In the ongoing game of musical chairs among top managers at Internet companies, former Yahoo exec Brad Garlinghouse–famous for his controversial “Peanut Butter Manifesto,” which correctly chided the Internet giant for becoming so lugubrious several years ago–is taking a job at AOL very similar to the one he left at Yahoo last year.

Garlinghouse, 38, has been named president of Internet and mobile communications at AOL, putting him in charge of the New York-based Time Warner (TWX) online unit’s powerful email and instant-messaging properties, including ICQ and AIM.

He has only been in talks with AOL–which used Spencer Stuart’s Internet-top-exec-finder-in-chief Jim Citrin–for a few weeks, in a deal that came together quickly, he and the company said.

Garlinghouse, a longtime Web entrepreneur and exec, had reportedly been considering a number of start-up and venture-related jobs since he left Yahoo last summer after six years there.

Sources said he was seriously considering becoming the CEO of a mobile firm.

He was most recently at Silver Lake Partners, as an “in-house senior advisor,” the private equity firm that recently bought the Skype Internet telephony firm for $1.9 billion. Garlinghouse also reportedly helped work on that deal.

“It’s really exciting to be to able to rebuild and revitalize an industry giant,” said Garlinghouse in an interview with BoomTown earlier today. “I make no bones that these [properties] are in need of that…but there is also a huge opportunity to do something cool.”

Garlinghouse has to hurry. Despite being among the top communications players online–a group that also includes Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT) and, more recently, Google (GOOG)–AOL has lost relevance with key audiences, even as social networking properties like Facebook and the microblogging service, Twitter, have innovated in the communications space.

The hiring of Garlinghouse, well known in Silicon Valley circles, is meant to counter that.

He will head up AOL’s operations from its Mountain View, Calif., campus–which is also the former HQ of AOL-acquired Netscape Communications–where, said AOL CEO Tim Armstrong, Garlinghouse will “be CEO of Silicon Valley for us.”

Between all its various properties, AOL has several hundred employees in the Northern California area.

Armstrong said AOL–which was founded 25 years ago on the East Coast and has tried and failed many times to get a true foothold in the West–thinks having an important player at the center of the tech industry is critical as it moves to spin off as an independent company by the end of the year.

“We have a triple play in getting a great executive, who is a master in the communications on the Web and who is well known out there,” said Armstrong. “Brad is our senior AOL manager there.”

Along with running all of AOL’s communications properties, Garlinghouse will inherit some of its community properties, although AOL’s Bebo social networking unit–now considered to be an overpriced acquisition error–now resides in its ventures unit, headed by Jon Brod.

Garlinghouse will also be aiding Brod, said Armstrong, with AOL on the lookout for acquisition opportunities in communications and other arenas.

While Garlinghouse declined to be specific about what would pique his buying interest, he was responsible for such big Yahoo deals as its $350 million purchase of Zimbra in the fall of 2007.

He was also key to bringing both Oddpost, which is at the heart of Yahoo’s email offering, and the popular Flickr photosharing service to Yahoo.

Garlinghouse said he has admired what Twitter and Facebook have done, but that they were not destroying traditional online communications, pioneered by AOL, as some assert.

“It’s a vibrant segment and this just means there are a lot of opportunities to enable integration,” he said. “I think of it as an expansion of online communications and I hope AOL can do more collaboration and partnerships.”

Garlinghouse also has to watch AOL’s basic products like email, which was recently passed by Google’s Gmail as the No. 3 email service in the U.S. Yahoo Mail is the top email, while Microsoft’s Hotmail is second.

How much Garlinghouse can do will depend on the future financial strength of AOL. Its advertising business has been hit hard in the econalpyse, with hopes it will return before its money-generating access business continues its slow decline.

Armstrong is now in the midst of looking over AOL’s cost structure and employee base, which most expect will eventually result in another round of layoffs and cuts.

He has been busy creating a different strategy for the company since he arrived earlier this year, as well as hiring (and firing) top execs to create a new management structure.

Now, that includes Garlinghouse.

So, for a look-see at AOL’s latest talent acquisition, here’s a video interview I did with him, just after Yahoo bought Zimbra:

And here’s the full press release from AOL about the hiring of Garlinghouse:

AOL NAMES BRAD GARLINGHOUSE AS PRESIDENT, INTERNET AND MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS

NEW YORK, N.Y.–September 8, 2009–AOL today named Brad Garlinghouse as President of Internet and Mobile Communications, spearheading AOL’s global efforts to expand the reach of its e-mail and instant messaging. Garlinghouse will also take on an expanded leadership position for the company, heading up AOL’s Silicon Valley operations from its Mountain View campus and serving as the West Coast lead for AOL Ventures, the company’s venture capital arm headed globally by Jon Brod. Garlinghouse was most recently at Silver Lake Partners as an in-house Senior Advisor.

