All Things Digital

Today, in yet another episode of the Web 2.0 lottery, Social Gaming Network grabbed $15 million in funding for its widgety gaming apps that are popular on Facebook and other social-networking sites.

The round, led by Greylock Partners, Founders Fund, Columbia Capital and Novak Biddle Venture Partners, will go toward expanding its offerings, which include the popular Warbook, and also its network for other developers to create and publish online games on.

SGN grew out of Webs.com, which used to be known as Freewebs.

While BoomTown often makes fun of viral apps, most of which are faddish and juvenile, the better made gaming apps actually are likely to be a real business over time, as long they remain engaging and fun to play as the classic real-life games are.

After all, who ever gets sick of Candyland?

SGN’s games are not quite that, focusing more on strategy and bang-bang that 12-year-old boys of any age so love, but, CEO Shervin Pishevar promises, with increasingly rich features and better graphics.

The business plan? Advertising, of course, especially sponsorships, as well as the sale of virtual goods and premium offerings.

SGN’s other popular online games include FightClub, StreetRace, Jetman, Text Twirl and Free Gifts. It has 1.1 million daily active users mostly across Facebook, but also on Bebo, hi5, and MySpace.

In the space, its main competitor is Zynga (here is a post and video with its founder, Mark Pincus). Naturally, the two bicker back and forth in the blogosphere about size and quality of games.

But it seems to me that there is room for both, so the fighting seems like a lot of noisy, well, game-playing.

Here’s Pishevar talking about the sector:

Yesterday, I traveled to Los Angeles for paidContent’s second Economics of Social Media conference, which opened last night and is being held all day today at the Skirball Cultural Center.

This morning, I am interviewing Steve Wadsworth, who helms Walt Disney’s (DIS) Internet businesses.

And after sating myself with as much Club Penguin info as possible, I will be sitting rapt in the front row, as folks like Yahoo’s (YHOO) Jeff Weiner, Bebo’s Joanna Shields and AOL’s (TWX) Ron Grant talk about how social media is going to finally make money.

BoomTown is on a vision quest to answer that question in the coming year, so we are kicking entrepreneurs and taking names!

Here’s a short video I did on the opening night, including talking to paidContent’s Staci Kramer and Seth Goldstein of Social Media.

But, first, it starts with a tour of my temporary L.A. abode at the home of Mahalo’s Jason Calacanis:

Valleywag got a hold of a sticker (see below) that Bebo employees are passing around in anticipation of the close of the purchase of the third-ranked social-networking site by AOL for $850 million in cash.

The motto: “I, for one, welcome our new AOL overlords.”

Why shouldn’t they? As BoomTown reported, every Bebo employee has had their previously granted stock options accelerated and fully vested under terms of the deal.

This is typical in acquisitions by the Time Warner (TWX) online subsidiary, since it cannot offer enough of its moribund old media stock.

Unfortunately, those kind of deal terms don’t make for the kind of environment that encourages already jumpy entrepreneurs to stay. In fact, it kind of gives them a free pass to leave.

Still, it is nice to see Bebo minions celebrating their new bosses, including AOL CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant, who helmed the Bebo deal.

But to clarify for Bebo staff: Falco and Grant’s nickname at AOL is Smithers and Burns, that lovable pair from “The Simpsons,” and not overlords.

It goes without saying that further errors like this will not be tolerated.

AOL is turning into the Oprah Winfrey of the digital world, it seems, opening up Time Warner’s (TWX) checkbook to as many start-ups as it can.

Last month, it was $850 million in cash for social-networking site Bebo.

And, today, it’s a much smaller slug for Sphere, which started as a blog search engine and morphed into a widely distributed “contextually relevant” content engine, used on news and blog sites across the Web (and which AllThingsD uses on this site, in fact).

While one source said the price was upward of $25 million, sources at other companies to whom the San Francisco-based start-up also talked, including Google (GOOG), said Sphere was looking for more than that.

In any case, the sale is surely a win for CEO and Co-Founder of Sphere Tony Conrad, a longtime entrepreneur who also has been a VC at True Ventures, which also invested in Sphere.

Oh, it’s a mosh pit of jolly interbreeding in the Web 2.0 start-up world!

