In a week, the entire advertising sales staff of MySpace will gather at a swanky new seaside resort about 20 miles south of Los Angeles to get a first glimpse of the fresh direction the company is preparing to take under its new management.

The beleaguered social networking site has been in the midst of an effort to reinvigorate its image, spur innovation in its product and–most of all–pull itself out of a too-long slump, even as longtime rival Facebook has seen explosive growth.

Now, with a new team of execs, the News Corp. (NWS) property is putting the finishing touches on a master plan, which will include a new redesign of its hopelessly messy interface and doubling down on a product strategy that will center on, said one source, “what we own”–namely, music and entertainment.

On the agenda, aptly enough, for the 150 ad sales employees, who will gather at Terranea in Palos Verdes, is Ben Sherwood, author of “The Survivors Club: The Secrets and Science That Could Save Your Life,” and founder of a Web site of the same name that describes itself as “the place for surviving and thriving.”

Also coming to the meeting will be several bands that have successfully leveraged MySpace as a platform, to talk about their experiences and to play for the crowd.

And, perhaps most importantly, the group might also get to meet its new boss by then, as several sources close to the situation said that MySpace has settled on an exec to fill the key job of running its ad business.

While it is unclear if the deal is completely done, sources said MySpace management will announce the pick this week.

Sources added that MySpace has been particularly interested in one exec from Viacom (VIA) and another from Microsoft (MSFT).

While the sources would not name the Viacom exec, several pointed to Keith Lorizio, Microsoft VP of U.S. sales, as someone MySpace has been targeting.

In late August, MySpace sales and marketing head Jeff Berman left the company as MySpace hired MediaLink, a New York- and Los Angeles-based media consultancy, to help get its ad sales business back on track.

That effort has been led by MediaLink President Wenda Millard, who is well known in the ad industry and was longtime leader of the ad sales force at Yahoo (YHOO).

Getting an experienced top ad exec in place will round out a recent spate of new hiring by MySpace, including a new CTO, Alex Maghen, who moved over from its MySpace Music joint venture, and a new CFO, Mark Rosenbaum.

This has been part of a wholesale flushing out of most of the top execs who worked under co-founder and former CEO Chris DeWolfe by new CEO Owen Van Natta.

Van Natta, along with COO Michael Jones and Chief Product Officer Jason Hirschhorn, have been squirreled away since late April, working at cleaning up the company by replacing management, restructuring its various units and cutting costs, including massive layoffs.

They have also been trying to come up with a plan to differentiate MySpace from Facebook, a good strategy since it is now well-nigh impossible for the Beverly Hills-based MySpace to catch up with the Palo Alto, Calif.-based Facebook’s galloping growth.

While the whole new offering will not be rolled out prominently until at least the first quarter of next year, said several sources, some changes will begin sooner, including a gradual redesign of the site.

Under the new plan, said several sources, the main idea will be to shift the focus to engagement over sheer audience numbers. While MySpace is still huge, with about 70 million monthly U.S. visitors, increasing how much time they spend on the site is the goal.

“It’s not like numbers are not important, but the better metric for MySpace will be how involved users are,” said one person close to the situation. “MySpace needs to win on minutes.”

And, rather than the wider and more scattershot approach of past years, the new direction being stressed is more scalable and focused.

“It is not about getting everyone and their mothers on MySpace,” said a source, “but about being a better site to those here.”

That will include stressing “ownership” of online categories, which for MySpace are music and entertainment, with the hope that advertisers will be attracted to more engaged users.

Unlike Facebook, which is often described as a utility platform for communications between friends, sources said MySpace will be aimed more at being a platform for communities of interest.

That includes using tools from other companies, such as MySpace’s recent two-way synch with Twitter, the hot microblogging service, to link those communities.

Presumably, the company’s August purchase of iLike, the social music start-up, is also part of that plan.

“Instead of the ability to just connect friend to friend in a single social graph, this will be about connecting a person to their communities of passion and interest and to others like them anywhere,” said one source.

Music is the obvious key leverage point, the still-bright spot of MySpace, followed by adding big entertainment categories like movies, television, gaming, video and other pop culture arenas.

(BoomTown request: Become the HQ for “Gossip Girl” addicts, um, fans, and I am so there.)

“MySpace should represent pop culture online to customers and advertisers,” said one source. “The core strength has always been music and that is where the site will really excel, because it binds customers to the service.”

The even heavier music focus on the main juggernaut site, noted several sources, does create an odd situation with MySpace Music, the separate joint venture the site has with music labels to create a massive music community.

While sources do not think News Corp. will attempt to suck MySpace Music back into the main site, due to the complex partnership issues, the idea is to make them even more deeply integrated and to sell them to advertisers as one powerful marketing message.