Prior to Silver Lake, Garlinghouse spent nearly six years at Yahoo!, where he led that company’s communications and community products. Garlinghouse will report directly to AOL’s Chairman and CEO Tim Armstrong.

” Brad Garlinghouse is an all-star in the Internet industry with an unparalleled background and proven track record, having led Yahoo’s communications products to unprecedented growth,” said Armstrong. “In addition to leading our efforts to grow our communications products, Brad will be bringing his global leadership and business experience as a key member of our company’s executive leadership team. He will also be a major force for AOL in Silicon Valley, working to expand our presence there and in the tech community in general. We’re delighted to have Brad on board and know he’ll do great things for AOL.”

“It’s a tremendous opportunity to join AOL at this pivotal moment in its history,” Garlinghouse said. “Tim has set out a clear strategy and vision for where he is taking this company as it becomes independent again. I’m looking forward to working with him and the rest of the team to realize that vision.”

Armstrong, who joined AOL in April, identified Communications as one of the five key areas of strategic focus for AOL after an extensive 100-day review of the company’s business. Other focus areas include Content, Advertising, Local & Mapping and AOL Ventures.

Garlinghouse spent nearly six years at Yahoo! where he most recently served as SVP of Communications and Communities. Prior to that he served as SVP of Communications, Communities and Front Doors, which included the Yahoo! home page. He came to Yahoo in 2003 as VP, Communication Products. During his time there, Yahoo! Mail went from No. 3 to leading all competitors by a wide margin, and the company’s instant messaging service rose to become the leader in that market as well. Garlinghouse also oversaw the company’s Flickr photo-sharing service and Yahoo! Groups.

Prior to Yahoo!, Garlinghouse was CEO of Dialpad.com Inc., responsible for all aspects of the company’s operations, finance, sales and marketing. He was also General Partner at @Ventures, Category Manager of Media Development for the @Home Network, Inc., and Manager at SBC Communications.

Garlinghouse, 38, received his BA in economics from the University of Kansas and his MBA from Harvard Business School.

In a risky but interesting move that has some at the company nervous and others excited, Yahoo is in the process of moving key development responsibility for its juggernaut Yahoo News unit to Taiwan.

Under the new system, product management, engineering and user interface design for the powerful Yahoo (YHOO) property will become the responsibility of staffers there.

Editorial employees for Yahoo News–which is the No. 1 news site on the Web with 48.4 unique monthly visitors, according to comScore data (SCOR)–will remain in the U.S., largely located at its Santa Monica, Calif., office.

Sources had alerted BoomTown to the change at Yahoo’s flagship content offering this week and many I spoke to about it were deeply worried about further separating key functions in the creation of Yahoo News.

“We are losing more and more of our ability to make quick changes and react to new technologies, which has worked pretty well so far, since we are #1,” said one staffer. “First, we all worked together across a room, then hundreds of miles away and now it is thousands.”

Previously, as was first reported here in February, the distributed and regional method of developing content was shifted to a central global product development organization, with product management, engineering and UI design centered at Yahoo’s Sunnyvale, Calif., HQ under CTO Ari Balogh.

The argument for the shift posits that centralizing the product development of a Yahoo media offering drives efficiencies, saves money, eliminates redundancies and accelerates growth across the world.

Those who do not like the idea think it is wrong to separate the development of a product from the programming because the two are intricately dependent and need to be tweaked delicately.

In addition, they argue, it makes Yahoo media offerings, which have been largely successful, less unique and more dull.

Well, tough tomatoes, because Yahoo confirmed the transition to me when I inquired about it. It was announced internally several weeks ago.

In an interview I did yesterday afternoon with Jeff Kinder, SVP of media products and solutions, who is spearheading the change, he said it was key that Yahoo News streamline how it makes its products in order to be more innovative and responsive on a global basis.

Before the shift to a global system, he pointed out that Yahoo had 26 different news products worldwide, using nine content management systems.

“This is part of building a global media platform,” said Kinder, who leads development of Yahoo’s anchor media properties, as well as its listings and regional products around the world.

Kinder said the staff in Taiwan was selected to take on Yahoo News because it had been creating top-level news products and was passionate about the arena.

Nonetheless, similar functions for other major Yahoo content categories–Sports, Finance and Entertainment–will remain in the United States.

In addition, he noted, with employees in Taiwan taking over these functions at Yahoo News, it would “free up some of the talent” in Silicon Valley to work on other critical content projects.

Kinder dismissed worries about any logjams in the ability of U.S.-based Yahoo News staffers to make changes to offerings, either for consumers or advertising partners, noting there were weekly calls between the teams and plenty of ways to communicate online.

