Continue reading Amazon Trades Lower Despite Topping Estimates for Third Quarter

Amazon Trades Lower Despite Topping Estimates for Third Quarter originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Digital Sky Technologies may be looking to grow its online empire a little bit. The Russian investment firm is said to be making a play for Aol's (AOL) ICQ instant messaging service. A report in the Wall Street Journal, which cites sources familiar with the talks, says that the discussions are still in early stages. And, in case Digital Sky doesn't bite, Aol is exploring options with other companies. The WSJ puts the possible sale price at $200 million to $300 million.

Back in July, Digital Sky pumped another $100 million into Facebook, paying $14.77 a share for the privilege of investing in the white-hot social media company which could be setting the stage for an initial public offering next year.

Continue reading Aol pushes ICQ, talking to Digital Sky

Aol pushes ICQ, talking to Digital Sky originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Continue reading Amazon (AMZN) second quarter earnings preview

Amazon (AMZN) second quarter earnings preview originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Yahoo!'s (NASDAQ: YHOO) second-quarter earnings release, which was issued after the bell on Tuesday, didn't go over so well. Sales declined 13%. Adjusted earnings were 16 cents per share. That means that there was zero per-share profit growth on the bottom line. To add insult to injury, adjusted operating cash flow declined 10%.

In terms of expectations, Reuters is reporting a beat of two pennies based on Yahoo!'s reported income of 10 cents per share. No one really cared. The stock sold off in yesterday's after-hours session, losing over 3% of its value. This was on top of losing 1.5% during the regular trading session. A lot of shares were traded yesterday, too.

Continue reading Yahoo! not for me after Q2 report

Yahoo! not for me after Q2 report originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Continue reading Washington Post (WPO) misses the mark

Washington Post (WPO) misses the mark originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:20:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Continue reading Not such a Merry Christmas at eBay (EBAY)

Not such a Merry Christmas at eBay (EBAY) originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

The deal for Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO) to allow Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) to sell text ads on the portal's search pages may happen more quickly than most analysts believed. According to The Wall Street Journal, "Yahoo Inc. moved closer to outsourcing its search advertising to Google Inc. after an initial test of the system yielded what the two firms deemed positive results."

The partnership could add several hundred million dollars of revenue to Yahoo!'s annual numbers. Most observers believe that regulators would be troubled by the two largest search companies joining forces.

The news still begs that question of whether any deal can be better than Microsoft's (NASDAQ: MSFT) offer to buy Yahoo! for over $29 a share. The first offer was at $31, but Microsoft's shares, part of the payment, have declined since then.

Yahoo!'s actions to run away from Microsoft seem to go along the lines of trying to stay independent for the sake of being independent. In other words, the company has no answer to the question of why investors are better off if Yahoo! stands alone.

Since no one other than Microsoft wants to buy the portal, the answer is that Yahoo! has lost all options to defend its present strategy. A deal with Google does not, in any way Yahoo! can explain, make the company worth $30 a share.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Google (GOOG) deal with Yahoo! (YHOO) now imminent originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:20:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Jupitermedia folds Flying Hands into its royalty-free music library originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Amazon.com (AMZN) Q3 earnings preview, plus a trade idea originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

When Sequoia Capital does a venture deal, people listen. The firm has backed such companies as Cisco (NASDAQ: CSCO), Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) and YouTube.

Well, Sequoia is making another play in the video space; that is, it has arranged a $4 million investment in TokBox.

With TokBox, you can make video calls - for free. Also, the platform is completely web-based. You don't even have to register for the service. There is also a cool feature that allows you to embed TokBox on a blog or social network.

I had a chance to interview Chase Norlin on the matter (he is the CEO and founder of Pixsy, which is a video search engine). According to him:

"Tokbox is in a very interesting space that has yet to produce a clear winner. The pioneer and current leader of the space is Paltalk, the main difference being that they're a downloadable app. The recent funding of TokBok brings back a lot of memories of eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY)'s Skype in the early days: Find a breakthrough technology, get mass distribution, then figure out how to monetize it later. Hopefully these guys will figure out that last part quicker than Skype has."

If you want to check out other venture fundings, click here.

