO who at the beginning is totally lost and comes up with totally bad ideas.
The companies that fail usually do not have a good management team,
1
The problem with Yahoo media was the idea of stories for everyone. This is also the problem with the New York Times website.
The human mind wants order and not a mishmash of stories. I stopped looking at Yahoo website when Yahoo decided to offer a mishmash of stories. I saw no reason in wasting my time in trying to find the stories that I would be interested in reading. With a mishmash of stories there was a good probability that I would never find the stories I was interested in reading.
The solution for Verizon to be successful is to simply revert back to the Yahoo before the CEO decided to make Yahoo media a place for stories for everyone.
By the way the money in media will be in smart phones. This will call for organization of stories and not a mishmash. Mishmash is for the advertisements stock on the stories.
The human mind wants order and not a mishmash of stories. I stopped looking at Yahoo website when Yahoo decided to offer a mishmash of stories. I saw no reason in wasting my time in trying to find the stories that I would be interested in reading. With a mishmash of stories there was a good probability that I would never find the stories I was interested in reading.
The solution for Verizon to be successful is to simply revert back to the Yahoo before the CEO decided to make Yahoo media a place for stories for everyone.
By the way the money in media will be in smart phones. This will call for organization of stories and not a mishmash. Mishmash is for the advertisements stock on the stories.
1
Sometimes it's good to be exposed to what one doesn't know by browsing through broad interest publications, rather than just viewing special interest apps. I pick up links in comments to Paul Krugman's blog (his is the only blog I regularly visit). I appreciate learning about pop music, fashion, etc, sometimes, in the entire issue of NYT, Vanity Fair, New Yorker. Yahoo News led me to Foreign Policy magazine. Wish I could justify the expense to subscribe to it and the Economist. Times-Picayune (New Orleans) and Southern Living have been my go-to sources for recipes. I'm from the midwest, so how would I know about these if not exposed to them somehow?
when you state the money in media will be in smart phones you miss the visual aspect. The future of media delivery is all about the picture and sound the user sees and hears from the smart phone. People won't take the time to read anymore after this. And by the way, the government is selling the radio spectrum at an alarming pace shutting out smaller technical users. And, of course, you know that the radio spectrum belongs to the people, right?
"Again, the problem has been identified, but the solution remains to be seen."
Google seems to be immune to any form of 20th century trust busting, so it can continue with its monopolistic business practices unabated. It has its tentacles deep into government at the highest level with the ability to change the outcome of an election by tweaking the algorythm to alter its search results.
Publications like this one are in thrall to Google and Facebook to such an extent that this article is the first indication I've seen that the NYT isn't necessarily suffering from full-on Stockholm syndrome.
Google seems to be immune to any form of 20th century trust busting, so it can continue with its monopolistic business practices unabated. It has its tentacles deep into government at the highest level with the ability to change the outcome of an election by tweaking the algorythm to alter its search results.
Publications like this one are in thrall to Google and Facebook to such an extent that this article is the first indication I've seen that the NYT isn't necessarily suffering from full-on Stockholm syndrome.
1
Marissa did not create the problems at Yahoo, nor did she solve them. I think the purchase is a good match for Verizon. Verizon needs to move Yahoo away from tabloid stuff. Yahoo is a recognizable brand, that could be Verizon's front door to its products. Verizon wants to be much more than a phone company and this could be a key piece. Verizon must convince the public what Yahoo is and why people should go there.
2
Yahoo! was my homepage for over a decade. Each day I would make my coffee, get my laptop and read the day's top news, centered in the middle of Yahoo!'s home page. For years there were stories from Reuters, the AP, the BBC, in short, REAL news from respected media. These stories were conveniently nestled in one centralized box and clicking on one would lead to other links relevant to the given topic. Then, sometime in the autumn of 2012, while reading the morning "news" after clicking on a topic without paying attention to the source, I realized that something was terribly off kilter. The piece I had opened was so blatantly biased that I felt I must have clicked outside of Yahoo!'s "news" box. I backed up my browser and saw that the opinion piece was indeed placed in the box which I had been conditioned to assume was news. For the next several weeks I watched as the Yahoo! news box became more cluttered with opinions and less populated with hard news. I emailed Yahoo! and expressed my concern as to why they chose to confuse their readers. Their response? Opinion pieces mixed into the space where millions of users had always turned to for news was not problematic. Keep in mind that this was at the height of the 2012 presidential race. To be fair, the biased opinions were from both sides but, having them mixed into the Yahoo! news feed was definitely a bad decision and ultimately the reason that I have not visited Yahoo! since October 2012.
11
Yahoo missed a great opportunity to deliver quality newsfeeds.
The Yahoo "news" page is an embarrassment, worse than useless with its mix of celeb gossip, sponsored stories, and fake news.
CEO gets paid out, and staff will get laid off -- this is becoming the new American story. Awful.
The Yahoo "news" page is an embarrassment, worse than useless with its mix of celeb gossip, sponsored stories, and fake news.
CEO gets paid out, and staff will get laid off -- this is becoming the new American story. Awful.
