It’s certainly acquisition fever in Silicon Valley today.

After it was announced that that social networking giant Facebook had bought online content sharing start-up FriendFeed, now comes the news that VMware has purchased SpringSource, a privately held enterprise and Web application development and management cloud computing start-up.

The price? That would be $420 million in cash and stock.

While the blogosphere–including BoomTown–will inevitably find the FaceFeed deal more riveting, this one is obviously more important.

With the purchase of San Mateo, Ca.-based SpringSource, Palo Alto, Calif.-based, VMware–which is a top player in the virtualization space–is adding to its cloud-computing application-management strength and its ties to the open-source community.

Said VMware in a press release about the five-year-old SpringSource buy:

“VMware will acquire SpringSource for approximately $362 million in cash and equity plus the assumption of approximately $58 million of unvested stock and options. The acquisition has been approved by SpringSource’s stockholders and is expected to close in the third quarter of 2009, subject to customary closing conditions.”

Here’s the full press release from VMware (plus, here is a link to a blog post by SpringSource CEO Rod Johnson:

VMware to Acquire SpringSource

Company Adds Modern Application Platform to Cloud Infrastructure Strategy

PALO ALTO, Calif., August 10, 2009–VMware, Inc., (NYSE: VMW), the global leader in virtualization solutions from the desktop through the datacenter and to the cloud, today announced a major step forward in its journey to help simplify IT by entering into a definitive agreement to acquire privately held SpringSource, a leader in enterprise and web application development and management. VMware and SpringSource plan to deliver compelling new solutions that enable companies to more efficiently build, run and manage applications within both internal and external cloud architectures.

“Today’s modern computing environments are moving to an application and data-centric world powered by state of the art virtualized and cloud computing platforms,” said Paul Maritz, president and chief executive officer, VMware. “The combination of SpringSource and VMware capitalizes on this shift and places us right at the intersection of the most important forces in the software market today–virtualization, modern application frameworks and cloud computing.”

VMware will acquire SpringSource for approximately $362 million in cash and equity plus the assumption of approximately $58 million of unvested stock and options. The acquisition has been approved by SpringSource’s stockholders and is expected to close in the third quarter of 2009, subject to customary closing conditions.

SpringSource is the innovator and driving force behind some of the most popular and fastest growing open source developer communities, application frameworks, runtimes, and management tools. In just five years, SpringSource has established a presence in a majority of the Global 2000 companies, and is rapidly delivering a new generation of commercial products and services. VMware plans to continue to support the principles that have made SpringSource solutions popular: the interoperability of SpringSource software with a wide variety of middleware software, and the open source model that is important to the developer community.

Together, VMware and SpringSource plan to further innovate and develop integrated Platform as a Service (PaaS) solutions that can be hosted at customer datacenters or at cloud service providers. These solutions will allow customers to rapidly build new enterprise and web applications and run and manage these applications in the same dynamic, scalable and cost-efficient vSphere-based internal or external clouds that can also host and manage their existing applications, providing an evolutionary path to the future. Forrester Research expects the emerging and rapidly growing PaaS market to expand to $15B by 2016. (Platform-As-A-Service Market Sizing, July 13, 2009)

“VMware has led the modernization of datacenter infrastructures through innovative virtualization and cloud architectures, providing customers with cost savings, agility and choice,” said Rod Johnson, chief executive officer, SpringSource. “The SpringSource team and community are committed to revolutionizing the way companies build, run and manage applications. By combining forces, I’m confident that we’ll be able to deliver a set of truly remarkable solutions that dramatically simplify enterprise IT.”

Background on SpringSource

SpringSource is at the forefront of “lean software,” a concept that is being rapidly adopted by enterprises focused on dramatically cutting cost and complexity, increasing productivity, and accelerating the delivery of high-quality, business-critical applications. SpringSource’s offerings and their underlying open-source technologies are uniquely able to address a wide range of corporate, web and commercial applications through a dynamic, yet consistent architecture. SpringSource counts a majority of the Global 2000 as current customers, and has a rapidly growing business delivering support, training and commercial software based on the well-known open source technologies and communities led by SpringSource:

The Spring Framework is the leading enterprise Java programming model; currently supporting half of all enterprise Java projects and used by approximately two million developers worldwide. The Spring Framework provides a high productivity, lightweight programming environment that makes applications portable across open source and commercial application server environments from IBM, Oracle and others.