Sphere raised about $4.25 million from many investors, some of which included Radar Partners, Trident Capital and well-known Web players Scott Kurnit and Will Hearst.

AOL has surely shown a knack for snapping up small and innovative properties with clever technologies–the Truveo video search engine and communications app maker Userplane, for example–and has let them stay relatively intact, as it has promised it will do with Sphere.

But it also has not exactly leveraged any of them in a massive way either and still faces the problem of holding onto talent from those start-ups, as BoomTown reported here.

One hopes that AOL can do more with the more complex and elegant Sphere, which has deep relationships with major publishers all over the Web, including many Time Warner properties like Time.com and CNN.

It would be a shame for Sphere to fall into one of AOL’s deep holes there.

But perhaps not, given all the frenetic multitasking activity at AOL of late, including yesterday, when it also announced a deal in which its Platform-A online ad division would sell ads for Verizon (VZ) on the Web and for its mobile units.

Oh, and its top execs, CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant, whom AOL sources tell me have been AWOL of late, have also been ferreting away on a possible deal to be the alternative for Yahoo (YHOO) in its takeover battle with Microsoft (MSFT).

While Yahoo troops are not really happy with such a union, as BoomTown reported here, neither are some top Time Warner execs at the possibility that AOL might simply be being used as a stalking horse by Yahoo, in an effort to get Microsoft to up its bid.

“Do you think they’re using us?” joked one Time Warner exec to me yesterday, given the deal activity seemed to have slowed down this week.

Um, yes, of course!

While that wouldn’t be sporting, if Yahoo does end up going to Microsoft, it just means AOL will need to get a lot more energetic and do a lot more Spheres in the future to keep up.

Everybody remain calm.

While it might have looked like it was the rapture for major Internet players yesterday–what with everyone and his mother getting sucked up into the Yahoo-Microsoft takeover tussle and disappearing into the ether of confusion that now reigns over the situation–it is best to keep moving toward the light of harsh reality for illumination.

Read more »

Gone, Tim Tuttle of Truveo. Gone, the Birches of Bebo. Gone, Dave Morgan of Tacoda. Gone, many Quigos.

One of the more interesting little problems that AOL has had over the last few years, in regards to its acquisition of hot Internet companies, has been that it is situated deep in the bowels of the Time Warner (TWX) behemoth.

So, one wonders, will a possible hook-up with Yahoo (YHOO) change that, giving the also-ran Internet outfit potentially valuable stock in Yahoo to better entice valued employees to stay?

Read more »

Yesterday, you could feel the testiness jump right over the phone from several people close to Microsoft whom I spoke to about Yahoo’s latest gambit to sell its blue-sky growth plan to Wall Street.

Like a lot of Yahoo’s various moves of late–dating promiscuously with other suitors, handing out pricey severance plans to all employees and continuing to spurn the advances of the software giant without a raise in its $31-a-share bid–the projections by Yahoo (YHOO) that its sunny future warranted at least $40 a share were not taken well in Redmond.

In fact, the company–although it may ultimately have to–is quite adamant about not raising the price. “Sooner or later, they’ll run out of things to do,” said one Microsoft (MSFT) exec.

Sooner would be better, as paying $40 a share would add about $12 billion more the the $41 billion price tag, which would make it one of the biggest tech mergers in history if consummated.

But for the same high, high price, why not take all that money and buy AOL and the giant media conglomerate attached to it?

Yes, I mean Time Warner! Home of AOL and Harry Potter!

This thought occurred to me as I watched the stock of Time Warner (TWX) drift further downward over the last weeks, even though it has tried to give itself a shot in the digital arm by paying $850 million in cash to buy the Bebo social network.

Current price tag for the whole ball of TWX: $51.5 billion. (Of course, debt brings the price up to about $85 billion to $87 billion, but this is just a fantasy, so indulge me.)

And for that you not only get the relatively decent AOL online ad network, you also get a social network in Bebo (No. 3, but Microsoft has only a tiny piece of Facebook), the powerful AIM instant messaging service, a just-as-famous brand name in need of some TLC, some nice Web properties and, best of all, a chance to shove out Google (GOOG) from its search-ad relationship with AOL (Google owns 5% of the unit, which it bought for $1 billion).

