BoomTown » rumor

The AppleTwitter-Equals-iBrangelina Experiment*

Kara Swisher — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:05:43 +0000

AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter
AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter

* Yesterday, in a BoomTown post about the latest unproven rumors that the world’s most iconic computer company, Apple (AAPL), was in “late-stage” negotiations to buy Silicon Valley’s latest pretty young thing, microblogging service Twitter, I wrote:

“Oh, the very notion of Apple and Twitter is a Techmeme dream-ticket, sure to be chewed over for days on end. (I once considered doing a post that just said “AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter…” for 1,000 words to see how much idiotic traffic I would get.)”

I wrote that because the pair rivet the tech press and digital fanboys as no others do, fomenting an obsession normally reserved for, say, Brangelina.

And since I imagine that a marriage of Apple and Twitter would be covered a lot like those two are–Red alert: Someone just sighted Evan Williams with a giant iPod getting a scoop at Fraiche Yogurt for Steve Jobs!–I thought I would get started early, just in case.

(Finally, given the epic Twitter diss of last year, let’s all just assume that Facebook will be playing the Jennifer Aniston role.)

Ignore the Twitter Buyout Rumors: Here Are the Facts in Five Beyoncé-Madonna-Approved Steps

Kara Swisher — Tue, 05 May 2009 11:00:25 +0000

Was it more than a month ago that Google was rumored to be in “late-stage negotiations to acquire Twitter”?

Not so much late-stage, I guess, with a gestation period that seems interminable (and BoomTown has been there, so can speak from experience about interminable pregnancies).

In fact, I’m still waiting for the Google (GOOG) takeover news floated inaccurately back then to cross our desk at All Things Digital HQ, although it’s more likely Godot will show up first.

So I guess it should come as no surprise that it was time to fob yet another rumor that yet another moneybags of a company–this time, Apple (AAPL)–is in “late-stage negotiations to buy Twitter.”

You could set your broken-but-right-twice-a-day clock by it, in fact.

But despite very serious interest in Twitter by every company that can afford considering such a thing, getting across that late-stage line would require major investors in the microblogging service to be involved, and they are not as yet.

In fact, both Twitter co-founders, Evan Williams and Biz Stone, are in New York today to attend the 2009 “Time 100″ dinner, which fetes this year’s influential people honorees selected by the magazine. Which they are.

So, if they are in serious talks with Apple, they better grab that award and head on home tout de suite.

In point of fact, talks with Facebook last year were actually the only truly deep sale discussions that Twitter has been involved in, and those went south.

Oh, the very notion of Apple and Twitter is a Techmeme dream-ticket, sure to be chewed over for days on end. (I once considered doing a post that just said “AppleTwitterAppleTwitterAppleTwitter…” for 1,000 words to see how much idiotic traffic I would get.)

But given that it is too good to be true for now, rather than be on the edge of your seat about all these endless, alleged late-stage high jinks, here is a five-step list to cut out and keep when the rumors of “late-stage negotiations” with Microsoft (MSFT), News Corp. (NWS), Verizon (VZ), Yahoo (YHOO), Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL, Comcast (CMCSA), Cisco (CSCO) and more inevitably show up.

1.) Belle of the Geek Ball

Everyone is indeed actually interested in buying Twitter and each has expressed a proper level of interest to the company’s execs–especially to over-contacted CEO Williams–about said interest.

And, because this is America, a bid for Twitter could come at any time and in any amount.

That’s why Apple has indeed said hello. Why Microsoft’s business development team has been busy formulating a valuation. Why Google’s M&A guy, David Lawee, has called into Twitter’s HQ many times with kind expressions of desire. And why News Corp. execs, including Rupert Murdoch himself, have murmured tweet nothings to the Twitter team.

Please note: This is not the same thing as “late-stage negotiations.” Not at all; so don’t believe such things, as you will see this one coming down the pike for miles (see Step #4 below).

If there ever were an Apple deal to be done, it would not be living in some tidy vacuum.

For example, does one imagine Google CEO Eric Schmidt–who is on the Apple board, much to the FTC’s chagrin, it seems–would decline to enter the fray? Oh, he’d be up to his conflicted eyebrows in it at this point.

(Full disclosure: ATD is also considering making a bid for Twitter, but only if I get to name who is called Chief Twit.)

2.) We Feel Pretty, Oh So Pretty

Twitter’s Williams, as well as Stone, do not really want to sell just yet, given the huge traffic over the last year, goosed even further by the whole Oprah-Ashton Kutcher axis of Tweetvil.

