BoomTown is assembling all the popcorn and treats at All Things Digital HQ for Yahoo’s first-quarter earnings call later today, looking forward to hearing what CEO Carol Bartz will say about how she is turning around the Internet giant.

It is actually the 99-day mark since Bartz took over in January, which means I might also invite the Yahoo sacred cows over for festive cupcakes too.

For the more serious-minded, there should be news about more cost-cutting, including the possibility of additional layoffs, as well as questions on Yahoo’s talks with Microsoft (MSFT) about a search and advertising partnership.

Frankly, I am most excited to see what pistol-packing remark Bartz will make to those listening in about the Silicon Valley icon and its prospects.

She has turned out to be the Midwestern version of Oscar Wilde of the Internet when waxing poetic on Yahoo (YHOO), including the classic: “This is not a company that needs to be pulled apart and left for the chickens.”

Although, truth be told, Wall Street is expecting more chicken scratch than feed today from Yahoo.

Analysts are expecting $1.2 billion in revenue and profit of eight cents a share for the quarter, which are significant declines on both counts due to the company’s lackluster online display ad business.

In these tough economic times, investors will be looking at the steepness of the declines for clue of performance, as well as what is to come. Any upside surprise will be a big deal.

Here is a simple cheat sheet: Bunny Hill steep good, Black Diamond steep bad!

The earnings press release will come out at 1:20 p.m. PDT, after the market is closed, while the call starts at 2 p.m.

You can tune in here at Yahoo’s investor relations site if you want to listen to the call, as well as get the press release, but BoomTown will be liveblogging so you don’t have to!

Here’s an interesting irony–Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz will have her 99th day in office on the very one that the Internet giant will announce its first-quarter earnings: April 21, 2009 at 2 p.m. PST.

Technically, it will mean that she has been running Yahoo (YHOO) for 100 days, a time when most administrations get their first evaluation.

Thus, if it’s good enough for President Obama, it’s good enough for Bartz!

While most expect the results for the quarter to be weak, due to the econalypse, the overall verdict from BoomTown’s needling of Yahoos to give me info on their new leader recently: Love, love, love Bartz’s innate decisiveness, and wanting more of the same.

“She has an opinion and she is not afraid to use it,” joked one high-ranking Yahoo. “That is a big deal for a lot of people here who have wanted a CEO who is very forceful.”

And the only substantive negative: Some remain worried about her lack of Internet savvy, although most of those admit she has been a quick learner as the 100-day mark comes to a close.

In Yahoo’s case, 100 days has a special meaning–when he got his job in late 2007, former Yahoo CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang declared that he was going to give the troubled company a 100-day evaluation with “no sacred cows.”

The Yang-farmed bovines, as it turned out, just got fatter.

Under Bartz, more have been under the knife, as the hard-charging exec has started to really put her imprint on the company.

She has certainly talked tough since the meet-the-press conference on her very first day on Jan. 13.

Some memorable Bartz quotes were about Yahoo’s immediate needs, in her estimation: “some friggin’ breathing room” and “frankly, [the company] could use a little management.”

That kind of tough-lady, Annie-Get-Your-Gun quote-making has been Bartz’s signature, whether it be in folksy Friday memos she has sent out to staff or at the fourth-quarter earnings call in late January, only weeks into her tenure, when she declared:

“This is not a company that needs to be pulled apart and left for the chickens.”

Well, except for the management structure, which Bartz pulled right apart and reshuffled six weeks in.

Cleaning up and simplifying the complex reporting structure in an all-roads-lead-to-Carol set-up and tossing out the CFO were main points of the reorganization. Many at Yahoo expect there to be even more cuts in staff sooner than later, many sources said.

And there have also been departures of key staff, including: PR head Jill Nash, Zimbra founder Satish Dharmaraj and soon, high-ranking techie Venkat Panchapakesan.

Yang too, although he remains on the board, has not been present as much at the company.

Curiously, though, except for the new CMO, Elisa Steele–whose office is powerfully located right next to Bartz, as many Yahoos noted to me–there have been no further appointments for open positions for CFO, a new Customer Advocacy top exec and a new international head. Presumably, they are on the way.