Plus, all kinds of stuff you can either keep or spin off: powerful cable assets, top-notch television and movie studios (those cool “Entourage” guys on HBO!), the biggest magazine company (People, Sports Illustrated!), cable networks (Anderson Cooper and Larry King on CNN) and much, much more.

Frankly, compared to Yahoo, Time Warner kind of feels like a bargain, and they know from getting taken over by digital types.

Years ago, as I reported in my book, “aol.com,” Microsoft Co-Founder and longtime leader Bill Gates once said to AOL Founder and then-CEO Steve Case in 1993: “I can buy 20% of you or I can buy all of you. Or I can go into this business myself and bury you.”

How ironic would it be if that promise finally came true?

OK, we Photoshopped it, but only because we could not get our head around what the official Yahoo/Microsoft post-merger picture might look like.

With news that the pair were in informal talks, first broken by CNET, Boomtown still could not conceive of Yahoo (YHOO) CEO and Co-Founder Jerry Yang trading high-fives with Microsoft (MSFT) CEO Steve Ballmer, given Yang has thus far behaved as if the unsolicited bid from the software giant was akin to eating a bowl of worms.

But, in the words of the immortal John Lennon, “Imagine all the people/Living life in peace.” Thus we took that famous picture of AOL’s Steve Case and Time Warner’s (TWX) Jerry Levin (they seemed so happy at the time–who knew?) at the dawn of that dog of a merger and went to town.

BoomTown has always been an avid student of those always curious post-acquisition/merger shots that get taken as the first public visual expression of a deal.

For example, the genuine one, pictured below, of the Bebo/AOL union announced yesterday, with Bebo president Joanna Shields shaking hands with AOL CEO Randy Falco, while AOL President Ron Grant stands nearby, seems unusually awkward and uncomfortable to me, for example.

Is a picture worth a thousand words or are looks deceiving? You decide.

After its AOL division paid out an insane $850 million for social-networking site Bebo yesterday, one had to wonder if the true digital legacy of Time Warner (TWX) will be as the perpetual gravy train for legions of Web players.

It certainly seems that way, from the original AOL execs who “merged” their company with Time Warner in 2000 and cashed out at the peak right after the deal to the series of ad-networking start-up entrepreneurs who got acquired, took their payouts and skedaddled right on through to the two founders of Bebo–Michael and Xochi Birch–who didn’t even stay long enough for a latte after grabbing their chunk of the payday Time Warner was handing out in crisp bank notes for the social-networking site they founded.

And, more importantly, after one digital misstep after the next dating back to its Pathfinder days–which I have likened to watching someone fall down an endless staircase–one also has to wonder if Time Warner will ever see any of the upside of the Internet itself.

I remain dubious.

And after interviewing numerous sources close to the company yesterday after the Bebo deal was announced, I am even more certain of more trouble ahead.

Here’s why:

1. While I have always admired Bebo for its innovation and cool ideas about content (I love its “KateModern” online series, as you can see here), AOL essentially just forked over all that money for an audience of primarily teenagers in England, which is Bebo’s biggest market by far (but where Facebook has pulled to No. 1 in a year).

And while Bebo execs would argue with me about this, especially since international aspirations were touted by AOL yesterday, it has no more international traction than much more powerful leaders Facebook and MySpace. More significantly, its size in the important U.S. market, which is hoped will be helped by a marketing boost from AOL, is small and further traction remains questionable.

To be fair, AOL also touted the high engagement levels, which Bebo does have in terms of both minutes and page view per user.

2. Sources close to the company say AOL CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant–who are none-too-lovingly called Burns and Smithers at AOL–kept the deal a relative secret from most other execs, including those who might be majorly impacted.

It is not abnormal for acquisitions to be done in a tight group, but was apparently excessive in this case, and reminds one of the sneakiness of former Time Warner CEO Jerry Levin in the troubled AOL merger.

3. Sources said Falco had repeatedly told execs at AOL that he had to do a “big property” acquisition to move the needle, which has not been exactly moving at the unit of late, in order to show Wall Street that AOL had a social-networking strategy. “It’s like constantly scrambling eggs, by doing big new moves, you can hide the problems,” said one exec.