Apache Tomcat is the world’s most widely used Java application server, deployed at more than 60% of all organizations running Java server applications. SpringSource is the key contributor to and maintainer of Tomcat and is responsible for more than 95% of the bug fixes over the past two years.

SpringSource leads Groovy and Grails, a rapidly growing dynamic language and Web application framework, each with more than 70,000 downloads per month. Together, Groovy and Grails deliver the rapid application productivity of Ruby on Rails for web applications, while maintaining skill-set and infrastructure compatibility with Java Virtual Machine (JVM) environments.

With more than 3,500 deployments worldwide, SpringSource’s Hyperic application monitoring and management tools are recognized as among the leading open source offerings in the space. In March, SpringSource/Hyperic was named one of Gartner’s “Cool Vendors in Cloud Computing Management and Professional Services.”

Facebook said today it is acquiring FriendFeed, the online content-sharing site.

It is a logical fit for the huge social networking site, which has lagged behind microblogging kingpin Twitter in the real-time news, search and status game of perception in Silicon Valley.

Mountain View, Calif.-based FriendFeed has also trailed well behind Twitter, despite its top-notch pedigree of ex-Google (GOOG) staffers, such as Paul Buchheit and Bret Taylor. The other ex-Google co-founders of FriendFeed are Jim Norris and Sanjeev Singh.

Benchmark Capital and angel investors had put about $5 million into the start-up, which had been a darling among the digerati.

Despite that, the start-up only broke one million unique visitors recently, according to several reports, while San Francisco-based Twitter was reported to have upward of 44 million in June.

But FriendFeed will surely get a turbocharge from its Facebook ownership, especially as its technology is fed to its 250 million users.

While Facebook–which is based in Palo Alto, Calif.–has added some of the same functionality that FriendFeed has innovated into its famous News Feed, it will surely get its own boost from adding FriendFeed’s dozen employees, 11 of whom are engineers.

Terms were not disclosed, but the purchase price is likely well under the $500 million Facebook offered Twitter last fall.

In fact, sources estimate to me that the price was about $50 million in cash and stock for the company, which was founded in 2007.

It is also unclear what will happen to the standalone FriendFeed service in the long run, although Taylor said in an uber-cute blog post (see below) that it would remain intact for now.

This move, although prominently unmentioned by Facebook in its full press release below, is most certainly a shot across Twitter’s bow.

Here’s the official word from Facebook, as well as that blog post by FriendFeed’s Taylor about the acquisition:

Facebook Agrees to Acquire Sharing Service FriendFeed

PALO ALTO, CALIF.–August 10, 2009–Facebook today announced that it has agreed to acquire FriendFeed, the innovative service for sharing online. As part of the agreement, all FriendFeed employees will join Facebook and FriendFeed’s four founders will hold senior roles on Facebook’s engineering and product teams.

“Facebook and FriendFeed share a common vision of giving people tools to share and connect with their friends,” said Bret Taylor, a FriendFeed co-founder and, previously, the group product manager who launched Google Maps. “We can’t wait to join the team and bring many of the innovations we’ve developed at FriendFeed to Facebook’s 250 million users around the world.”

“As we spent time with Mark and his leadership team, we were impressed by the open, creative culture they’ve built and their desire to have us contribute to it,” said Paul Buchheit, another FriendFeed co-founder. Buchheit, the Google engineer behind Gmail and the originator of Google’s “Don’t be evil” motto, added, “It was immediately obvious to us how passionate Facebook’s engineers are about creating simple, ground-breaking ways for people to share, and we are extremely excited to join such a like-minded group.”

Taylor and Buchheit founded FriendFeed along with Jim Norris and Sanjeev Singh in October 2007 after all four played key roles at Google for products like Gmail and Google Maps. At FriendFeed, they’ve brought together a world-class team of engineers and designers.

“Since I first tried FriendFeed, I’ve admired their team for creating such a simple and elegant service for people to share information,” said Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook founder and CEO. “As this shows, our culture continues to make Facebook a place where the best engineers come to build things quickly that lots of people will use.”