Not that Bartz has not been busy–visiting Yahoo staff and clients all over–as well as finally finding time for a face-to-face meeting with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in Silicon Valley recently.

Before the recent meetings, in a classic negotiating tactic, Bartz (pictured here) has projected a disinterested, poker-faced attitude about the situation, even telling Yahoo staff in one meeting “that she plans to spend a lot of time investigating whether to sell Yahoo’s search business, but that her ‘gut’ was not to do that.”

Well, a sale of Yahoo’s search business might not happen, Bartz was only buying a little time in being so confident and projecting the affect that Yahoo had some leverage and a choice.

But that is exactly what she does not really have, given that Yahoo faces the prospect of spiraling costs to maintain a search share, even as it has a good chance of declining.

So, last week, the news–first reported here Friday–that Bartz was involved in preliminary talks with Microsoft (MSFT) about an extensive commercial advertising and search partnership–should have come as almost no surprise.

A re-engagement between the companies, after a bruising takeover battle that ended in tears all around, has been long hoped for by investors and other observers, given that both have struggled against the search behemoth that is Google (GOOG).

(Or, in a nickname that BoomTown is trying unsuccessfully to popularize: Googzilla.)

The talks–which are not about the software giant making another acquisition offer for Yahoo–are ongoing and might not lead anywhere, but it is in both sides’ interest to avoid that outcome.

“Yahoo has to do some kind of deal or Bartz will be facing a decline even she cannot manage,” said one person close to the situation. “And Microsoft, if it wants to compete in search, needs Yahoo’s share along with its own.”

Among the surprisingly innovative ideas being bandied about: Yahoo might take over all of Microsoft’s display and premium advertising business to sell along with its own, while Microsoft would run the search advertising business for the pair.

And, while the discussions could degenerate into chest-pounding and pointless jockeying, one assumes that Bartz gets the idea that Yahoo needs a lot of help–including from some rapprochement with Microsoft, from making its staff even leaner, from streamlining its product focus and from striking other significant partnerships.

Many inside and outside Yahoo certainly hope that spirit–and not the one from this video below of a fabulous scene of Betty Hutton and Howard Keel in the musical classic, “Annie Get Your Gun,” singing “Anything You Can Do”–prevails with Microsoft in the next 100 days.

Of course, that has nothing to do with the fact that most people think the Singleton speech was aimed at the search giant and its burgeoning power over the distribution of media, although Google was not named by him.

Still, it’s always nice to make nice. Sort of.

So, it was hard to resist translating this Google (GOOG) blog by one of its lawyers.

Google wrote: Some questions related to Google News and the Associated Press
Tuesday, April 7, 2009 at 8:03 AM
Posted by Alexander Macgillivray, Associate General Counsel for Products and Intellectual Property

Translation: Questions? Someone has questions about our practices? OK, we will answer them only to assuage the panic among the little brains about our size and power over IP.

But remember: They don’t call us Googzilla for nothing!

Google wrote: Yesterday I entered the following search in Google News: [Phish in mountain view]. The search results led me to click on this headline, which took me to the full story by the San Jose Mercury News about Phish’s upcoming concert at Shoreline Amphitheatre.

Translation: Hey, we might seem like geeks over here at the Googleplex, chomping on organic flax crackers and making up scary algorithms, but we know of this hip Phish phenom. We looked it up under “hip” on Google!

[Complete digression: BoomTown was in a car pool with the very sweet Trey Anastasio for many years in middle school, and he was not such a hipster then!]

Google wrote: Users like me are sent from different Google sites to newspaper websites at a rate of more than a billion clicks per month. These clicks go to news publishers large and small, domestic and international–day and night.

Translation: My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!

Google wrote: And once a reader is on the newspaper’s site, we work hard to help them earn revenue. Our AdSense program pays out millions of dollars to newspapers that place ads on their sites, and our goal is that our interest-based advertising technology will help newspapers make more from each click we send them by serving better, more relevant ads to their readers to generate higher returns.

Translation: Money makes the world go around,
the world go around, the world go around,
Money makes the world go around,
it makes the world go round.