4. The turmoil in its online advertising unit, dubbed Platform A back in the fall, is real and profound and extraordinarily troublesome, given that it is supposed to be the engine to make the Bebo financial projections work at AOL. As I wrote earlier, Bebo needs that jump-start given its small revenues and profits.

The recent departure of three of the key executives who were supposed to be part of Platform A’s success–VP of Marketing Solutions Kathy Kayse and EVP for Global Advertising Strategy Dave Morgan in February, as well as Platform A President Curt Viebranz last week–is worrisome, even though it has been floated by AOL as a housecleaning.

But, curiously, all get good marks for competence from many and had, in fact, been recently touted as saviors by AOL. They do share one thing in common, said several sources: Run-ins with Grant, over cuts in spending and disagreement over aggressive sales projections in a recessionary economy.

In addition, all the key execs from its Tacoda acquisition are gone, along with those from its Quigo buy.

And, while its Advertising.com top exec Lynda Clarizio has taken over Platform A and is considered a strong exec and a “go-getter,” many sources told me she also reportedly had similar testy run-ins with Grant, before he recently was quoted on her promotion: “There is no one better qualified to do this than Lynda, whose track record at Advertising.com has been nothing short of stellar.”

While corporate departures and infighting are also common at many companies, especially over budgets and performance expectations, the level of rancor at AOL has been high.

5. Perhaps most importantly, it remains a mystery to me and many others I talked to yesterday that AOL has not truly attempted to take its very powerful properties like AIM and ICQ and make them more social, building applications on top of already robust ones and partnering around the Web.

“Didn’t AOL invent the social graph with Buddy Lists?” said one perplexed Silicon Valley luminary to me. Yes, indeedy, it did.

Thus, I am still trying to figure out why AOL–which was built on the pillars of community, communications and connectivity–has consistently not been able to leverage its still-valuable assets.

I suppose it is sexier to do a big, splashy deal, of course, which takes focus away–for a while at least–of the essential need to take hits, while doing the slow block-and-tackle work it will require to really build a strong ad and social network.

Buying Bebo, the third-ranked social network, for so much and trying to turbocharge it is a very lofty goal, of course, but the real problem with the acquisition is that it feels like an answer in search of a question.

While Bebo President Joanna Shields–who will enter the AOL exec team as part of the deal–and the Birches have clearly built a very interesting property, the weight of Falco’s calling it a “game-changer” on which AOL’s future rides could turn out to be much too much for Bebo to carry.

That is, especially with that heavy bag of Time Warner cash it is also shouldering.

While a lot of focus yesterday was on the gobs of cash that Time Warner (TWX) shareholders now have to fork over to social-networking site Bebo, which was bought by its AOL division for $850 million in spite of low revenues, sources close to the company tell me another big deal is in the hopper and at another lofty price.

Sources say that AOL has been seriously mulling the acquisition of KickApps, which makes white-label social widgets, apps and communities for various companies and helps monetize them, for a reported price of $90 milion.

The deal was being negotiated by AOL’s vice president for business development and general counsel Ira Parker and KickApps Chairman and Founder Eric Alterman (pictured here) as late as this week, although it has not been signed yet.

Founded in 2005, the New York-based KickApps offers social-media applications on demand to companies, such as a car-search widget for Autobytel and a social community around Time Warner’s CW television network’s “Gossip Girl.”

Its investors include Softbank Capital, Prism VentureWorks and Spark Capital, among others, who have put $17 million into KickApps. Competitors include start-ups, such as Ning, GoingOn and CrowdVine.

Here is a video KickApps has on its site about its 3.0 offering:

What’s AOL getting for its $850 million in cash to purchase of social-networking site, Bebo?

A very attractive social-networking service and a very experienced exec who has been running it.

But, perhaps more importantly for those who focus on pesky numbers, not a whole lot of revenue and negligible profits, judging financial information I got a gander at, courtesy of sources at several companies that looked at funding or buying Bebo.

And the rest of the overall outlook for Bebo? A small but growing business, with nice user engagement with strong page views and minutes spent per session, but little traction beyond Britain and Ireland, and too small a presence in the critical U.S. market.