FriendFeed is based in Mountain View, Calif. and has 12 employees. FriendFeed.com will continue to operate normally for the time being as the teams determine the longer term plans for the product.

Financial terms of the acquisition were not released.”

FriendFeed accepts Facebook friend request

We are happy to announce that Facebook has acquired FriendFeed. As my mom explained to me, when two companies love each other very much, they form a structured investment vehicle…

The FriendFeed team is extremely excited to become a part of the talented Facebook team. We’ve always been great admirers of Facebook, and our companies share a common vision. Now we have the opportunity to bring many of the innovations we’ve developed at FriendFeed to Facebook’s 250 million users around the world and to work alongside Facebook’s passionate engineers to create even more ways for you to easily share with your friends online.

What does this mean for my FriendFeed account?

FriendFeed.com will continue to operate normally for the time being. We’re still figuring out our longer-term plans for the product with the Facebook team. As usual, we will communicate openly about our plans as they develop–keep an eye on the FriendFeed News group for updates.

What about the FriendFeed API?

The FriendFeed API will also continue to operate normally. As above, we will let you know as we settle on our plan to more fully integrate with Facebook.

Check out the official press release for more information.

Yahoo reported so-so second-quarter earnings results today, with a decline in revenue, but with a slightly stronger-than-expected improvement in net income.

For the three months ended June 30, the Internet giant said it had revenue of $1.14 billion, excluding traffic-acquisition costs, down from $1.35 billion in the same period a year ago (click on the revenue chart to make it larger).

Profit was up eight percent, due to cost-cutting. The Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Yahoo said it earned $141.4 million, or 10 cents a share, in the quarter, compared to $131.2 million, or nine cents.

But that’s not really saying much since Wall Street analysts had such low expectations, estimating Yahoo would earn eight cents. But, with a weak online advertising market in a bad economy, it is also not that bad.

But Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Carol Bartz will take it for now, especially since the company still makes a lot of money, especially compared to the vast number of Silicon Valley competitors–leaving out Google (GOOG), of course.

Plus Yahoo has money to burn, with $4.2 billion in cash in the bank and marketable securities.

Here’s the Yahoo press release, minus the charts, some boring explanatory stuff and legalese (which can be found here in its entirety):

YAHOO! REPORTS SECOND QUARTER 2009 RESULTS

Company Exceeds Midpoint of Revenue Outlook Range Maintains Strong Balance Sheet with over $4 Billion in Cash and Marketable Debt Securities

SUNNYVALE, Calif., July 21, 2009–Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) today reported revenues of $1,573 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, a decrease of 13 percent from the second quarter of 2008. Excluding the impact of currency rate fluctuations, revenues for the second quarter of 2009 would have declined 8 percent from the second quarter of 2008.

Net income per diluted share for the second quarter of 2009 was $0.10, compared to $0.09 for the second quarter of 2008. Non-GAAP net income per diluted share for the second quarter of 2009 and 2008 was $0.16.

“I’m pleased with our results this past quarter. We established a clear, simple vision to be the center of people’s lives online, and we’re backing that vision with important initiatives to create ‘wow’ experiences for our users,” said Yahoo! chief executive officer Carol Bartz. “We’re confident that this vision will put us on the right path to growth and profitability long term. Our new homepage is a perfect example of our efforts to create innovative products aimed at increasing user engagement while offering the most compelling advertising proposition in the industry.”

“Even in this challenging economic environment, Yahoo! had a solid quarter, reflecting the strength of our offerings for our users and advertisers,” said Yahoo! chief financial officer Tim Morse. “Moving forward, our goal is to invest in the long-term health of the business so that we are positioned to capture the growth opportunities created by the economic recovery and the ongoing shift to online advertising.”

Revenues

* Total revenues were reduced by the effects of currency rate fluctuations, the sale of Kelkoo in late 2008 and lower fees revenues from voice-over IP services and subscription music offerings. Excluding the effects of these items, revenues would have declined 6 percent.

* Marketing services revenues declined 13 percent and fees revenues declined 8 percent, compared to the second quarter of 2008.