But those worried about the change said the reason for the move was more to cut costs in the content arena, which–like many parts of Yahoo–has undergone layoffs and expense reductions.

Countered Kinder: “We are all driving to the same goal….This is not about cost savings, but about accelerating change and leveraging a global team.”

After a while–in a BoomTown mangling of the old cliché–if you are a nail, everything begins to look like a hammer.

So, it is probably inevitable that the next thing for much-beleaguered AOL staffers to start rumbling about is 2,000 people getting laid off next week, as was reported earlier this week by Silicon Alley Insider.

After all, the Time Warner (TWX) unit has a long history of whacking employees. So, it is easier to assume things will not be different under the regime of the latest CEO Tim Armstrong.

Except it’s not actually true that such massive cuts are in the offing, since–as many sources I spoke to said–Armstrong is only in the early part of figuring out what to do about the cost structure of AOL, after laying out a company strategy and rejiggering management recently.

While the end result of the cost-to-benefit analysis might, in all likelihood, mean layoffs of a chunk of its 7,000 employees–a larger number for its smaller operations.

And, after all, staff costs are one of the biggest line items in AOL’s budget–sources at the company said Armstrong will not rely on simply cutting jobs to craft a more attractive budget for its upcoming spinoff.

Still, there is obviously a lot of pressure on Armstrong to get the financials–which are still largely dependent on AOL’s declining, but money-generating, access business–looking pretty.

That access business did almost $2 billion in revenue last year–about half its sales–and it represented almost all its profits.

In contrast, AOL’s advertising business lagged, dropping hugely over the last several quarters.

Still, Armstrong has laid out a strategy that has included, in part:

Being a new kind of content giant, via a series of branded niche media sites, with about 500 full-time writers and editors and 1,500 freelancers; selling premium display advertising on these sites and strengthening its third-party self-service ad network business; finding a way to use its communications properties to redistribute traffic to other properties in a kind of virtuous circle.

There are also local, analytical and venture elements. But–for all intents and purposes–Armstrong’s plan is a content-and-advertising model, supported for now by the dwindling piles of cash from the access business.

That’s why, of course, costs are the next item on Armstrong’s to-do list.

“The cost structure is the last part of what was going to be dealt with, as Tim has told everyone,” said one person close to the situation about the former Google (GOOG) exec. “But, if it is slash-and-burn only, that would be pretty short-sighted.”

Perhaps, except that it is that exact tactic that has been business-as-usual at AOL for far too long.

How low can Microsoft go?

Very low, it seems, in announcing really bad fourth-quarter earnings, missing Wall Street revenue estimates by an astonishing $1 billion.

Talk about a game of extreme limbo.

After the market close Thursday, the Redmond, Wash.-based tech giant reported that fiscal fourth-quarter net income fell to $3.05 billion, or 34 cents a share, from $4.3 billion, or 46 cents a share, in the same period a year earlier.

Revenue for the period ended in June fell 17 percent to $13.1 billion. Wall Street had been looking for earnings of 36 cents a share on $14.37 billion in revenue, according to data compiled by Thomson Reuters.

Online advertising revenue took a big hit, decreasing $86 million or 14 percent, to $529 million, as the display advertising business got hard hit.

No surprise–Microsoft (MSFT) shares have been taking a beating in after-hours trading.

BoomTown liveblogged the earnings call.

2:32 pm PDT: The conference was kicked off and Microsoft CFO Chris Liddell–whose jaunty New Zealand accent I never tire of–came on right away, pointing out the very obvious bad news in several different ways, although also trying to find some kind of silver lining.

The quarter, he said, “marks the end of one of the most difficult [periods], but also most encouraging.”

The darkness has a dawn, he noted: “In my mind, we are a stronger company than we were a year ago…but we need to lift our game to a new level in 2010.”

You can say that again!

So Liddell did, saying that “there are some signs that we have at least seen the worst” of the econalypse, and “looking forward, we do not expect trading conditions to get worse.”

Well, how could they?

2:35 pm PDT: Microsoft’s investor relations guy went over the numbers. Crappy results, but meaningful cost savings.

Read the official press release here.

2:48 pm PDT: Liddell came back on and he said this would be one of the most “interesting” years, especially due to a spate of new product rollouts coming, such as Windows 7.

He did some forward-looking, talking about a variety of arenas at Microsoft, from the games business to its product launches to tax rates.

Microsoft has, despite the economic turmoil, a great balance sheet in terms of cash–with over $30 billion.

I think I found a gold lining.

2:56 pm PDT: Question-and-answer time.

The first was about spending on personal computers, which hit Microsoft badly on the downside, said Liddell.

But, as a refresh cycle kicks in, he noted that average selling prices will go up.

It would eventually get “better,” which Liddell pronounced, bitter.