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

Sequoia Capital backs Tokbox: YouTube redux? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:26:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Google (GOOG) cans pay-per-video originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

eBay throws fit, then crawls back to Google originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:36:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Expedia -- Confidence building in the on-line travel company originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

'Long and Winding Road' to iTunes' Beatle offerings originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 25 May 2007 18:13:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

As a warning, I'm one of the .0354% of Americans who have never ordered anything at Starbucks Corporation (NASDAQ: SBUX). Maybe it's the fact that I find the whole idea of a chain of "neighborhood coffee shops" with jazz music and local art a little tacky. Perhaps it's the personal finance writer and penny-pincher in me that doesn't want to spend that amount of money for a cup of coffee. So be warned: I've met people to talk in Starbucks several times but I've never actually bought anything there. When I write about Starbucks, I do so from the perspective of a skeptical non-customer rather than that of a latte-sipping fan.

Starbucks currently charges $6 an hour for in-store access to the Internet through AT&T's T-mobile service, compared to McDonald's which charges $2.95, and Panera, which will let you go on for free. This raises a question: Is Starbucks making itself less competitive by charging for the Internet, or is Panera stupid to give away a service people would gladly pay for (as evidenced by the large crowds at Starbucks)? From a business perspective I think makes sense to charge, if only to keep tables from being taken up by people who buy one cup of coffee and then freeload on the Internet access for two hours (or am I the only person who would actually do that?).

Do you mind paying for Internet access in restaurants? Would you be more likely to frequent a cafe that lets you on for free?

Starbucks' wifi strategy: bonehead or brilliant? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

This post is in response to a question from one of my loyal readers. Loyal enough to ask me a question, that is! It's so nice to know that there's someone reading my stuff besides me.

Her question is simply; What's eBay Inc.'s (NASDAQ:EBAY) plan C? She asked this in response to eBay's decision to change its China game plan from one of open competition to one of minority partner in a shared venture. I'm not sure what her vested interest in eBay is, but her question is valid nonetheless. Here's the problem -- I'm not sure eBay has a "plan C" nor am I certain whether or not it thinks it needs one. As of this writing, eBay auction stats are pretty much in keeping with the previous two years, although its after Christmas listing count bounce-back is progressing slower than '04 and '05. It will be a couple weeks before we can get a good picture as to the true condition of listing volume going into 2007.

Continue reading Someone asked me: What's eBay's plan C?

Someone asked me: What's eBay's plan C? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 01 Jan 2007 22:41:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

I knew Nielsen didn't formally track the viewership of TV commercials as part of its television ratings, but somehow, I didn't know it. It seems like an obvious win -- after all, ever since the days when VCRs reared their 12:00-blinking heads in the world's living rooms (and don't even get them started on TiVo), broadcasters have been wondering whether people were watching commercials.

Well here you are, Nielsen: I watch TV ads, and so do my children, so they can nag me. But you'll know that soon, as you're about to start formally breaking out commercial breaks in the TV numbers you report. Everyone's expecting, of course, to see that viewership declines sharply during advertisements. And the natural evolution of the negotiation strategy: advertisers will start asking to pay less for their 30 seconds' worth of that reduced number of eyeballs. Money will flow away from the TV breaks and toward that other, far more measurable medium: the internet.

Or will it? So many advertisers have already made their mark by liberally sprinkling their products throughout the plots of your favorite shows. Take Kyle XY, the ABC Family show I've become addicted to. Kyle and his "brother" use Sour Patch Kids as currency. Watched the Hallmark Channel original movies recently? Boy have I never seen such loving treatment of an automobile. The camera loves the minivan ...

And isn't the "get up at the commercial and get a snack" contingent already calculated into the equation when advertisers decide how much they'll pay?

Continue reading Are you watching TV (commercials)? Nielsen knows

Are you watching TV (commercials)? Nielsen knows originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:27:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

I just got off eBay's first quarter earnings call and no longer am I quite so surprised that the stock sold off in after-hours trading after the auction giant released its results. The stock fell 5% to $38.42 after today's 5 p.m. ET announcement. 

On the face of it, the results weren't bad. EBay met Wall Street's estimates and exceeded its own guidance -- although it did some weird monkeying around with "non-GAAP" results that used to be known as "pro-forma" and would have been higher if it weren't for stock option expensing and new accounting rules. (Just give us the straight scoop, next time, okay?).

The release's second subhead was a real grabber: "Q1 GAAP Diluted EPS of $0.17 and Non-GAAP (pro forma) Diluted EPS of $0.24." Catchy, right?

But that's not why the stock sold off.

Continue reading eBay bums out the street with Q1 results

eBay bums out the street with Q1 results originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 19 Apr 2006 18:11:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.