24
So interesting that for all her leaning in when she took over the reins at Yahoo, she ends by leaning back into old school management -- =trim staff and sell the business! You go, girl!
13
How is she still there?
17
She's still there because the severance package she negotiated when she signed on. If she was fired, her payout would have been even more ridiculous than the golden parachute she will receive. Quite clear the Ms. Mayers is particularly good at taking care of Ms. Mayers. Probably read "The Art of the Deal."
9
With this type of record, she could run for President like Carly: 'what I did to HP/Yahoo/whatever, I can do to the US.'
13
Is there anyone who watches video after emptying their spam folder? I just can't figure out who thought adding that feature was a good idea.
4
Marissa Mayer, the destroyer of Yahoo.
She should have doubled down on search instead of outsourcing it to Bing.
Yahoo could have been an alternative to Google.
No one will be going to Yahoo for media content. The idea is rediculous.
She should have doubled down on search instead of outsourcing it to Bing.
Yahoo could have been an alternative to Google.
No one will be going to Yahoo for media content. The idea is rediculous.
13
remarkable how Ms Mayer made over $200 mn by simply passing the buck. Management skill at its best.
25
We live in a world where people and organizations who create original content are marginalized by gate keepers like Google and Yahoo who derive disproportional benefit form other people's work.
Marissa Mayer's golden parachute maintains that theme within Yahoo itself.
Marissa Mayer's golden parachute maintains that theme within Yahoo itself.
17
At Google, Marissa Mayer was handed a tremendous product that she did not create, and was feted as brilliant and crowned a tech superstar. But at Yahoo!, Mayer had complete control, a platform at the time with ad revenues greater than Facebook, and tens of billions of dollars with which to make internal investment and acquisitions. Over the course of four years, Mayer's internal investment strategy bore no fruit, and her acquisitions, including Tumblr, were complete failures. Mayer turned out not to be the tech superstar that she appeared to be while working at the still high-flying Google.
Nonetheless, Mayer did prove one thing: it is not only male CEOs, around whom a cult of personality develops, and who are given compensations packages into the hundreds of millions of dollars, while completely failing to deliver any measure of success, let alone deliver the extraordinary results that would justify her breathtaking compensation.
Nonetheless, Mayer did prove one thing: it is not only male CEOs, around whom a cult of personality develops, and who are given compensations packages into the hundreds of millions of dollars, while completely failing to deliver any measure of success, let alone deliver the extraordinary results that would justify her breathtaking compensation.
26
Yes. And the exact same things can be said about Meg Whitman. Handed a product she did not create, feted as brilliant, and crowned. Yet her only significant acquisition while at the helm was SKYPE, not even marginally connected to E-Bay's business, and which was subsequently sold at a loss. But, once crowned, always crowned, that is, until she ran for governor of California, where intelligent people saw her for what she really was. That crown - it's tarnished a bit.
1
213 million dollars, for four years of work that failed, that is emblematic of the problems of this country. If Verizon tries to force me to use Yahoo, I will switch carriers.
27
Ms Mayer, while at Google, made comments pertaining to the value of "high quality content"..too bad that philosophy did not continue at Yahoo. Just look at Yahoo's home page today, July 27: Megan kelly should not have worn that dress...baseball players get kicked out of a bar..shop workers laugh at woman's shorts..stars who believe in open marriages..Chris Everett blames menopause for her problems....and on and on. It is 95% trash talk, click bait and ads posing as news stories, and for some reason this has escaped the notice of someone who will walk from Yahoo with a 50 million dollar golden parachute. It's disgusting.
64
She meant, of course, the high *profit* quality. Click bait brings the ad views from people who don't know better (or don't care about e.g. how she turned Yahoo Mail into an anti-adblock security risk), and getting "native ads" (fake corporate articles) and paid-for-by celebutante stories only sweeten that pot.
It's trash, and trash gets picked up. See also: Moonves's reaction to the whole Trump thing.
It's trash, and trash gets picked up. See also: Moonves's reaction to the whole Trump thing.
3
Clickbait the bane of marketing. Sadly, eye grabbing headlines work.
I think Ms. Mayer did not follow her own warnings she made in 2009. She chose to add more media and content which are difficult to monetize with so much competition, rather thn focusing on making Yahoo a distribution center through its email and search. Its not easy.. but i suspect tey would have been more successful that way.
1
As hard as she works, and as visionary as she can be, she still ran Yahoo stock down, down, down. Unfortunately, Marissa Mayer decisions on the directions Yahoo should take while she's been at the helm have brought the company to the nadir that it is currently in. She'll receive a great parachute, but good luck to the next company who hires her on for her leadership abilities.....
8
don't worry, there will probably be many companies making offers. Corporate governance leaves much to be desired. Even if she is not, she has made over $300 mn in her previous jobs. That should hold her over.
4
All thosee-mail archives to ransom. They'll make a bundle.
5
I, for one, hoped she could transform it but those mistakes along with some baffling acquisitions at astronomical prices gave me a feeling this was a sinking ship and she doing everything she could to sink it.