Irony alert!

The next question was about margins. Microsoft has tried to cut costs, said Liddell, although it would never completely offset the bad economic conditions. And he was not making promises.

A follow-up on buying back more Microsoft stock. Nope, because “we’re still not sure we’re out of the woods.”

The next question was about what customers are saying about the Windows 7 upgrade and about server shipments.

No surprise, but server shipments are weak. “We don’t see a lot of pent-up demand in that area,” said Liddell.

As to PCs and Windows 7, he said he has more hopes of people being more likely to start to move over. Or, at least, prepare to do so.

“Then, you start to get into a much more virtuous cycle,” said Liddell.

A question on whether expenses can be slowed more.

Sorry, analysts! Nope.

Another question on looking at PC-refreshing. We’ll see, said Liddell.

Another expense question. Hey, analysts, you might want to stop asking since Liddell is not going to suddenly say Microsoft is lopping off more employees–at least, not right now!

Plus, there are those pricey upcoming product launches, said Liddell, which is going to take some dollars.

“There are a series of relatively small items, which add up,” he said.

3:09 pm PDT: An annuity question. Zzzzzzzzz.

Analysts continued to try to get Liddell to predict when things were going to take off again and return to the golden times when Microsoft was a regular financial powerhouse.

It was admirable that he refused to take the bait and maintained his tone of semi-doom and lessening-gloom.

“I would not promise that it is going to be significantly better,” said Liddell.

3:18 pm PDT: A question about the latest launch of Office in 2010 and its impact on financials.

Liddell said he did not see a significant impact until 2011.

The next question was also one on revenue: “Is revenue going to grow?” asked one analyst in a kind of desperate-sounding way.

Liddell said Microsoft would be watching costs, which would help. As to revenue, which is less controllable, he could not say.

3:22 pm PDT: Although there have been no queries about Microsoft’s discussions with Yahoo (YHOO) about a search and online advertising partnership–which will cost the company a pretty penny, if struck–there was a question about Google (GOOG) and its Chrome operating system.

“We still believe that people will want a client and an Internet-based experience,” said Liddell.

Translation: Google is a mouse that roared!

The final question was about how various geographies are doing. Asia and emerging markets are a place for growth, said Liddell, followed by North America, especially relative to Europe and Japan.

But, the tone of the earnings call? Economically speaking, it’s still a small world after all.

If there’s an earnings call at Yahoo, you know BoomTown is going to liveblog it!

Will Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Carol Bartz say something naughty? (Nope!) What is new CFO Tim Morse like? (Nice!) Will they say anything about the talks with Microsoft (MSFT) about a search and online advertising partnership? (No!)

Oh, it might be a corker!

The earnings results for the second quarter certainly were not.

As I wrote in a previous post:

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

For the three months ended June 30, the Internet giant said it had revenues of $1.14 billion, excluding traffic acquisition costs, down from $1.35 billion in the same period a year ago.

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

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

Here’s the conference call, updated as it happened:

2:02 pm PST: Music followed by investor relations lady, who had a very nice voice.

She was quick and to the point, and soon enough Bartz was on.

First, she welcomed Morse as CFO, noting he was strong in “efficiency and process.”

Then she pointed out that the new home page for Yahoo–pictured here and you can read about it here–was “available…starting…today.”

Bartz dragged out the words, with a small dramatic flourish.

Then, it was right to the results, which Bartz was bullish on: “Considering the economy, I am pleased with the results.”

Bartz noted that “overall, we are seeing less fear in the marketplace,” although she added that she had no idea when the econalypse would be over.

“It’s easy to see it bumping along the bottom, but it’s too early to call…so, we’ll leave economic predictions to others,” she said.

She moved onto her being happy about all the new execs she had hired, noting that Yahoo was “closing in” on picking an international head (note to myself, get a Yahoo to leak the news to me asap).

2:07 PST: Morse (pictured here) came on and introduced himself. He looks like a CFO and also sounded like one too–calm, cool and collected, as it should be.

After a short talk about his background, he moved onto all the particulars of the quarter–results that had already been released, but Morse repeated them with verve.

I try to listen carefully in these explanations, but I confess that I actually don’t, unless something new happens. It didn’t.

Then Morse was looking forward, including talking some more about marketing spend coming up, as well as explaining what kind of CFO he was going to be.

2:18 PST: Back to Bartz, who started talking about well the long-troubled Silicon Valley icon was doing, even in the weak economy.

She kept calling Yahoo the “world’s biggest Internet media company,” and then said that Yahoo was an “Internet kingmaker” for other Web sites.

Well, it’s kind of true on both counts, so we’ll overlook the bragging.

Bartz then quickly moved through all the various arenas at Yahoo–from advertising to the home page to mobile–where Yahoo was trying to improve and increase its business.

