News Corporation (NYSE: NWS) is in talks with Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) in a deal that would combine the company's MySpace site and other Internet sites with the pioneering Internet portal, according to The Wall Street Journal [subscription required].

Under the terms of the deal, News Corp. would get a more than 20% stake in Sunnyvale, Calif.-based company. No doubt that Rupert Murdoch, New Corp's CEO, would want to buy all of Yahoo at some point, probably after it's completed the integration of Dow Jones, publisher of the Journal.

For now, the ball is in the court of Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT), whose $44.6 billion unsolicited bid for Yahoo was rejected as being being too low. Unless News Corp is prepared to buy the whole thing, Yahoo will have little choice but to agree to Microsoft's buyout. Murdoch, though, may have a few tricks up his sleeve.

"News Corp. has been reaching out to private equity firms since the day Microsoft's bid was first announced, according to one person familiar with the matter," the paper said. "The company had been originally reluctant to press forward with a deal until waiting for a sign from the Yahoo board that they were interested, according to another person."

Though time is on Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT)'s side in its $44.6 billion unsolicited takeover battle for Yahoo! Inc., (NASDAQ: YHOO), that doesn't necessarily mean it will win the war.

The world's largest software company late Monday said -- predictably -- it was disappointed that Yahoo "has not embraced our full and fair proposal to combine our companies" and that it was "confident that moving forward promptly to consummate a transaction is in the best interests of all parties.''

You didn't have to be psychic to see that coming.

But Yahoo co-founder and chief executive Jerry Yang isn't stupid. Microsoft, like News Corp (NYSE: NWS) in its pursuit of Dow Jones & Co. is an uneconomic buyer of Yahoo. Steve Ballmer wants to make sure that Yahoo doesn't fall into the hands of the either Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) or a media conglomerate such as Time Warner Inc. (NYSE: TWX), parent company of AOL. He has already pledged to pay a 62% premium for a company that many on Wall Street believe has seen its best days.

After my post of last week lambasting NebuAd for using information obtained from internet service providers in order to serve ads to web browsers based on users' browsing behavior, I was contacted by the CEO of NebuAd, Robert Dykes. He agreed to talk with me about his company and the internet advertising world.

I started by asking Dykes what steps NebuAD has taken to maintain the privacy of the customers of the ISPs with which they work. Dykes told me his company realized early on the security implications of its processes.

"In formulating the structure of how our equipment would work, (at this time) the government was subpoenaing AT&T and Verizon for their data... (and) AOL's search data had become public. We realized that...we had to be extremely careful in the way we structured our equipment and what we did on the internet... so that we would never be the subject of a subpoena from the government. So our structure is such that we never have any information that would be of use to the government. (There) never would be any information there of a personal nature.

"(We) built our system such that, as we map a user over and over again... that mapping is reflected only as a hash number, not as any personally identifiable information, not even an IP address... All we track is that somebody qualified for certain interest categories...(we) don't keep the raw data about what searches they did."

11-18 note: see my later post for more and updated information on this story.

A new ad delivery system unveiled this week by NebuAd will provide advertisers unprecedented details about your web access activities, allowing them to place their advertising more effectively.

Unlike conventional ad delivery companies that track your choices when you log onto a site that is part of its network, NebuAd takes the concept one frightening step further, tracking your browsing via your internet service provider (ISP).

The difference? Think of the typical ad delivery system as a lookout that spots you when you pull into the parking lot of the mall, who then alerts all the merchants that you've arrived, so they can put up the appropriate displays for your tastes.

In this analogy, NebuAd would be a guy staking out your house, ready to tail you, or your children, wherever you go, reporting your comings and goings to anyone willing to pay for the information.

The company claims that it aggregates and anonymizes the information such that it can't be misused, a claim that I view with great skepticism. As the FTC probes privacy issues and internet advertising, this company will probably serve as the stalking horse. If it's allowed to thrive, there will be little left to defend.

OK, so is China really communist? Not from what I can see.

Just look at the IPO market. Yes, it's been sizzling.

And, of course, the latest mega deal is the public offering of Alibaba.com, which operates a sprawling group of fast-growing Internet properties.

According to a report from Bloomberg.com, the IPO surged from HK$13.50 to HK$39.50. In fact, Alibaba.com sports a market cap of a cool $25.7 billion. That is a thrill for Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO), which has a 39% stake in the company.

Actually, Alibaba.com even has earnings. Although, at the current valuation, they are more than 150 times the market cap. That makes Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) look pretty cheap.

While China certainly has strong growth prospects, there are still risks. Can the country continue its torrid growth rate? What about political instability?

If you look at the history of US markets, strong IPO markets are usually a sign of excess and a top. So, investors should show caution.

And if you want to check out the IPO action here in the US -- which is not as frothy -- you can visit DealProfiles.com.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook and The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.

The IPO of Alibaba, the large Chinese e-commerce site, may show that the China stock markets are topping. The company appears to have raised $1.5 billion for about 17% of the company. This is good news for Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO), which invested a billion dollars in the site, but it could also make the US portal look bad. If the China market moves down before Yahoo! can off-load some of those shares, its initial investment in the company may not look like a coup.