A mark, a yen, a buck or a pound,
a buck or a pound, a buck or a pound,
Is all that makes the world go around,
that clinking clanking sound,
Can make the world go round.

Google wrote: The Associated Press (AP) recently issued a press release announcing plans to develop an initiative to “protect” the newspaper industry’s content online. Since then, some readers, users and journalists have asked us if the AP’s plan is about Google since we host complete AP articles. The answer is that it doesn’t appear to pertain to Google since we host those articles in partnership with the AP. We announced that partnership in 2007 as part of an experiment in hosting articles on our site. In hosting agreements such as this, we pay news agencies and display the entire text of articles, such as this one from the AP about President Obama’s visit to Turkey.

Translation: Ain’t nobody here but us chickens!

Hey, we pay up some! Not a lot! But some. I mean, YouTube doesn’t pay up and it has tons of content on the site that is not theirs.

Wait, we own YouTube. Forget that example.

Back to chickens. Nobody here!

Google wrote: We drive traffic and provide advertising in support of all business models–whether news sources choose to host their articles with us or on their own sites, and whether their business model is ad-supported or based on subscriptions. In all cases, for news articles we’ve crawled and indexed but do not host, we show users just enough to make them want to read more–the headline, a “snippet” of a line or two of text and a link back to to the news publisher’s website.

Translation: Hey, we only give consumers a little smackeral, in the lingo of the great Winnie the Pooh. Well, yes, that bear does always end up gobbling all the honey. Forget that example.

Back to chickens then, but chickens with an advertising-supported business model!

Google wrote: In the U.S., the doctrine of fair use enshrined in the US Copyright Act allows us to show snippets and links. The fair use doctrine protects transformative uses of content, such as indexing to make it easier to find [pdf]. Even though the Copyright Act does not grant a copyright owner a veto over such uses, it is our policy to allow any rightsholder, in this case newspaper or wire service, to remove their content from our index–all they have to do is ask us or implement simple technical standards such as robots.txt or metatags.

Translation: Oh yes, the fine print. Legal stuff–fair use, transformative, indexing. In other words, we’re covered, and 3,476 Washington lobbyists have our back.

But hey, here is some technical stuff and we’ll also take it out–all you have to do is ask, although it will effectively make you undiscoverable for all of time!

And, if you do then want us to take it out, comb through our gazillions of search results to find your stuff, over and over and over again, like gerbils on a treadmill. We totally hope that does not exhaust you in every way possible.

Google wrote: As for Phish in Mountain View this summer, asking will get you nowhere because the tickets are already sold out.

Translation: Also, for anyone keeping score, Phish owes us too, since no one would have found tickets without us. Google HQ is right smack up against Shoreline Amphitheatre, so we are watching.

So let’s review: Ozymandias, King of Kings. Chickens. Smackeral. Hip.

Nothing to see here, so please enjoy this lovely Phish video of “Bouncing Around the Room” from YouTube (relax, it’s from their official channel):

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

In Yahoo’s fourth-quarter earnings conference call earlier this week, new Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz went out of her way to ho-hum all over the possibility of a search deal with Microsoft.

She even went as far as to not even mention its name when she referred to the laggard third player in market share.

And Bartz also tried to make it seem as if a recent meeting between Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock–as well as Time Warner (TWX) CEO Jeff Bewkes, who presides over the AOL online service–was fiction. (It was not.)

Of course, it was all cooked up and well-rehearsed by Bartz, who knows how to play the expectations game as well as anyone else, especially as she endeavors to come up to speed on the various prospects for Yahoo going forward.

One person who has been close to the situation said it best: “Anyone would have said the same regardless of their true position at this point.”

Indeed.

Of course, BoomTown’s favorite–and obviously well thought out–line was in answer to an analyst’s question on shareholder value. No surprise: Bartz insisted Yahoo as a whole was, in fact, an unappreciated pearl before swine.

Actually, she used another barnyard metaphor, in the grand tradition of former CEO Jerry Yang’s “sacred cow” debacle.

“This is not a company that needs to be pulled apart and left for the chickens,” said Bartz, using a phrase she said was from her Wisconsin upbringing.