She apparently is aiming to make online ads less annoying–if successful, I propose that Bartz should be awarded some medal of honor.

“We have a clear simple vision to be the center of people lives online,” said Bartz in conclusion, throwing in “kingmaker” again. “At the end of the day, we know who we are and know what we need to do to win.”

2:33 pm PST: Question time!

The first was about what Bartz thinks about Bing, the new Microsoft search engine, because it might take a while for these Wall Street analysts–reporters don’t get to ask questions–to screw up the courage to ask her outright about any Microsoft deal.

Bartz was unusually cordial, which is how someone about to be hitched needs to be.

“I think Bing is a good product…I think Microsoft should be given kudos for Bing,” she said. Hmmmm….

The next question was about the intent of Yahoo to invest in search, as opposed to display advertising. Another veiled Microsoft search deal question.

Bartz noted that Yahoo was investing in the user. Nice way not to answer the question!

2:38 pm PST: A question about spending and if there was going to be more.

Bartz noted that Yahoo was restructuring costs, rather than cutting and burning. She noted, for example, that more marketing spend was part of the plan.

Morse used a bucket analogy, and talked about draining costs back and forth, which was apt.

The next question was about advertising revenues, and whether they would grow. Also, more questions about costs.

Morse noted good strength in a lot of areas in the premium sector. As to cost structure: “We’re repositioning the business.”

2:48 pm PST:

Another cost question. I am officially ignoring it.

The next question was about how Yahoo was going to keep fixing APT, its newest advertising platform, which some think is too hard to use.

Bartz, who has insulted it in the past, was now kind of nice about it, noting that they were working on making it better.

A question about owned-and-operated search and its relationship with Yahoo’s affiliate search, which had been stronger. Not a trend, said Bartz flatly.

More about search and whether scale matters in search (another sneaky way to ask about Microsoft). “Of course scale matters,” said Bartz, who joked she would be happy to switch share positions with Google (GOOG).

A question about the new home page and its monetization and why it was announced today, as opposed to the fall, as planned.

Bartz did not really explain why or about revenue, but she sounded good.

The last question was about improvements in search share and monetization (translation: I want to ask about Microsoft, but I am too much of a wimp).

Bartz talked about better targeting, improved experience, driving relevancy and the prominent position of search on the front page. That will lead to more money, she noted.

Again, it’s not exactly an answer, but it sounded good.

Then it was over, although Bartz ended by urging everyone to “go look at the new home page.”

A few weeks ago, when I was having breakfast with legendary Silicon Valley entrepreneur Marc Andreessen about his new venture fund, he talked about what he thought was critical to being successful as an Internet company.

Ticking off names, from Apple (AAPL) CEO Steve Jobs to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Andreessen said he always favored technical entrepreneurs for one key reason: “You need someone who lives and breathes product.”

It’s a refrain I have heard a lot recently from a wide range of people in the sector, most especially when talking about two of the more challenging renovations of key Internet brands going on of late.

That would be: Yahoo and MySpace.

In recent days, the focus at both Yahoo (YHOO) and MySpace, a division of News Corp. (NWS), has been on cost cuts, management rejiggering and, of course, layoffs, as new leaders at each Web giant are trying mightily to push the reset button. (News Corp owns Dow Jones, which owns this Web site.)

No surprise, their efforts have gotten a lot of attention and have been the subject of a lot of coverage (here for Yahoo and here for MySpace).

But, as those clean-up efforts wrap up, both have to show a whole lot more than that if either is to truly succeed at their tasks–which is to make both services much more relevant and exciting in the fast-changing Web arena.

While Yahoo and MySpace remain huge Web properties–and Yahoo, in particular, is very profitable in comparison to most Internet outfits–the widespread perception across the digital sector for too long now is that they are both tired in some significant ways and in desperate need of innovation.

Their big tasks include an overhaul of product offerings and features, a refreshing of brand and, most importantly, a strategic rethink that will set them on a new course for the next several years.

This is not a new thing in the Internet space, which has seen once-popular companies fall by the wayside as their products have gotten dull and consumers weary.

AOL–the Time Warner (TWX) unit whose new CEO, Tim Armstrong, is trying to reinvigorate that iconic but deeply tarnished brand too–is the classic example of this problem. But there have been too many that either hobble along, get subsumed into a larger company or just wither and die.

Sudden death is not likely to be the case for either Yahoo or MySpace, but time is most definitely running out for the pair to show some true product pizzazz and a strategic road map.

At Yahoo, most of the glitter thus far has come from the personality and charms of CEO Carol Bartz (pictured here), who has been hard at work projecting an image of moxie and decisiveness in her efforts to get some momentum at the turmoil-plagued company.