(Bebo is also strong in New Zealand, but BoomTown does not have to point out that that country is not exactly the kind of game-changer that AOL CEO Randy Falco mentioned in his email to the troops about the purchase.)

According to the several sources who were privy to Bebo’s financials, for example, Bebo’s revenues for 2006 were only $7 million with $3 million in EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization). In 2007, the results are still small, with $20 million in revenues and $5 million in EBITDA.

Using 2007 results, that means Time Warner’s (TWZ) AOL paid a handsome 42.5 times revenues and an incredible 160 times EBITDA.

AOL might assert that it makes Bebo a bargain, given that Facebook got valued at 50 times revenue when it got that $15 billion valuation from the $240 million investment from Microsoft (MSFT) last year. Still, Facebook has a huge presence in the U.S. and is growing strongly in Europe, including being just ahead in Bebo’s strongest territory in the U.K.

Projecting outward, the company estimated–remember, these are not actual numbers, but a best guess by Bebo execs–it would have $50 million in revenue and $10 million in EBITDA in 2008; $117 million in revenue and $48 million in revenue in 2009 and $193 million in revenue and $92 million in EBITDA in 2010.

While potential is important, the high price (which was still lower than the $1 billion and above that Bebo might have fetched even six months ago) and its small presence in the U.S. were the reasons several companies passed on acquiring Bebo–including News Corp. (NWS), Google (GOOG), Yahoo (YHOO) and CBS (CBS), said sources close to each of these companies.

On the plus side, users do spend a lot of time on Bebo, engaged by its more robust content offerings, such as its “KateModern” series (which I wrote about here), and its elegant and content-rich offering, which has some of the cleanness of a Facebook and some of the flash of MySpace.

In addition, in Bebo’s president Joanna Shields (pictured here somewhat awkwardly shaking AOL CEO Falco’s hand and with AOL President and COO Ron Grant), AOL gets an experienced and savvy Web exec, which it desperately needs these days, given the flux there.

Shields has worked at RealNetworks and Google and she will continue to run Bebo and report to Grant. In fact, Shields has effectively been running Bebo for a while now, and its founders Michael Birch and Xochi Birch will be leaving the company.

You can see Shields in action in this video, which I did while visiting London last summer:

The thudding failure of the online-born “quarterlife” original series on network television Tuesday night, garnering some of the worst ratings in NBC’s history (after experiencing a declining Internet audience too), was loudly touted yesterday as a possible impediment to online-to-offline dreams of original-content creation that Hollywood has been nurturing.

Well, it’s not. One show, which just did not work, is in no way representative of a trend, any more than the box-office failure of the movie “Snakes on a Plane” meant online marketing and hype was finished.

The Wall Street Journal’s excellent Jessica Vascellaro wrote a great piece today on the subject of online content creation, focusing on social-networking efforts, such as Bebo’s “KateModern,” an original online show from the creators of “lonelygirl15,” as well as stuff being made by MySpace and others.

The goal is to keep users more engaged. More importantly, it is to fight the continued audience attraction to user-generated videos on YouTube, which is owned by Google (GOOG). It dominates the online video market, as you can see from this chart below (click on it to make it larger).

BoomTown has written about the Bebo hit several times (including a video visit to Bebo’s HQ in London last summer and an interview with a “KateModern” producer in November, both seen below), as it represented the right way to start to develop original online content.

And that would not include pulling some failed television pilot out of a drawer, making it on the cheap, cutting it up into shorter segments and slapping it online.

Instead, true success–besides the material actually being good, which should be a given–requires the content to be interactive, pioneer new filming techniques and be made specifically for the medium, using its tools, rather than being shoehorned into it.

“KateModern,” for example, has been changeable by the second by its audience and the creators have moved the action along with startling speed.

But it still has someone professionally producing it. Set in East London, it follows a “troubled young art student named Kate and her three closest friends: an Australian wild-child named Charlie, a young entrepreneur named Tariq and a mischievous computer whiz-kid named Gavin.”