My guess is that the savvy and slick Bartz left that farm behind a long, long time ago and was again using the folksy straight talk in some serious gamesmanship with Microsoft (MSFT) and anyone else.

And perhaps Yahoo (YHOO) is truly not chicken scratch, although a lot of horse sense will be needed in the next few months to make that so.

(No, I could not resist.)

And, employing a video I love, if Bartz ever does succumb to the charms of Microsoft, here’s what the pair might hope that flock of attack poultry would peck at next:

Oh, a nice tiny surprise from Yahoo, as it reported its fourth-quarter results, which came in at 17 cents a share in adjusted earnings, compared to the 12 to 13 cents Wall Street was expecting.

“Despite the challenging economic environment, Yahoo! delivered adjusted operating cash flow above the midpoint of guidance for the fourth quarter,” said new Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz in the company’s official release. “The company also made important investments while aggressively managing costs, leaving us better positioned to weather the economic downturn and emerge stronger when advertiser spending improves. We have work to do, but I am excited by Yahoo!’s opportunities, and encouraged by the tremendous innovation and momentum I’ve seen since joining the company as CEO.”

But let’s experience Bartz Live and Unplugged at the fourth-quarter earnings conference call, including a Q&A in which–the company’s intro speaker noted at the top of the call–former Yahoo (YHOO) CEO and Co-Founder Jerry Yang might make an unexpected cameo appearance.

(He didn’t.)

2:08 p.m. PST:

It’s Carol’s show obviously, coming on first and foremost, with a little joke, after hearing all the typical caveats that must be uttered by Yahoo’s investor relations folks before the call begins.

“I should have understood all those risks before I took this job,” she chuckled.

Now that’s the understatement of the year!

Noting she has been on the job only eight days, meeting and greeting the folks of Yahoo, Bartz said she was impressed by the energy and “can-do” spirit of the company, noting that the product pipeline was fantastic.

Of course, products have never been the problem at Yahoo, as many have noted (including BoomTown many, many times). Execution has been the devil in the details!

Bartz obviously got this, but was not going to insult former management this time, as she did in her debut public conference with the press and analysts.

Right after she was hired in mid-January, Bartz noted that Yahoo and its assets, “frankly, could use a little management.”

But it is probably not a good idea to say that again with thus-far silent Jerry Yang sitting right next to her.

2:09 p.m. PST

A tiny bit of kissing up to Bartz by CFO Blake Jorgensen, who started to go over the numbers in great detail, putting the best face on a weakish performance overall, especially compared to previous years.

At the end, he said that Yahoo had performed well in 2008, considering the poor economy, and added guidance going forward was not great either, especially compared to a year ago.

Also, he warned Wall Street not to expect too much guidance for 2009, as Microsoft had also said last week in its own depressing earnings call.

2:20 p.m PST:

Back to can-do Carol Bartz, who began by pointing to all the various assets that Yahoo has–including its Build Your Own Search Service (BOSS) product and Yahoo News–all of which are strong products for advertisers, she said.

But Bartz also finally made the point that execution needs to improve, which she said was “addressable.”

Before the Q&A started, she answered some questions about the company she asked herself, before they could be asked by others. Apparently, now that Bartz is an “insider,” she knows better than anyone else!

Did she come to Yahoo to sell it? “No.”

Will she sell search? Bartz does not know yet, but noted “search is a very valuable part of [Yahoo's] business.”

She added that Yahoo search market share was three times the size of the third player, which Bartz curiously did not name, but which is–of course!–Microsoft–which wants very much to buy Yahoo’s search business.

Uh-oh, Microsoft (MSFT) CEO Steve Ballmer might not get his way so quickly!

2:26 p.m. PST:

The first question was about selling the company.

“I did not come to Yahoo to sell the company,” said Bartz again. “It’s too early to say more than that.”

The second question was about reports–in this column too!–about talks with Microsoft and Time Warner (TWX) unit AOL recently.

Bartz said Yahoo does not comment on reports that “come from nowhere.”

Sorry to disagree, but they did come from somewhere and were very well-sourced–just like the absolutely on-target post this column did of Bartz’s pending CEOship at Yahoo, before it was officially announced. But let’s just try to ignore that slight and move on–unless, of course, Bartz keeps up with what has become regular blog-bashing, which means a testy war of words and copious leaked memos to come!