The astonishing thing about the Alibaba IPO is that, according to The New York Times, "the I.P.O. price translates to a multiple of 55 times its forecast 2008 earnings." The number serves to point out the fact that, even with its economy growing at 10% a year, sustaining P/Es at this level will become impossible, as it did in the Japanese markets and US internet stocks in late 1990s. Both of those bubbles led to corrections of more than 50%.

The Shanghai Composite Index is now up well over 200% this year. The bull argument for an ongoing increase is that the emerging China middle class needs a place to invest its money and cannot move that capital into overseas equities. That makes the market overly dependent on one set of buyers.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) does not appear to have made any real money from YouTube, especially given how much the company earns from its search ad business. There are not a lot of advertisements on YouTube, but Google may have come upon a plan to get dollars out of the big video-sharing site another way.

Marketers using the Google ad network will be allowed to use certain YouTube videos in messages on the network's sites. According to The New York Times : "The Internet search giant is expected to introduce a service on Tuesday to allow Web sites in its ad network to embed relevant videos from some YouTube content creators. A Web site or blog specializing in hiking, for instance, might choose to embed hiking videos from YouTube."

Google will share ad revenue with the video content creators. The program is in its earliest stages and only 100 companies are set to offer their video as part of the program. Given the millions of videos on YouTube, that figure is likely to change soon.

The idea looks good on paper and it may work in practice, but it could have drawbacks. Much of the video on YouTube even from professional companies has mediocre picture quality, and there is no guarantee that adding video to a marketing message will make it any more compelling or effective than text ads.

Beyond those issues, it is a brilliant idea if it works.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

Reuters (NASDAQ:RTRSY) has a blog section at the bottom of most business stories at Reuters.com. It is called Business Blog Posts, and it is powered by Blogburst. Blogburst is part of blog syndication service Pluck. And, Reuters is one of Pluck's owners.

Complicated? Yes.

The business blogs that Reuters runs are mostly small, one-person operations like Phil's Stock World and Captain Currency. Some, like The Kirk Report and Bill Cara, are well regarded. But, Reuters does them a disservice. It keeps the traffic for their content when it runs on Reuters.com. So, Reuters gets the ad revenue on those pages. The bloggers get their names on Reuters, and a link back to their sites, which is probably rarely used.

It is interesting to note that none of the big business blog sites like SeekingAlpha or Ticker Sense run in the Reuters program. They understand that the deal is good for Reuters and bad for the blogs. They aren't prepared to let Reuters compete with them for eyeballs using their own blog content.

It is a shame that Reuters has handled bloggers this way. Many other media outlets like WSJ.com and TheStreet.com comment on blogs but send traffic to the bloggers. Reuters has decided not to give the little guy a leg up.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St. which was approached about the Reuters program and turned the company down.

Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT) is in talks with Facebook about making an investment, according to the Wall Street Journal. (subscription required).

The deal would value the hugely popular social networking site at $10 billion, the paper said, citing sources familiar with the talks.

If this happens, it would be huge for Microsoft, giving it the competitive boost it so desperately needs against Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) and Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO). The key word is "if" because Facebook's founder Mark Zuckerberg has dangled his company in front of big Internet and media companies before and not done any deals.

Who knows if this time it's for real?

Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) has been a target for a number of internet privacy groups who feel that it keeps personal data on users for too long. Google argues that having the data helps deliver better search results. Plus, the company decided to cave into pressure and agreed to keep data on individuals no longer than 18 months.

Now, Google want to be out in front of the drive for Internet privacy. It is an unlikely about face, but it is one nonetheless. According to the Financial Times, Google is "calling for new international laws to be set up to protect personal information online." It wants a body like the UN to draw up the rules.

Google's position is clearly one that it would rather not be forced to take, but it is making the best out of a bad situation. Clearly, the more data a search engine has, the better the results. This allows for better text ad targeting and better profits. Now that Google has purchased DoubleClick the use of data collected from users is even more important to get good results for display ads.

But, Google has to protect its image and so instead of just going along, it will lead the parade.

The company may figure that if it take a central position in drafting new rules so that it can at least slant them a bit to its advantage. It is not being helpful for nothing.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

It's hard to imagine that a single website could bring in so many visitors every day, but if we are to believe a recent report that analyzed metrics from web analysis firm ComScore, Google, Inc.'s (NASDAQ: GOOG) YouTube property is doing just that. According to JMP Securities, Google has accomplished quite a bit of growth from the July 2006 period to the July 2007 period. Should Yahoo, Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) and Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT) be worried at these Google growth numbers in the last year?

• Worldwide users up 20%
• U.S. users up 18% (now 22% of 552 million global total)
• Time spent on sites up 113%
• Page views up 56%
• Google Maps up 98% to 682 million, crushing Yahoo's 397 million (which is up 32%)

Those numbers, if validated, are hugely significant. Google's command of the time spent on the internet is increasing in a large way, and with the possible fact that Google's YouTube is commanding 28% of the total minutes spent on Google's global web properties, what is next? How about less revenue for starters? YouTube is not nearly as profitable as Google's cash-cow AdWords system, which brings in nearly all of Google's current barn-burning revenue every quarter. If more and more eyeballs shift to YouTube instead of Google Search, will Google's revenue suffer? Maybe.