Twitter is growing and growing and growing. Does that mean it has peaked or is just crossing over into the mainstream?

I would say the latter and so would its investors and execs.

I have done a lot of reporting and have found that most of them would like a chance to ride this rocket ship and see if they can prevent it from being a shooting star by figuring out some viable, innovative and lucrative business plan.

“Twitter really could make a lot of money,” said one investor. “And we are not just making that up either.”

Well, phew, because I have been a little worried about that.

3.) We’re Living in a Material World, and I Am a Material Girl

That said, as Madonna sings, a pile of cash is a pile of cash and if one of the suitors makes a big move with $600 million or more in cash, it would be hard for Twitter to completely ignore such an offering.

But, in any case, there will be no late-stage negotiations with one player.

Instead, an epic free-for-all wrestling match to the death would break out among all of them, especially Google and Microsoft.

This will be great for me and all the other tech writers as it will be ugly, competitive and tailor-made for breathless reporting.

Google is the likely winner here, although Microsoft is quite intent on the possibilities of integrating Twitter technology with its business offerings.

Someone will, I can predict with certainty, lose an eye.

4.) All the Single Ladies…Cuz if You Liked It, Then You Should Have Put a Ring on It

And, even with that kind of offer–which I would take in a New York minute, as would some Twitter investors–there is a sense when you talk to Twitter’s founders and investors that they truly believe they are onto some very important interactive communications paradigm shift in the Internet arena with their start-up.

I would have to agree given that the real-time and status-update concepts that Twitter has perfectly touched on are a very important one.

Thus, Twitter would prefer to remain independent for now.

Whether Twitter will prevail or not is never assured, but it would be really a shame if it gave up before the story was over.

5.) And They Lived Happily Ever After

Let’s be honest: There is no real downside here for Twitter.

If the service turns out to be be a flash in the pan and it is not sold for big bucks, Twitter still has heralded a very important new era in the digital industry.

And, if it grows like crazy even more, better still.

Also, Stone got to go on “The Colbert Report” and Williams on “Oprah.”

Best of all, in a shameless plug, they will both be captive on stage with Walt Mossberg and me at the seventh D: All Things Digital conference exactly three weeks from today, where we can ask them about all this and more.

So, I am thrilled too.

Who says there are no happy endings?

Until that D7 interview, here is my recent video with Williams and Stone at Twitter’s funky San Francisco HQ:

[ See post to watch video ]

With Inbox Clogged With Admirers, Twitter Should Ignore the Hype and Get Back to Work

Kara Swisher — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:12:33 +0000

The hubbub that was created around a rumor that was floated late last week that Twitter was in “late-stage” negotiations to be acquired by Google–which BoomTown reported was premature–definitely resulted in one certainty.

Every business development exec in media and tech rushed to lob in a we’re-interested-too communication to its founders–most specifically CEO Evan Williams and Chief Creative Officer Biz Stone–creating an email tsunami directed at the hot microblogging service.

“My inbox is flooded this morning with requests for a response to the latest Internet speculation about where Twitter is headed,” said Stone, in a post titled “Sometimes We Talk” on the company blog on Friday.

Sources close to the company said its execs were pinged relentlessly by a plethora of big companies, all wanting to make sure Twitter called them in the event the company was up for grabs.

And all–from Microsoft (MSFT) to Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL to Yahoo (YHOO) to News Corp. (NWS) and, yes, Google (GOOG) too–are indeed watching Twitter very carefully to either partner with or acquire outright.

But it takes two to tango. And–although Twitter did indeed conduct serious talks to be acquired by Facebook last fall, which did not come to pass–it was not on the block to the search giant or anyone else this past week.

The companies, many sources told me, have been talking about a serious product partnership around real-time search, which is often a prelude to discussions on deeper ties and creates a bond between companies that could result in some larger acquisition deal.

This is entirely typical for Silicon Valley, where the game of push-me-pull-you is common among companies. Stone is only partially right: All the time everyone talks.

I have almost no doubt that Google’s intent in talking to Twitter is motivated by a lot more than sharing search results better.

Simply put: It needs Twitter in its orbit. But what that means right now is still undefined.

Google, for example, has long worked with AOL on delivering search on the online service. Then, in a renewal of the deal, it paid for some equity, investing $1 billion for a five percent stake in 2006 (interestingly, Google later wrote down some of that investment).