As The Journal’s Vascellaro correctly writes: “Past efforts by Web companies to turn themselves into online versions of television networks have been hampered by the difficulty in changing ingrained consumer habits–while people are happy to watch short video clips from time to time, few until recently saw the Web as a forum to follow regular episodes of series. For online-only shows, weak advertiser interest, subpar production quality and lack of promotional muscle were added hurdles.”

Indeed. But that will change quickly.

Here is our too-long video of the visit to Bebo and the interview with “KateModern” producer Pete Gibbons:

gal·va·nize [gal-vuh-nahyz]
–verb (used with object), -nized, -niz·ing.
1. to stimulate by or as if by a galvanic current.
2. Medicine/Medical. to stimulate or treat (muscles or nerves) with induced direct current (distinguished from faradize).
3. to startle into sudden activity; stimulate.
4. to coat (metal, esp. iron or steel) with zinc.
Also, especially British, gal·va·nise.

[Origin: 1795–1805; < F galvaniser, named after Luigi Galvani; see -ize]

Oh, my.

A pail?

That’s the exact image I got when I heard the unusual word Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Jerry Yang used when he decided to finally emerge from the cone of silence (where, let’s be clear, he has been living for the last year) and make a public declaration about the unsolicited bid Microsoft (MSFT) had made for the company he co-founded.

“Obviously I think we can’t say a whole lot about the process we’re going through. Everybody has read about everything we’re doing, so there’s not much more to add,” said Yang in a Q&A session after a keynote speech he gave yesterday at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s yearly meeting.

Noting he wanted to make sure that “where Yahoo goes is the right place” for everyone involved and standing by the company’s assertion that the Microsoft offer was too low, Yang characterized the takeover attempt as “a galvanizing event for all of us at Yahoo.”

Yang was echoed almost exactly at the IAB event by Yahoo President Sue Decker, who said the Microsoft bid was a “galvanizing force and a catalyst.”

Obviously, teams of strategic advisers were up all night chugging Red Bull to come up with this particular word to trot out for the official talking points memo. (One has to wonder what the No. 2 word was–Stomach-churning? Migraine-inducing? Panic-attack-creating?)

Of course, if they had actually checked the definition, like the one above, one might have imagined they would have thought twice about using it.

Because, leaving aside No. 1, No. 2 and, most especially, No. 4 (ouch!), No. 3 is not exactly what I would imagine Yahoo shareholders and employees want to think of the company’s leaders.

That is, being startled into sudden activity. Other definitions are similar, but they all have to do with reacting as if stimulated by an electric shock (Merriam-Webster), instead of acting without that kind of painful prodding.

Of course, you might think continually declining search-market share over the last year might have zapped Yahoo execs.

Or quarter after quarter of flat earnings.

Or the stock price drifting downward to dangerous levels.

Or all those departing execs and deepening morale problems.

Or, of course, that sticky peanut butter memo that, in hindsight, outlined the problems at Yahoo pretty clearly.

But, of course, it did actually take the attack from Microsoft to spur this recent spate of frantic activity from Yahoo, whether it be kibitzing with Google about outsourcing search (now obviously a nonstarter) or talking to companies like News Corp. (owner of Dow Jones and All Things Digital) about possible merger combinations (which all sound painfully complex) or focusing on new product innovations (like a new Digg competitor called Buzz, which we will feature on this site).

One also imagines other ideas being cooked up, such as a significant acquisition.

For example, I would not be surprised if Yahoo was taking a long look at the for-sale-sort-of social-networking site Bebo, which–if it does get snapped up soon, instead of raising funds–will likely get picked up by a media company like Viacom or CBS.

Well, it is nice to see such energy out of Sunnyvale at long last, even though most agree that it is only a matter of time before Microsoft prevails in its aggressive quest to own Yahoo.

And while Microsoft execs have recently promised to protect the Yahoo brand and keep its significant presence in Silicon Valley intact, all the galvanizing in the world will not mask the truth.

And that is: The idea of an independent Yahoo, which is still a laudable one, is probably about to kick the bucket.

Maybe a galvanized bucket, but a bucket nonetheless.