The third question was about the management. Bartz said she plans on getting the lines of communication clearer, which she said she was really good at.

Kissing up to herself was a nice touch.

2:33 p.m. PST:

Next came a question about international business–which is the least of Yahoo’s worries, no matter what its execs say about the great products.

The next question was about guidance. No guidance, folks!

Now, one on the display business, with questions about the pressure on prices and on premium online advertising, which is Yahoo’s top business.

Jorgensen said Yahoo is trying to help advertisers, but that there has been and will continue to be a slowdown in advertising, due to the recession.

More on outlook, cost-cutting, etc. Jorgensen: More caution. Hey, analysts, we’re in a recession and I am not so sure how many ways he can say that.

So far, no Jerry Yang, which was starting to seem odd, since that Yahoo minion said he might be chatting away too.

But, as I said, it seems to be Carol’s show, which has been highly entertaining so far in her tenure, although she’d probably scowl at me sternly for saying that and pull out that cheap trick of insulting the press again.

Next up was a question to about various foreign assets and investments. Bartz will look into it! Jorgensen got in a good joke about her priority not being foreign tax issues.

The following question was about product innovation aimed at a younger demographic.

Bartz was on top of that too, pointing out that she has kids in their 20s.

First, she noted children do grow up, and that they will start to use Yahoo products like its finance offerings, as they move into the workforce and have less time to post dopey pictures on Facebook and throw digital sheep.

Also, young people are finicky, she added. They jumped from MySpace to Facebook, after all!

“Who knows what’s going to come next?,” she said, sounding like a typically exasperated parent. In other words, Yahoo will grab them when they grow up and prefer to be more dull!

2:43 p.m. PST:

The next question was about the timing of changes to come, which prompted Bartz to make another joke about buying the New York Times tomorrow! She was kidding, because the analyst asking the question suggested the troubled Yahoo buy the troubled media company in a recent report.

But, seriously folks, Bartz reiterated: “Gimme some time.”

Next, someone asked about the advertising sales force at Yahoo, which is a good question. Bartz is headed to a sales force meeting in a few weeks, she said, wherein she plans to have a beer with them and find out (once they are drunk and presumably easy to get blabbing).

Still, no Jerry Yang! Sigh. I suddenly desperately miss him and his lower-case ways.

The next question was on shareholder value, which has not been very valuable of late. Bartz noted that everything is on the table related to Yahoo’s businesses, but underscored how valuable the property is as a whole.

“This is not a company that needs to be pulled apart and left for the chickens,” said Bartz.

Apparently, this folksy little saying is from her Wisconsin upbringing. Scary poultry metaphor alert!

Bartz is asked about top assets at Yahoo.

She once again noted that Yahoo’s great products will save the day, from customization to integration of assets. “If we have strong products, we will attract the audience that just beats everything,” said Bartz.

A question about search and display being together, which is a sneaky way to ask about Microsoft, since that’s the great debate within Yahoo over whether to do a deal to outsource it or not.

Bartz made a confusing house metaphor, with search being the house, but it is completely lost on me. Is search the house or a living room or what?

“Whether we keep it or sell it, it’s an important asset,” Bartz then said, which was a clever way of saying exactly nothing.

2:55 p.m. PST:

A question on Yahoo brand, which Bartz basically said is about being the place people come every day. But she admitted there was too much complexity to that brand, although products are strong!

Next, someone asked a question about relevancy of Yahoo. “Our users don’t need constant change,” noted Bartz, who has a decent point about the jumpy nature of Web 2.0’s change-for-change’s-sake mantra.

Still–let’s be honest–Yahoo’s missed a key trend or two in recent years.

Next up was a question about ad prices and another on cost cuts. Jorgensen said that it’ll be more about efficiencies and perhaps some more outsourcing.

Bartz thanked the group for not being “too pushy” in their questions, which was an odd end note, since pushy should be the main job of analysts.

In fact, after listening to the call, I hope that Wall Street keeps up the pushy factor, as investors deserve a lot more answers from Bartz and Yahoo going forward.