Could such a thing happen? It seems a more interesting idea than a bigger deal to swallow Twitter whole.

That’s also because sources close to the company have said many times to me that Williams, especially–who already sold his Blogger start-up to Google in 2003–is not interested in selling out as yet.

Of course, using simple logic and the fact that everyone has a price, Twitter could still sell itself off at any time–especially, if there were an overwhelming cash offer for the company.

And as I have written even before this latest explosion, Google is indeed its most likely acquirer.

I wrote in February:

“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 or Microsoft 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.”

In fact, many sources I spoke to said the search giant will not shirk from trying to buy the company if it thinks it needs Twitter, especially related to its growing importance in real-time search.

And, Google can certainly move fast, as it did when it paid $1.65 billion in stock for YouTube in 2006. It snatched the video service start-up from the hands of Yahoo in one night, said many sources.

Lastly, added many of those sources, it will also not blink in paying up for the revenue-free and profitless Twitter if it thinks it needs to own a category, even though Google has now been dinged by Wall Street for paying too much and now losing too much on YouTube.

“If Google wants a company and thinks it is key to its future, it would buy it without worrying about much else, if it could,” said one source. “And it will do it quickly without a lot of muss and fuss.”

Personally–and this is my analysis alone and not based on any source–I think Google has to partner with Twitter strongly, as I reported it is currently trying to do, and think long and hard very soon about buying Twitter and should definitely not let anyone else do so.

But sources I spoke to uniformly denied Google was ready to deliver that giant bag of money to Twitter last week.

And Twitter was also not ready to receive one quite yet.

This was a sentiment reinforced this weekend, as I did more reporting on the story (we like to double dot all our i’s and cross our t’s here at All Things Digital).

Williams even told staff as much at a meeting on Friday, due to the unbelievable reaction generated by the ever-changing Google-about-to-buy-Twitter report by TechCrunch.

(By the way and of interest to only those who like blogger disagreements–my issue with the post by TechCrunch was loudly declaring that the deal was almost struck, which it was not, and then changing its report–and headline–to report different developments.)

Interestingly, Twitter’s Williams did not do so, sources said, during the Facebook talks, as news of those actual negotiations never leaked until later and was then reported in this column in detail.

Such a descent into Twittermania was as inevitable as the air, of course, after even a hint of possibility that the media-overhyped start-up–which is unquestionably also an important conceptual game-changer in the online space–was in play.

But how much it should let itself get caught up in such a roundelay of acquisition blather is something its execs and investors have to think long and hard about now.

Because, as many know, living in such an overheated terrarium of breathless expectation always ends up with withered focus on what’s truly important.

And that is: A commitment on the part of Twitter’s management and staff to follow through and build a substantial and profitable business on the back of what is a profoundly promising beginning.

Twitter’s Stone said as much in that post: “Our goal is to build a profitable, independent company and we’re just getting started.”

As a chronicler of the Internet sector’s proclivity to shine too bright a light on the one company of the moment, I think Stone’s declaration is exactly right.

While I often make fun of Twitter’s current lack of a business plan (Snuggie-Tweet is genius!), it is clear that it is onto something significant and perhaps even something quite profitable someday.

That is, providing its execs focus on what’s important–building Twitter’s business and audience–and trying as hard as they can to ignore all the noisy and pointless tweeting from and about its many suitors.

If they can’t, though–and it would be a crying shame–they should just start responding to all those pretty swains and sell out to the highest and most attractive bidder.

Personally, I am hoping they pick the former, as Twitter is turning out to be yet another of Silicon Valley’s great stories of possibility and promise.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Yahoo Rumors, Rumors All Around, But Not a Drop Correct

Kara Swisher — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:08:13 +0000

Inevitably, in the wake of the collapse of the controversial Yahoo-Google search advertising deal, there would come the next shoe to drop–that Microsoft (MSFT) was swooping in with a bid to buy the company and that Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang was on his way out on a rail.

Maybe that should happen, but according to my many sources, a report in VentureBeat of this development is dead wrong.

And, said sources, Yang will keep his scheduled stage appearance at the Web 2.0 Summit today in San Francisco.

The culprits of the bad information? Surprise, surprise, those wishing to make some money on the stock market on the swirl of uncertainty around Yahoo. These stock manipulators have tried to spin BoomTown many times, and they are appalling.

More later, but the Yahoo (YHOO) train-wreck story, with its latest Google (GOOG) crash, is exciting enough without specious rumors.