* Marketing services revenues from Owned and Operated sites were $858 million for the second quarter of 2009, a 16 percent decrease compared to $1,016 million for the same period of 2008. The decrease was driven by a 15 percent decline in search advertising revenue and a 14 percent decline in display advertising revenue.

* Marketing services revenues from Affiliate sites were $520 million for the second quarter of 2009, a 9 percent decrease compared to $571 million for the same period of 2008. The decrease was driven primarily by a shift to lower yielding inventory.

Cost Initiatives

During the second quarter of 2009, the Company recorded a $65 million net restructuring charge for real estate facilities exited, changes in sublease income estimates for previously exited facilities, write-off of property and equipment for exited facilities, and personnel severance and related costs offset by a reversal of stock-based compensation expense for forfeited awards. The Company is also continuing to implement non-headcount cost reductions.

Cash Flow and Cash Balance

* Cash flow from operating activities for the second quarter of 2009 was $342 million, a 20 percent decrease compared to $426 million for the same period of 2008.

* Free cash flow for the second quarter of 2009 was $266 million, a 15 percent increase compared to $231 million for the same period of 2008.

* Cash, cash equivalents and investments in marketable debt securities were $4,197 million at June 30, 2009 compared to $3,522 million at December 31, 2008, an increase of $675 million.

Business Outlook

GAAP revenue for the third quarter of 2009 is expected to be in the range of $1,450 million to $1,550 million. Non-GAAP operating income before depreciation, amortization, and stock-based compensation expense for the third quarter of 2009 is expected to be in the range of $330 million to $370 million. Income from operations for the third quarter of 2009 is expected to be in the range of $55 million to $65 million.

Well, despite the news being as bad at Microsoft as it was at Yahoo (YHOO) earlier this week, the conference call after the software giant released its third-quarter earnings was 100 percent less naughty and 200 percent more glum.

In other words, while there were no F-bombs dropped, there were lots of E-bombs–as in econalypse.

Microsoft’s earnings and revenue took a big hit in its third quarter, with profits down 32 percent from a year ago on a six percent sales decline.

It was the company’s first-ever year-over-year quarterly sales drop.

There were also more than $700 million in charges from layoffs and investment declines, both a result of the weak economy. The culprit for most of the bad news was the decline in consumer and business spending on computers.

And Microsoft CFO Chris Liddell did not even bother to act as if there was any hope, painting a semi-apocalyptic picture of the business landscape that he predicted was not going to get better anytime soon.

Here’s BoomTown’s liveblogging of the call:

2:34 p.m. PDT: The call starts after some very stern marshal music was played. This turns out to be the perfect mood-setter.

First up, the investor relations guy who talks about all the rules, like those folks who come on after, say, a Viagra commercial and quickly list the scary side effects.

But scary was what Liddell was serving up from the get-go, as he pretty much spent the entire conference call talking about just how bad the economy has been, is and will be.

What’s most disconcerting perhaps is the fact that he was delivering the bad news in a cute-as-a-kiwi New Zealand accent.

Nonetheless, Liddell said the company had had to “adapt to a new reality” and that Microsoft was “more cautious than most about the state of the world economy” and–let’s not forget–the “economic pressures are both broad and deep.”

Liddell also noted that the recovery will not happen quickly, but be “slow and gradual.”

Perhaps this is not the right time to mention that both Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL) essentially killed in their recent earnings reports.

2:38 p.m.: Microsoft’s investor relations head Bill Koefoed–without any jaunty inflection whatsoever–delivered the numbers in that droning way that all financial types who deliver numbers on calls like this do.

My assistant, Ed, actually fell into a temporary coma from across the room.

Basic message of numbers: Bad.

2:54 p.m.: Back to Liddell for some forward-looking stuff.

Also not good, with consumer sentiment and spending weak, he said, there would be “significant pressure until market conditions improve.”

“In summary, it was a tough quarter,” reiterated Liddell, restating what he already stated and stated again. And then restated.

2:59 p.m.: Now to questions! Maybe things will look up here.

But…nope!

Thus, more worries about Microsoft’s growth, a weakness in sales and even some clucking over renewal rates of its operating system software licenses.

Then someone noted that it seemed as if Microsoft at least had its “arms around” the problems.

Would Liddell show any glimmer of hope?