In any case, several sources noted that one of the most successful parts of the new plan has been to convince News Corp. leaders that MySpace does not have to beat Facebook to be successful.

Sooner than later, of course, MySpace has to do just that.

Will it work? Who knows, but said one source close to the situation quite correctly:

“There is no silver bullet for MySpace–it just has to climb back step by step.”

(Full disclosure: News Corp. also owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

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”:

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.

Given I am still in Buffalo until Wednesday, still chilling (and not in a good way), let’s start the proceedings slowly, with some videos I did with the ebullient Sarah Lacy for Yahoo’s Tech Ticker site right before the holidays at the All Things Digital HQ (i.e., the cozy cottage behind my house).

In the first, below, I look back at 2008 and make predictions for 2009, including demanding that the new administration of President-Elect Barak Obama “fix my broadband!” Also: I copiously praise the stylings of Blake Lively on “Gossip Girl” and her show’s online life.

In the second, below, I play secret Santa to a range of tech figures, doling out virtual presents to Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Jerry Yang, Oracle (ORCL) head Larry Ellison and Apple (AAPL) icon Steve Jobs.

Jerry wrote: yahoos,

it’s time for another update.

Translation: Yep! Still no adult punctuation! We might continue to face serious big-boy issues at the company, but we refuse to give in on our insistence on kindergarten spelling patterns.

In that vein, would you like a nice cold glass of chocolate milk before I get to the bad news?

Jerry wrote: as a company, we’ve made some great progress this year. while it hasn’t been easy, especially in light of the challenges we’ve faced (not to mention the current downturn in the macro economic environment), we’ve accomplished a tremendous amount and we’re all working hard to continue executing on the company’s strategic plan.

Translation: As a company, we have managed to avoid disaster more times that Serena and Dan have broken up and reunited on one episode of “Gossip Girl.”

We’re foiled Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (MSFT)! We’ve co-opted shareholder activist Carl Icahn! We’ve pissed off investors like Gordon Crawford!

Much like Serena and Dan, who are arguably a lot sexier to watch in their state of complete plot paralysis, that all this has moved Yahoo (YHOO) precisely zero feet forward in terms of true changes at the company does not matter.

Jerry wrote: as we look ahead and to position us for success in 2009, we’re continuing the work already underway to get fit as an organization: actively looking for ways to make process and structural changes to our business that will allow us to work more efficiently, with more scale. we’ve enlisted the help of Bain & Co. to work with the leadership team on identifying ways to leverage our strengths, and to improve and accelerate our performance. we all know and experience parts of yahoo! where we can do better and be more agile in a competitive marketplace. this is consistent with what you told us in the YEES survey conducted in may–we need to find easier ways to work within yahoo!, and more importantly, create an even better experience for our customers and users.

Translation: Here come the weasel management consultants!

By saying “actively looking for ways to make process and structural changes to our business that will allow us to work more efficiently,” we actually mean layoffs.

By “identifying ways to leverage our strengths, and to improve and accelerate our performance,” we actually mean learning how to make layoffs.

By “we need to find easier ways to work within yahoo!,” we actually mean having the weasels, oops, Bain, tell us the best way to get rid of people via … layoffs!

Jerry wrote: each one of us will play an important role in this process. in the coming weeks, we’ll be soliciting your input and feedback. i want to know how we can improve the way we work with each other, and the way others work with yahoo!.

Translation: While the famous “Peanut Butter Manifesto” by Brad Garlinghouse (who laid himself off!) outlined all this and more years and years ago, we’d like you to tell us the best way to fix what’s broken, even though that has been, well, the presumable job of management.

Also, if you have any thoughts on who we should lay off, please do not hesitate to put your suggestions in the purple boxes we have placed strategically throughout the campus (and stuffing ballots with my name on them will not count!).

Jerry wrote: i know that yahoo! can benefit greatly from more discipline among all departments and functions, across the company. longer term, getting fit now will enable us to be more successful moving forward.

Translation: Discipline = layoffs. Getting fit = layoffs. But just think how lean and trim we’ll look when it is all over!

Jerry wrote: thanks,

jerry

Translation: Thanks and please don’t forget to take your complimentary purple Yahoo cozy on the way out! (The Bain people said it would be a nice touch.)

And, as an added plus, here is a decoding of the fully-punctuated statement Yahoo PR guy Brad Williams made about rumors of possible layoffs at the company:

Brad wrote: Yahoo! has been exploring ways to streamline our processes and bring new agility and efficiency to how we work as an organization. As part of this effort, we have engaged Bain & Co. to help us identify opportunities for improvement. This work is well underway, with the ultimate goal of positioning Yahoo! to achieve long-term, sustainable growth.

Translation: After I am laid off, I think we can all agree that this kind of stunning verbal acrobatics is sure to impress the folks over at Dunder Mifflin, where I hope to work next.