Replacing former CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang, Bartz has largely been busy cutting staff, pruning products that she recently dubbed “space debris” and rounding out her executive staff.

She’s also been prepping a new branding campaign to accompany Yahoo’s overhauled front page, which is set for the fall.

But, as the famous Peggy Lee song (see video below) goes: “Is that all there is, is that all there is?/If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep dancing/Let’s break out the booze and have a ball/If that’s all there is.”

But breaking out the booze and having a ball is actually not such a bad idea. To my mind, instead of tweaking what is there and emphasizing what it has been, Yahoo now has the chance to just go for broke and boldly make some dramatic choices.

That is especially true if it forgoes a search and online advertising partnership with Microsoft (MSFT), since Yahoo is going to have to do more than just what it already does better.

Interestingly, it is Microsoft, with its well-reviewed new Bing search service, that seems the most aggressively innovative these days.

So, why not, for example, make a shocking move, say, into the premium online video space? Yahoo certainly could pick up some damaged goods, like Veoh and Joost, on the cheap.

But what about buying the early winner: Hulu?

While the three studios that are its joint owners (the fourth owner is Providence Equity Partners)–News Corp., Disney (DIS) and GE (GE) unit NBC Universal–don’t seem inclined to sell, many sources close to the company said they most certainly would for the right price and perhaps a stake in Yahoo too.

Yahoo has been one of Hulu’s many distribution partners, but that effort has been lackluster. As owner, it would surely point its vast traffic and tech resources at Hulu to good effect.

In this kind of scenario, Google (GOOG) and Comcast (CMCSA) are also contenders for Hulu, but it is only Yahoo that has the truly better record of being able to create, manage and distribute Web content.

Plus, you could call it: HuHoo or YaLu or, better still, HooLu.

There are lots of ideas along these lines for Yahoo, but the overarching idea is to dominate in areas its rivals do not.

For MySpace, which was the dominator until rival Facebook cleaned its clock and then some, it is both a crisis of identity, a broken consumer experience and technology that needs a major overhaul.

It is hard to say what MySpace is, except really noisy. While the music part of that is good, the idea of making it hip again seems well-nigh impossible.

But it could be useful as an entertainment hub where it is fun to be. News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch raised this concept recently, in fact, and it is a good one.

That’s because Facebook is aggressively un-fun, with a fascist design sensibility and a thick ethos of utility and enforced busy-ness. Whenever I use it, I always start to feel like I am 23 minutes late.

There really is no good overall and unified entertainment hub on the Web in a massive way–one that aggregates all kinds of interests. I would, for example, love a place where I could easily live in a “Gossip Girl” universe.

Best of all, such a direction moves MySpace well away from Facebook, where is needs to get pronto.

MySpace CEO Owen Van Natta (pictured here) said as much in a memo to employees yesterday:

“As I’ve said before, simplifying and unifying our site is fundamental to our success going forward. MySpace should feel like one platform–not 15 sites loosely stitched together. We consider our diverse content offering a strength but too many logos and disorganized verticals makes the site difficult to navigate and creates confusion about our brand identity. Our users don’t know if we’re a social portal, a music site, or an entertainment hub.”

In her own memo last week, Bartz also talked about the need for speed and definition of Yahoo:

“I’ve noticed that since the reorg, people seem like they’re waiting for something. I’m not sure if it’s a sugar-low or what, but we need to stop waiting and get moving. Good things do not come to those who wait, they come to those who make things happen.”

Actually, per Marc Andreessen, good things come to those who make things. Wonderful things, fun things, memorable things and, if you are Steve Jobs, just one more thing.

Let’s just hope in the case of Yahoo and MySpace, they don’t settle for just any thing.

Until they do that thing they do, here is a catchy video from the movie, “That Thing You Do”:

Oh, they’re still talking. Except when they’re not. And, then, they are.

Such has been the course of discussions Yahoo and Microsoft continue to be engaged in about a possible partnership deal around search and online advertising.

“It runs hot, then cold, then hot, then who knows,” said one person close to the situation.

It’s kind of like a digital version of the romantic travails of Lindsay Lohan and Samantha Ronson, minus the paparazzi and screaming matches in trendy clubs.

(Spokespeople for both companies declined to comment on any talks. Curiously, both joked separately that they would prefer to be the Lohan character in my sick metaphor because she was so “unpredictable,” which is good in business–until I pointed out that was just another word for an addiction-challenged lunatic.)

But I digress!

The temperature now, after talking to a dozen sources with knowledge of the situation?

Warmer than two weeks ago–with one of Microsoft’s principal dealmakers on the case–Charlie Songhurst–down in Silicon Valley where Yahoo is located, focused solely on the talks and making progress with them.