In the meantime, here’s the Chemical Brothers’ 2005 terrifically energetic hit, “Galvanize,” which might provide some inspiration to Yang and the Yahoo board as they move to their inevitable decision.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

If Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is serious about finding a true No. 2 to replace outgoing exec Owen Van Natta and more, then BoomTown has certainly at least two cents to add.

So here is our list of ideas, which include a number of women execs, since a list that Facebook has made apparently includes a few women too.

(And we applaud that, especially since, as you can see from this page at the social-networking site, there are none in its current top management.)

But you do have to begin with the menfolk, since the top choice of mine is one.

That would be someone that Facebook has already looked at, former eBay exec Jeff Jordan (pictured here). Jordan and Zuckerberg talked a lot last year, before Jordan headed off to lead OpenTable, the restaurant reservations service.

It would be hard to entice Jordan, a one-time contender for the top spot at eBay (EBAY), to leave OpenTable, given it is IPO-bound in the next year.

But he has the chops operationally, having led eBay’s North American unit and also its PayPal division. In other words, this man can scale.

But so can former Yahoo (YHOO) COO Dan Rosensweig (pictured here), who left the troubled Internet portal in late 2006, just before it started its long and painful descent into Microsoft’s bear-hug bid.

Rosensweig is now a principal and its-man-in-Silicon-Valley for the tony New York investment firm, the Quadrangle Group, so it is unlikely he would move over to Facebook.

More to the point, it also unclear how well his gregarious nature would mesh with Zuckerberg’s less social manner (although we would pay big bucks to see those two interacting on a daily basis). But Rosensweig, for all his joshing, has the leadership skills and deep contacts in the tech community.

And since Zuckerberg feels so comfy with Microsoft (MSFT), why not its savvy Chief Media Officer Joanne Bradford (pictured here). There, she “leads global product and platform development, content and programming, business development, product management, marketing and branded entertainment for MSN.”

Plus, she might not relish the idea of helping overhaul Yahoo, if that deal is struck, and has the ad sales and content experience too. Also, she is tough, but nice about it.

So is a sharp Facebook social-networking competitor, Bebo’s President Joanna Shields (pictured here). Based in London, she has worked at both Google (GOOG) and RealNetworks (RNWK) and has an international exposure Facebook needs.

Plus, she knows how to work with founders (in Bebo’s case, Michael and Xochi Birch) and has a charming, though squarely in-charge, demeanor.

Google, of course, has been a good headhunting ground for Facebook and the search giant has been fending off poaching off its execs by Facebook regularly.

But why not go for the big game, as there is a long list of prospects in the higher managment echelons of Google.

That includes: Tim Armstrong, president, Advertising and Commerce, North America; Marissa Mayer, vice president, Search Products & User Experience; Susan Wojcicki, vice president, Product Management; Sukhinder Singh Cassidy, president, Asia Pacific and Latin America Operations; David Fischer, vice president, Online Sales & Operations; Omid Kordestani, senior vice president, Global Sales & Business Development; Salar Kamangar, vice president, Product Management.

But we’re partial to a pair of hard-charging execs who lead critical nuts-and-bolts operations at Google: Sheryl Sandberg, vice president, Global Online Sales & Operations; and Shona Brown, senior vice president, Business Operations.

Sandberg (pictured here) is responsible for online sales of Google’s ad and publishing products, bringing experience Facebook sorely needs. She is also politically savvy, having been the chief of staff at the Treasury Department in the Clinton administration.

Former McKinsey consultant and author Shona Brown (pictured here) has been running Google’s business operations since 2003 and knows how to push around, oops, work with two headstrong founders at once. Thus, Zuckerberg would be a breeze for the sharply honed Brown.

But let’s not leave out Yahoo. We have but one choice here (and someone who has reportedly been on Facebook’s list too): Hilary Schneider, its EVP, Global Partner Solutions. In other words, the revenue person.

The former Knight-Ridder exec (pictured here) is well liked at Yahoo and is also steeped in the world of media, which is important to Facebook. While probably a keeper for Microsoft, it might not be her first choice to stay after a forced merger.

There are a lot of other choices–in fact, I am completely leaving out the many media execs who might be good, as well as some longtime Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who would get along a lot better with Zuckerberg.

