I did knock it down at the time and several times PRECIOUSLY, because I knew (via reporting!) that Yahoo was rebuffing all such overtures. I did note that Microsoft kept publicly making statements of interest, but I shot down rumors (which appeared about 43 times over the last year), because of Yahoo’s lack of interest in pursuing talks.

Read the WSJ and NYT today and you will see, this is just what led Microsoft to go hostile. And Yahoo still is not interested and looking for other suitors, although it might have waited too long to act by now and Microsoft could win this long battle.

When I was noting eBay, I did so then because it was the kind of merger partner that Yahoo was more amenable to.

Again, Jerry Yang has LONG been opposed to any merger with Microsoft, which was true then and probably even more true now (though, as I said, he might have to bow to inevitability).

And, as I said above, many–including me–wrote that SOMETHING was going to happen when Yahoo stock dipped below $20 a share, as it did this week.

I searched my memory, then I searched your archives. If I may, Jan. 11th — the headline was something along the lines of Microhoo or Yabay, with a theme of “Deal or No Deal.” You unequivocally stated — No Deal, Howie. You proceeded to shoot down the rumor Microsoft was sniffing around, for the 43rd time, as the bored talk of investment bankers at lunch, etc.

To be fair, you didn’t say it would not happen, just that Yahoo wouldn’t be interested. You put more stock in the idea of a Yahoo-Ebay merger. Which could still happen in the days to come. Who knows? Not me. Like I said, I was just asking…

I said Yahoo did not want it to happen and had rebuffed overtures each time they were made previously. And when I was shooting down old rumors, I was referring to the rumor on that particular day (which was not true at that time), not about the possibility Microsoft might make a bid. I never said it would definitely not happen ever.

In fact, I said twice this week that after the shares went below $20 a share, Yahoo was in a dangerous situation and had put itself in the path of such a possibility.

See above.

But Joe, I know this merger is of Biblical proportions, but get a grip man! I can’t tell if you are making a joke or really Steve Ballmer trying to explain it all to us.

This is the best tech news day in MONTHS!

Some other things happened today that got totally buried. But that’s just as well, as the interplay between this and the news from Facebook and Google will be spectacular, even more so for not having made headlines.

Whooooeeee!

I and many others have talked about the Microsoft interest in buying Yahoo if the stock dropped below $20.

I wrote many posts on this–though I thought it was a bad idea each time–about four times specifically discussing the Microsoft interest.

Here’s one from last July:
Simply put, if Yahoo did decide to sell to Microsoft, it would be the end, and not the beginning, for the company. Even if its name remains, Yahoos need only recall what happened to the company that gave it its first big opportunity on the Web by listing the Yahoo directory on its powerful site. The minute it was bought by AOL in 1998, Netscape effectively was finished, and today its influence is negligible. That’s a fate Yahoo must avoid.

And I and everyone else noted the problems got worse last week, in fact, on Tuesday after earnings, when I wrote:

After the underwhelming call, which came after the markets had closed, Yahoo shares were off almost 10% in after-hours trading, falling below a dangerous $20 level to $18.89.

Or, as I like to call it, takeover territory.

And:

That lack of traction and not porky headcount is what has been depressing the stock, which remains in danger of slipping below $20 a share.

From there, things could quickly get out of control for Yahoo and perhaps spin it right into the hands of private equity wolves or others.

If Yahoo really wants to turn the ad revenue thing around, they need to start thinking more like TV networks and less like search engines.

They need to pay high traffic Web sites for exclusive rights to make them available only through an exclusive Yahoo portal, and with those rights post two to three 30-second ads, that can’t be skipped over, every time a computer visits.

Think about it, isn’t that what TV networks do with the NFL, NASCAR and other high viewer events? Buy exclusive rights and then sell ads. Works for them, it would work for Yahoo as well.

What if you could read the NYT, WSJ and LA Times only through the Yahoo portal? What if you could only view NASCAR.com, NFL.com, NBA.com (and all related teams) etc … only through the Yahoo portal? How much would a 30 second ad be worth there?

This would be good for surfers as well. Yahoo could keep it’s general search engine available for people who want 144,000 returns on a search, but exclusivity would make life easier for people searching for information from only legitimate Web sites.

anyways,

I’m really interested to see if MS pulls this off. Their is the obvious benefit of getting those highly trafficked web properties and potentially search and ad delivery intelligence.

But Also MS has probably the largest glut of highly interactive electronic real estate in the world (think devices, and windows desktop widgets). They just need to line up the tubes correctly.