Google has to figure out a way to make YouTube (and other public properties that are popular) profitable in a growing way. It's just now starting to experiment with this, adding ads to YouTube (to the chagrin of many customers) and it will inevitable try other ways to sift advertising revenue from the YouTube property. If it doesn't, a revenue crimp from the company may be a result in future quarters. Well, that is, if AdWords stops growing as a revenue source, which probably won't happen.

The investors who are flocking to Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) today because Bear Stearns argued that the internet portal would make an attractive acquisition target need to take a deep breath and count to ten because any deal isn't going to happen any time soon.

For one thing, internet advertising is going to take a hit over the next few months because financial services firms are going to cut spending due to the subprime mortgage meltdown. Plus, why would any company buy Yahoo! while questions remain about Project Panama.

Shares of Yahoo!, up about 6% this year, have gotten beaten up badly over the past year, tumbling about 19%. Pundits are predicting gloom and doom for the Sunnyvalle, Calif.-based company, which continues to struggle against Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) and other web sites such as News Corp.'s (NYSE: NWS) MySpace for advertising dollars.

The news, though, hasn't been all bad. President Susan Decker and other top Yahoo! executives have been buying shares over the past few months. Yahoo's traffic also will benefit as fantasy football season ramps up. Bloomberg News notes the initial public offering of Alibaba.com may boost the company's earnings by 78 cents per share.

Those are more compelling reasons to buy Yahoo. Remember, a potential buyout is like a potential weight loss. The gap between theory and reality can be huge.

For some time advertisers have objected when their competitors showed up in Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) search results for information on their companies. Clever marketers saw this as an easy way to pick off customers by targeting their rivals in the listings at the big search engine.

One of the oldest suits against Google for allowing this practice was recently dropped. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory had filed a suit against the practice in 2003, according to Reuters. For reasons that are hard to understand, "American Blinds stipulated that Google was paying nothing and making no change in policy in order for American Blind to settle the case." Google has won several cases on the matter in the US and lost several in Europe.

Why did American Blind back down? Wall Street may never know. It is likely that the company either ran out of money to pursue the legal action or that earlier court victories by Google covering similar accusations made the plaintiff decide that its chances were falling.

Whatever the reason, it removes a significant headache for the Google AdWords program, the source of most of its revenue.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

In good news for those concerned about our evolving into creatures with enormous thumbs and no legs, a study by private equity firm Veronis Suhler Stevenson found that the average American's time spent viewing/listening to media last year actually dropped in 2006, down 0.5% to only 3,530 hours, or a mere 9.67 hours per day.

The study attributes the decrease to the efficiency of on-demand media such as the internet, where we can find specific content without needing to wade through irrelevant information. Examples of this might be watching a YouTube clip of The Daily Show vs. sitting through the whole half-hour, or reading this blog vs. poring over the Wall Street Journal.

VSS believes that this trend reversal is temporary, but projects growth in time spent at a modest 0.5% per year over the next five years.

The decrease is not reflected in spending in the media industry, however. According to the report, communications spending was up a huge 6.8% in 2006, and averaged 5.9% over the past five years. VSS projects a 6.7% growth rate through 2011.

In marketing dollars, the strongest growth segments were in alternative advertising (no surprise there), which grew 36.6% last year vs. a paltry 2.4% in traditional venues. Other marketing avenues such as direct mail also suffered, up only 5% for the year and 4% over the five-year period.

In positive news for companies such as Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) and Yahoo! (NASDAQ:YHOO), VSS expects internet advertising by dollar volume to pass print media in 2011, projecting it will reach almost $62 billion.

Many of us are tired of ads. They're on television, on the radio, in newspapers and on the internet. Technology has cleared a lot of the muck out, since you can zap past ads with a TiVo or other DVR, you can subscribe to satellite radio and do away with ads completely, and you can even use software to block ads when using a web browser. But what happens when ads are embedded in the software you use on that PC?

Along those lines, Microsoft seems to be considering making up some revenues with advertising instead of direct product sales may be in its future for some or all of its products.

Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) seems to be stealing some plays from Google Inc.'s (NASDAQ: GOOG) strategy book. But if a consumer pays for that nice piece of Microsoft software, how well will any advertising be tolerated? Not at all.

But the world's largest software company has apparently patented a system that can insert ads into any PC application, and even into the operating system (like Windows Vista) itself. That right there should throw millions of computer users into a tizzy. Granted, it's just a patent application, but it's a scary one.

The future of Microsoft's software products being tied to an ad-serving "mother ship" that would deliver ads right to the computer desktop for seemingly relevant consumer and business needs sounds a little fishy. But perhaps there will be an advertising-subsidized version of future Microsoft operating systems in the near future? Are you ready for an ad for Avery label sheets when typing that list in Microsoft Word 2007?

[Disclosure: I own MSFT shares as of 7-23-07]