It is not, as Bartz insisted in the conference call, a case of inside and outside perceptions being different. Yahoo does have strong products, but it still has gotten itself into its current mess all by itself, much of which has little to do with the weak economy.

That’s why I plan on being very pushy, asking about everything from what structural changes Bartz plans to make to how she envisions Yahoo’s business going forward to improving morale on a sustained basis to what she thinks she can do to make Yahoo the strongest it can be when the economy comes out of the recession.

And, not to get pushy or anything, but what happened to some words from the promised Jerry Yang?

Perhaps he fell victim to the vicious chickens of Wisconsin.

[Dear Yahoos: To get on board the Can-Do Carol Bartz Express, you can buy the "Yes We Can" t-shirt at Zazzle.com for just $23.40!]

Maybe it would be easier to sell Facebook to Microsoft for billions and billions, even though it is not likely you will.

But, for the sake of argument, let’s take the opposing position about the best future for the hot social-networking site.

In other words, make a friendly Microsoft takeover of Facebook your own version of an IPO, as John Furrier has suggested here, and walk away a Silicon Valley legend.

Because such a sale to Microsoft could happen, you know, with or even without you.

Here’s one scenario to think about while on your current worldwide “Vision Quest” trip:

Microsoft (MSFT) somehow screws up its courage again after the Yahoo (YHOO) rejection and makes a concrete offer anywhere above $10 billion for Facebook. And it gets on the record, as it must, at your next board meeting.

Say you refuse, as you have the power to do (and have done before) as founder, due to the voting structure.

But minority shareholders find out (they always do), then some employees and, inevitably, the press.

Mayhem will surely ensue.

Sure, they all stuck with you when you turned down previous offers for Facebook at more than $1 billion from Yahoo, $5 billion from Microsoft, sniffs in that range from Google (GOOG).

That was definitely gutsy for you to do, in your first job and in your early 20s.

But $10 billion, when you have not yet proven you have a truly sustainable and explosive business model of the kind Google luckily found before its IPO?

And what if the Microsoft offer was $15 billion? $20 billion?

BoomTown will tell you exactly what:

Possible lawsuits–ask any good corporate governance lawyer about it–from any number of aggrieved minority investors for not grabbing the Willy Wonka-esque golden ticket when it was offered to you.

Growing pressure from the media–which you are, to be certain, very good at completely ignoring–asking incessantly whether you have just made too big a bet this time.

And, most importantly, from your own employees, the growing worry that even you, especially in a weak economy, cannot spin up a shinier IPO than the money Microsoft is offering you. Stayers can turn into sellers very quickly.

You need to be prepared, BoomTown speculates, for this very possibility and need to have answers when and if the time comes.

That requires asking some questions, which I am guessing a smart young man like you is already asking of yourself.

Such as: At what price should I consider a Microsoft buyout? Could Facebook still be run independently? And, if not, how long would I have to stay at a Microsoft-owned Facebook?

Most importantly, how many other entrepreneurs like me have refused the big buyout and done better?

(The list is long and varied–some like Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin refused and won, but others like former Netscaper Marc Andreessen did not and also did just fine.)

You’re lucky for now, of course, because Microsoft’s CEO Steve Ballmer will likely not make a definitive offer after the Yahoo debacle, without knowing you are firmly on board to at least consider it with a friendly frame of mind.

And, I am guessing, you won’t dangle a price to Microsoft either.

Thus, a chicken and an egg conundrum. Which comes first?

BoomTown is also guessing the bankers are working hard at solving this ancient philosophical causality dilemma–in this case, who can and should move first?

But no matter how much they huff and puff–expensively, of course–the only one who can solve this puzzle is you, at least at this juncture.

And that requires just one basic question for which you need to have an answer ready: Do you truly believe you can do better?

Well, do you?

Furrier thinks not: “Risk losing it all in competitive warfare where you’re undermatched and overgunned. … It’s about basic risk management.”

Of course, all BoomTown can offer to say is this: There is absolutely nothing basic about it.

And, for your viewing pleasure, there is also nothing basic about this delightful man lip-synching to the classic movie “Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory” ditty, “I’ve Got a Golden Ticket” (along with the real clip from movie below it):