Off the top of my head: former AOL head Jon Miller; former Yahoo execs Ellen Siminoff and Jeff Mallett; CBS dynamo Quincy Smith; former When and Ofoto entrepreneur James Joaquin; Fox Interactive Media’s Peter Levinsohn; and many more.

But why not go for the man who was Zuckerberg before Zuckerberg was cool. Yes, the shiniest of Golden Geeks himself, Marc Andreessen (pictured here on the iconic Time magazine cover in 1996).

I could go on and on about the similarities I find between the two, if you compared today’s Zuckerberg with the Netscape founder in the mid-1990s.

From their arrogant innocence to their visionary qualities to their enfant-terrible charm, it is almost as if they were separated at birth.

But now Andreessen is all grown up and much, much matured from when I covered him. He has become all calm and sage and he even does a very decent blog.

Plus, he has also started and run a number of start-ups after Netscape, giving him deeper managerial experience over the last dozen years.

And, best of all, Andreessen knows the pressure of being the best-thing-since-sliced-bread in the tech sector, and its inevitable downside too.

Overall, a real mentor and partner for Zuckerberg, making a perfect pair of Golden Geeks.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

That is all.

Wait, not all. The report that it has signed a bill of sale earlier this week that “definitely happened”: It definitely did not.

What is true: Bebo is raising money and it is open to selling and there has been interest. But, in two words: No sale.

Nonetheless, TechCrunch, the popular tech blog that has been gift-wrapping up Bebo, has upgraded the unconfirmed rumor it floated about Bebo’s sale last week. At the time, it estimated the veracity of that rumor at 50%, but has now upgraded it to claiming “this is about as strong a rumor as they come.”

Unfortunately, most rumors are typically about as strong as a twig to begin with, so that’s not saying much. And this one snaps easily with only a little bit of reporting.

Even more fragile is TechCrunch’s assertion that Google is the acquirer–well, to be fair, its post characterizes it as a bet–because of some theory of fitting in with Google’s not-so-hot social-networking effort, Orkut.

Actually, Google has been approached about investing in Bebo and even to look at it as an acquisition, which is an event that happens about 3,546 times a day at Google by all sorts of companies. But Google is, at this point, uninterested in buying Bebo.

(And just FYI, Orkut is not exactly a favorite child at the Googleplex, so spending $1 billion as a gift to it seems a bit of a stretch).

TechCrunch also seemed to imply a nefarious plot in its post: “What’s clear is that Bebo, which is the second-largest social network in the U.K. behind Facebook, either signed a deal, or is sending out false messages that they’ve been or are about to be acquired (which is unlikely given Allen & Co.’s involvement). If misinformation is the goal, we’ve bought it hook, line and sinker.”

Well, we’re not hearing voices and we are not a fish, but here is what is true, based on reporting today and our previous post on the Bebo rumors last week:

Bebo is in the midst of raising a large round of funding with Allen & Co. that values the company at upward of $1 billion. In the course of that, it has prepared a book of information about itself.

Some companies–News Corp., Yahoo, Microsoft, but NOT Google–have expressed interest in looking at the company as a whole, although they are all potential investors too.

The very innovative social-networking company certainly could be sold and sold quickly, and it has long been interested in that option, but is not averse to going it alone. But Bebo, which held a board meeting today, has not been sold and remains independent.

If the company did go in this direction, any good guesser could assume News Corp., Yahoo and Microsoft are the best bets (again, Google would be a long shot). I suppose CBS and Viacom could also be included, but that’s a lot for Sumner Redstone, owner of both companies, to fork over.

And, in any case, Yahoo, Microsoft and News Corp. are probably now too embroiled in the wrangling over the fate of Yahoo to focus on Bebo. To recap, Microsoft made a $31-per-share unsolicited bid for Yahoo. Yahoo rejected it. Microsoft vowed to fight on.

News Corp., owner of Dow Jones and this site, which said it was not likely to enter the fray last week, appears to have changed its tune this week. It is reportedly formulating what sounds like a devilishly complex deal related to its MySpace property that seems most likely to drive Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer into a rage (not a long drive!).

While Bebo’s fate remains the same for now, here’s something I can upgrade into a near certainty: Yahoo is going to get sold.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.