When last we checked in, Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer had a little private tete-a-tete about the deal, when both were attending the seventh D: All Things Digital conference in Southern California in late May.

That meeting, as well as meetings between other top Microsoft (MSFT) and Yahoo (YHOO) execs in attendance, went well enough.

Bartz and Ballmer also both acknowledged discussions in onstage interviews at D7, with Bartz even boldly stating that she was open to the deal if good and reliable data and “big boatloads of money” were forthcoming from Ballmer.

(You can see the video of her saying that here, while Ballmer is less colorful here.)

Well, that ship has not yet sailed, with the two sides–whose history together is tumultuous–still niggling over price and control issues.

Thus, talks in the weeks after languished, especially in the wake of Microsoft’s launch of its new Bing search service and Bartz’s focus on beefing up Yahoo management and marketing.

And while Ballmer has consistently said that Microsoft was open to a deal, Bartz has since made a variety of public statements related to it, many in conflict with previous statements.

It is an indication of the push-me-pull-you tone of the talks, which began in March.

When last asked about Microsoft by a stockholder at the Yahoo annual meeting in late June, Bartz said she had nothing to say about any deal and said it would be said publicly only after any such deal was struck.

Setting expectations is probably a good idea, since all the back and forth underscores a very real debate by both sides about whether joining together will benefit them both or not.

The possible pluses are clear: Huge technology cost-savings and cash for Yahoo and another weapon to fight archrival Google (GOOG) for Microsoft.

Sources said Bartz had been getting a lot of pressure to do a deal from Yahoo board member Carl Icahn, whom she has managed to isolate, even as she has gained total control over the company.

She is also under less immediate scrutiny, sources said, since the cost-savings related to a series of layoffs at the company have given Yahoo some financial breathing room. Still, it can ill-afford a search arms war.

Yahoo, as well as Microsoft, will report its quarterly earnings next week and both are expected to show continued weakness, due to the economy.

Still, the stock of both companies has also improved a lot since the beginning of the year, with Yahoo shares up 23 percent and Microsoft’s up 19.5 percent.

As for Microsoft, the company has also become more confident with the early success of Bing, which has garnered good reviews and improvements in market share in surveys.

Sources at the company maintain that the improvement–via innovation and a huge marketing spend–has given Microsoft a bit of leverage against Yahoo, although the bets are still out on exactly how much sustained share Bing can garner.

In a blog post today, for example, Yusuf Mehdi, Microsoft SVP of the Online Audience Business Group (really, that is his actual title), touted Bing’s success after just a month:

“We saw 8 percent growth in unique users to Bing.com in June, which is an important indicator that you are trying Bing and the word is spreading….We have a long term view, and we are committed to steady progress over the years to come.”

Does that mean these two crazy kids will probably not get together in the end? Well, like LiLo and Sam, they seem to be trying, but striking a lasting partnership is not as easy as it looks.

And, until the companies decide to unite or part for sure, please enjoy this delightful video trailer for “The Parent Trap,” a time when Lohan was adorable and much, much less–like a possible Yahoo-Microsoft deal–complicated:

Here is the letter AOL CEO Randy Falco (pictured here) has penned to the entire staff about layoffs of 10 percent of its workforce–or 700 people–and other cost cuts, which the online service is announcing today.

“We’re at a pivotal point in AOL’s transformation, and need to be even more strategically focused and operationally efficient as we weather the economic storm,” wrote Falco, in part, about the move.

As BoomTown reported earlier today, Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL is making huge staff cuts, due to the weak economy and the ensuing deep falloff in advertising revenue, but also because of recent structural changes made to refocus the once-mighty service.

The layoffs will take place over the next several quarters, with most of the U.S. cuts to be completed by March. AOL has 7,000 employees world-wide, with most located domestically.

Here’s Falco’s letter:

Dear AOL colleagues,

I’m writing to tell you about some important decisions we’ve made about AOL’s business and why we’ve made them.

The deepening economic recession has affected every corner of the economy, including our own. Online marketers have tightened their ad buying across the board, reducing their spend by hundreds of millions of dollars.

As a result, we will be reviewing our entire organization to further align resources and expenses against the real revenue opportunities in this difficult market. Part of this will involve consolidating groups to gain efficiencies that will unfortunately lead to head-count reductions. We anticipate this will result in a net reduction of our workforce of up to 10% over the next several quarters–and we will attempt to finalize all domestic actions by the end of March. Reducing our workforce is never easy, particularly in the current climate, but our goal in doing this is to provide our core businesses the resources they need to thrive. Please know that, as always, we’ll be doing everything we can to help and support those affected, including offering severance packages and other services.

To further keep employment costs down, we will also forgo merit pay increases in 2009. This is a painful decision, but one that many companies have prudently taken to help minimize the number of layoffs they have to make.