“I guess we are all learning… how do I feel about the shape of the quarter [to come]?” he pondered.

Wait for it, wait for it, wait for it. Said Liddell, the sad-sack CFO: “I do not see anything that gives me any encouragement.”

Big, big sigh.

3:16 p.m.: Someone asked about one remark Liddell made about some “countercyclical” products, which might be bright spots in the Microsoft empire.

Indeed, new versions of the Windows operating system, Office, Exchange and its search offering are all set to come out in the next year.

Will they be gamechangers? Liddell was not saying, of course.

Finally, at the end, after a question about stock repurchases, there was some light at the end of the tunnel.

No matter what, Microsoft is still a cash-spewing engine.

“One of the great positives,” said Liddell was the company’s free cash flow of $20 billion, at an annual rate.

In other words, there is nothing like money stuffed under the mattress in times like these.

About 10 days ago, BoomTown posted a piece titled, “With a King’s Ransom in Cash, Why Is There Still No Buying Spree in the Tech Space Yet?”

Noting the big cash hordes being held by a plethora of giant tech and Internet companies and their strong cash flows too, even in the midst of the economic meltdown–I wondered when the mergers and acquisitions would ever begin.

The answer is two-fold: No one wants to buy when prices could just keep going down. And no one wants to sell at all-time lows.

Another issue? While public companies have a market value, as low as they might be, noted a prominent Internet player, the bulk of tasty private ones no longer have a set price, since there have been no sales of late.

Well, that just won’t do! So, in the interest of jump-starting the economy–I mean, there are investment bankers out there running low on caviar and Dom, folks!–here are three suggestions for interesting deals.

IBM Buys Sun:

I mean someone has to buy Sun Microsystems (JAVA)–now hovering in the $5-a-share range with a market valuation of just $3.62 billon–right?

But it’s not going to be Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), despite a deal announced just yesterday in which HP will distribute and provide support for Sun’s Solaris operating system on a line of HP servers.

Analysts dismissed the deal as meaningless in terms of true revenue, with one noting that it did not mean HP would buy Sun either, especially for its server business, because of redundant hardware products.

That leaves, according to many observers I spoke to: IBM (IBM), which competes with Sun in the server business too. Many think the products fit better together, and IBM has a $115.3 billion valuation, so the purchase would be doable.

The server business is sucking wind, according to a report earlier this week, due to the global economy, so finding safe harbor for Sun is something Wall Street seems to be looking for.

Of course, Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz curiously did use the term “Live Free or Die” in his blog post about the HP deal yesterday–although he was not referring to Sun’s independence, but noting that the phrase was “synonymous with software independence, innovation and intellectual property freedom.”

Google Buys Twitter:

A lot has been written about the supposed “threat” of Twitter to all Web, media and communication companies in the known universe. (How we are all scared by a start-up whose name is so flighty is a question for another day.)

I am not so much convinced, although Twitter certainly is on a roll from a hype and growth perspective.

And I do understand why Twitter–flush with venture funding and an allegedly low burn rate–might want to bide its time to see what happens and not sell out too early.

But while the hot microblogging service declined to sell to Facebook, it might want to reconsider if Google (GOOG) or Microsoft (MSFT) or a big telecom company comes calling with, say, a $1 billion check.

Why? Simply because Twitter–while it says it is poised on the verge of announcing its grand plan to make money–is operating in an arena I have seen many other shooting stars in, traversing a very dangerous crevasse of hype and expectation.

Due to that, it has a very big red target on its back, one that a competitor in the status space–such as the spurned Facebook, whose update business is much bigger–will not ignore.

Right now, Twitter could ask for a lot, as one of the only Web 2.0 companies that everyone is uniformly excited about.

It might want to think about how such excitement can turn rather quickly. Digg–which was almost bought by Google–might give them some advice on how quickly the winds change, for example, as can many too many others.

Microsoft Buys Anyone:

With its $20.7 billion in cash and still casting about for a really bold Internet strategy–sources tell me that newly installed digital head Qi Lu just wrapped up a meeting-rich look-see at the path ahead, including a day-long session on Super Bowl Sunday–Microsoft really should stop futzing around with the PowerPoints and jump right in.