To provide some perspective on these decisions, right now we’re two years into a three-year turnaround plan. Since day one, our strategy has focused on building and growing mutually dependent publishing, advertising and social media businesses to take advantage of the shifting media landscape. We’ve worked shoulder-to-shoulder to make considerable progress during this time.

We acquired best-in-class companies across the digital advertising space (AdTech, Third Screen Media, Lightningcast, buy.at, TACODA and Quigo, respectively) and integrated them with Advertising.com to build Platform-A, the largest, smartest display advertising platform in the world.

We grew our MediaGlow audience via an efficient content development model that in 2008 enabled us to launch more than 20 new sites that are generating significant page view (up 64% year over year in December), engagement (up 39% year over year) and unduplicated user (70+ million) numbers. This momentum will continue in 2009 with our goal of creating an additional 30+ editorially curated sites focused on consumer passion points.

We combined Bebo with our longtime community assets AIM and ICQ as well as newer acquisitions Goowy, Yedda and SocialThing, to build People Networks, gaining AOL a foothold in the critical social media space, with more announcements to come on the next phase of development in both the social media space and in the integration of social and publishing capabilities.

This progress continues to put AOL in a strong position to capitalize on our new business model when the recession ends.

In addition to focusing our investments, a successful turnaround plan also requires us to realign our cost structure against this three-pronged business model–making difficult decisions to cut costs in areas that aren’t critical to our growth. Splitting out the Access business improved the transparency of what’s working and what’s not, and allowed us to make better decisions about exiting businesses that weren’t performing while investing in growth areas. A successful turnaround plan also mandates we control costs, operate with healthy margins and position the company for sustainable growth. As you know, we’ve moved repeatedly to bring discretionary expenses in line to spare across-the-board job cuts.

But we’ve also had to make many hard decisions along the way. And this moment is no exception. We’re at a pivotal point in AOL’s transformation, and need to be even more strategically focused and operationally efficient as we weather the economic storm.

In addition to the head-count reductions and the 2009 merit pay decision, we are also making changes throughout the organization to improve efficiency and better align it to our three core businesses. This includes a review of our international operations and our global shared-services functions. In addition, we will continue throughout the year to carefully and thoroughly review all our products and services to make sure every one fully supports our strategy and has the potential for growth.

Finally, we are going to realize significant savings by continuing to consolidate our facilities–for example, moving from two buildings to one in Mountain View, from two floors to one in Los Angeles, and leasing unused space on our Dulles campus.

With these and other changes, we will take significant annual run-rate costs out of our business while, importantly, retaining the flexibility to invest in our growth strategy.

I know all this will raise questions, but I wanted to share as much as I could with you now. Senior management will provide more details as appropriate to their teams in the weeks ahead.

As difficult as things look right now, the economy eventually will turn around. Some companies will use this time prudently and make difficult decisions to come out of it in better shape–growing toward areas of opportunity, scaling back in others and maintaining a line on costs all around. Our only choice is to be one of these companies. With your continued hard work and dedication, we will position ourselves to emerge a stronger company ready to lead in a vibrant online market.

Randy

Time Warner online unit AOL is cutting 700 employees due to the weak economy and the ensuing falloff in advertising revenue, but also because of recent structural changes made to refocus the once-mighty service.

AOL CEO Randy Falco sent a memo this afternoon to AOL staff about the layoffs and other cost cuts being made, confirming the moves.

The 10 percent reduction in workforce will take place over the next several quarters, with most of the U.S. layoffs to be completed by March. AOL has 7,000 employees world-wide, mostly located domestically.

AOL is also eliminating merit raises, just as Yahoo (YHOO) and other digital companies have done recently, and consolidating facilities.

While Time Warner (TWX) has been trying to sell AOL to Yahoo, the online unit has also been shifting its resources, as part of a long-term turnaround plan. It has focused the company on three parts: its Platform-A ad unit; its communications and social-networking arm, People Networks; and its recently launched MediaGlow content studio.

It has also been in the midst of splitting out its longtime access business, which has provided the bulk of AOL’s revenues and profits, which sources said has given its top execs insight into what its future business model should be.

Besides the layoffs and cost cuts, sources said AOL was also looking at paring its international business, which has never been particularly successful.

As part of its ongoing moves to make New York its main HQ, AOL will also be consolidating facilities in Silicon Valley, Los Angeles and at its original homestead in Dulles, Va., although not closing it completely.

Much as throughout the online advertising industry, AOL has seen drastic declines in growth. In a recent financial report, AOL said its ad business dropped almost 20 percent year over year.

And AOL’s worth has also declined, with Google (GOOG) recently writing down its 2005 investment of $1 billion in the online service, which valued it then at $20 billion. It is now valued at $5.5 billion.