It already has an investment in Facebook. While the social-networking phenom might not be for sale, one wonders if a $10 billion offer and a promise of autonomy might not be well-considered at Facebook’s Palo Alto HQ.

Or what about the social-networking/communication assets of AOL and its low-margin advertising business, with owner Time Warner (TWX) keeping the media part of the unit? Rival Google actually wants to keep that AOL search business, so sticking it to that company would be an added bonus.

As to the continual flirting with Yahoo (YHOO), it is getting to be as annoying as Chuck Bass and Blair Waldorf’s persistently unconsummated roundelay on “Gossip Girl.”

But, of course, once again this week, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said he was interested (sort of, but not), while Yahoo’s CFO Blake Jorgensen said Yahoo was too (sort of, but not).

Said Ballmer at a strategy gathering: “They have share. We don’t have share. They have a huge team. We’ve got a much smaller team….I’m hoping that’s a reasonable conversation to have with new management at Yahoo.”

Said Jorgensen at an investor’s conference: “We’re not opposed to doing a deal…[but] it’s extremely difficult to draw a line down the middle of the organization and split it into two pieces.”

Aaaaaagghhhh!

Dear Steve: Yahoo is the only way Microsoft is ever going to gain the share it so covets, and it looks like new CEO Carol Bartz is at least showing that Yahoo does not have to be roadkill.

Dear Carol: Get while the getting is good because 20 percent is still pretty weak, compared to Google’s 70 percent, and competition is only going to get pricier.

And even though Ballmer could not resist and made a jibe at former CEO Jerry Yang–with whom he famously tangled in the botched acquisition attempts–noting “I don’t want to be known as the Jerry Yang of this market,” everyone knows these two crazy kids belong together.

So kiss, please, declare your undying affection and intent to stick it to Google, and pronto, so we can all move onto the next episode.

Even in the midst of the economic meltdown, consider these mega-billion-dollar cash hoards of big tech companies:

Microsoft (MSFT): $20.7 billion

Cisco (CSCO): $29.5 billion

Apple (AAPL): $25.6 billion

Intel (INTC): $11.8 billion

Oracle (ORCL): $10.6 billion

Hewlett-Packard (HPQ): $10.2 billion

Google (GOOG): $15.9 billion

Yahoo (YHOO): $3.5 billion

Of this moneybags list, Apple and Google have zero debt, with the others not having much at all to speak of. Better still, all typically generate a whole lot of cash flow quarterly, even in the downturn.

And since very few tech companies like to hand over dividends or buy back much stock–kind of a minor sacrilege in the space since it means they have no innovative new ideas to fund–BoomTown asked a big exec at one of these companies when the buying spree of both public and private companies might begin.

“Like everyone else, we are waiting for the bottom,” said the exec. “So who knows?”

Said another: “No one wants to buy when prices could just keep going down. The trick is to buy before the really great deals out there collapse.”

And, even as some tasty targets are suffering and might need a lifeline, none of them want to necessarily sell out at all-time lows either.

“We will start eating our toner and paper first,” joked one start-up exec, whose company is increasingly strapped for cash, even after a number of cost-cutting moves.

Interestingly, the only standout in the buying game has been Oracle, which has been in bargain-hunting mode, making 10 acquisitions for about $750 million in the last year, according to an article in The Wall Street Journal today.

While this amount is small potatoes to Oracle, which has typically been known for doing huge merger and acquisition deals, it is still some activity in a decidedly inactive space.

Oracle has especially focused on private firms, as the private-equity investing and venture capital has dried up and IPOs are an impossible dream.

And while another well-known M&A addict, Cisco, has recently issued $4 billion in debt to fund more purchases, and Microsoft execs have noted recently that it is a buyer’s market, it seems Oracle CEO Larry Ellison is the only one currently putting his big money where his big mouth is.

So, when do you think tech companies should commence to gobbling too?

BoomTown was a squeaky enough wheel to get Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang to grant a long interview by phone yesterday–just a day after he had announced weak third-quarter earnings results for the Internet giant, caught as others are in the econalypse, as well as layoffs of at least 10 percent of its global workforce.

But instead of being glum, as you might expect, especially after a year of corporate turmoil that would have finally gotten to even Job–let’s review: management upheaval, a Microsoft (MSFT) takeover battle, an attack by billionaire shareholder activist Carl Icahn, tangling with the Justice Department over a pending Google (GOOG) search advertising partnership and more!–Yang sounded surprisingly confident that Yahoo (YHOO) would emerge a winner after all the wrenching change is wrought at the company he co-founded.

I split the interview into two parts (here is the first post on Yahoo’s financial performance, the impact of the bad economy and the layoffs).

Here is the second part, in which Yang talks about acquisition opportunities, although no comment on his talks with Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL; his relationship with Icahn, who now holds a Yahoo board seat; the status of the controversial Google deal; his take on Microsoft; and, most importantly, why he is still the right person to lead Yahoo.

BT: What about acquisitions? Everyone knows you are talking to AOL, but what else are you thinking about here?:

Yang: I am not going to comment specifically on AOL.

We have not bought back stock. Right now our stock is very cheap, but we think having our cash position is more important. We are very focused on scaling, and it is important to be able to be in a financial position to do so if opportunities come up.

BT: And how is your relationship with Carl Icahn going?:

Yang: Carl is fine and he has got a lot on his plate as well. But he has been a very useful person to have on the board and, of course, it is a different role for him than before. For the most part, he is very constructive, but he is still Carl and he doesn’t hesitate to share what’s on his mind.

BT: What is the status of the talks with the Justice Department over your search ad deal with Google?:

I don’t have a lot of new things to say. We’re still talking, as I have said, and hope to get things resolved. We have not started it, but no one has walked away.

BT: What about your relationship with Microsoft; what did you think of CEO Steve Ballmer’s comment last week about doing a search deal?:

Yang: I don’t have anything new to report there either. As we have always said, we are willing to listen to them, to talk to them about anything.

BT: You have been attacked a lot recently for not selling Yahoo to Microsoft, Yahoo’s low stock price and your management of the company–why do you think you are the best leader for Yahoo going forward?:

Yang: I think if you look at what the company is doing and what we have been going through and the story we have been telling, we have done most, if not all, of what we set out to do, starting last year.

And, in this uncertain environment, I think I am absolutely the right person. Times like this require a leader who really understands this company and its customers, and I think I do. The world is a different place today than even a month ago and I think I am the best person to guide Yahoo through this volatile time.

So why hasn’t Microsoft (MSFT) raised the $31-a-share price of the bid it has made for Yahoo (YHOO) yet?

I have been pondering this question recently, as the Yahoo- Microsoft deal sits in limbo, awaiting the results of Yahoo’s earnings next week and the progress of “authorized” talks between the pair.

One might call it a moment of calm before what could be a very nasty storm, if the situation moves onto a proxy fight. But if I had to bet now, while I am assuming it won’t drop the price, I also don’t think Microsoft needs to up the ante at this point.

Why?

First, while AOL sources tell me they thought it was a done deal last week, which the company apparently expected to be approved at Yahoo’s board meeting, even if Yahoo does agree to buy the Time Warner (TWX) unit, I expect Microsoft to wage a proxy fight even–especially!–in the event of a Yahoo-AOL union.

And I don’t think that even if the results of Yahoo’s two-week search-ad deal with Google (GOOG) are spectacular–here’s a good bet: They are sure to be–it will not necessarily open the software giant’s wallet more.

With Google’s dominance of the search market, I am not too sure Microsoft–as deeply and weirdly paranoid as its execs are of Google–thinks it will be too tough to mire, if not scuttle, such a partnership in a deep regulatory morass.

A better scenario? Microsoft should wait until the last possible moment and then convert the deal to all-cash, which would keep the price at $31 a share in real terms, since the current bid’s value has been depressed by Microsoft’s lagging stock price.

After all, didn’t Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang say that’s one of things he wanted in his most recent letter to Microsoft, after it threatened to go hostile.

Yang wrote: “To be clear, this includes a transaction with Microsoft if it represents a price that fully recognizes the value of Yahoo on a standalone basis and to Microsoft, is superior to our other alternatives, and provides certainty of value and certainty of closing.”

And cash does provide that certainty of value and certainty of closing–probably a smaller price for cash-gushing Microsoft to pay to end this more quickly.