backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by omnicronx.. on Oct 6 at 8:37 AM

Could more layoffs be in store for Yahoo?

It's no secret that Yahoo is in trouble.  With shares falling to a five-year low, and no word yet on whether the new Google advertising pact will withstand regulation scrutiny, Yahoo is surveying its limited options.

Earlier this year, Yahoo cut 1,000 jobs, or roughly 7 percent of its workforce.  Analysts are calling for Yahoo to cut deeper into its company to try to regain competitiveness.  Analyst Henry Blodget suggested Yahoo fire 3,018 employees, more than 20 percent of its current workforce.

While Yahoo is unlikely to fire this many employees, sources close to Yahoo say cuts are coming.  According to a Silicon Alley Insider report, sources state that Yahoo is mulling over a new round of job cuts.  The cuts would be less than 20 percent, but significant.  The site describes, "While our Henry Blodget has called on Yahoo to can 3,018 people (that's more than 20 percent of the workforce), the odds that Yahoo will make cuts on that scale are very low, we're told by people familiar with the company's thinking. But we're also told that another round of layoffs are indeed on the drawing board, prompted by a grim financial forecast."

The cuts may be announced after the third quarter results are predicted October 21.  The report is expected to be mixed at best, and may further damage Yahoo's already unstable stock value.

Also bad news for Yahoo is that Sen. Herb Kohl, chairman of the congressional subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights, is pushing the U.S. Department of Justice to examine the Google-Yahoo partnership closely for possible antitrust violations.  He sent the DOJ's head a letter Thursday with this request.  If the DOJ were to rule that Yahoo could not continue in the pact, it would be devastating, as the deal is really one of the only pieces of good news for the company lately.

Kohl's antitrust committee held its own review of the merger.  While its findings were inconclusive, the committee frowned on the deal.  In Sen. Kohl's letter he states:

The parties assert the transaction is in the advertisers' best interests since it will create a more efficient marketplace.

While we have conducted a careful review of this transaction, we do not have the benefit of the confidential business information supplied by the companies to the Department nor the economic models necessary to predict consumer behavior...nonetheless, we conclude that important competition issues are raised by this transaction. Should the amount of advertising outsourced by Yahoo to Google grow significantly, we believe the threat to competition will also increase.

The partnership is currently in its final stage of approval by the U.S. Department of Justice.  The DOJ may block the deal entirely, or it could only allow it to proceed with strict conditions -- so called "remedies".



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: proof
By quiksilvr on 10/4/2008 12:28:39 AM , Rating: 2
Capitalism is a facade. Freedom is claimed for everyone and there is no "control" upon the people unless they refuse to follow the laws of the land. Bullshit. Those with power in this world will always control and rip away the freedoms of the people in whatever way they can to keep their power. You can't do these drugs but these drugs are okay. We can tap your phones but so long as you obey the laws you won't even notice. These cameras on the traffic lights are for your own protection. Sooner than later it will be these cameras in front of your house are for your own protection.

Capitalism was a term just used to face against Communism. Ooooh Communism is evil and Capitalism is good! This society only makes sure that the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. They destroyed the education and healthcare system and now are going towards "education for everyone" and "healthcare for everyone" when in reality they don't have a clue on how to fix it.

The problem with freedom to fail or succeed based on your own actions is that your actions aren't free; they're limited. You are pushed in a corner with the quality of life based on location the moment you're born. Bad education, bad health care, insane taxes, gun shops, liquor shops. It's almost as if it was meant to happen, that you are meant to be stuck on the bottom of the barrel.

The simple truth? A pure capitalist or pure communist society cannot exist. Corruption prevails and the foundation of the society crumbles. There has to be a balance and right now the scales are teetering back and forth, with a mix of capitalist and communist ideologies and a heavy sprinkle of corruption. And the sad part? There aren't many other better places to be living in. Welcome to the American Dream.


RE: proof
By TheFace on 10/4/2008 3:54:15 AM , Rating: 1
I feel like people should keep track of the sentiments found on these message boards about the sentiments felt about our nation. 15 years ago everything was much more positive. Everything was just starting to boom, and it seemed like the sky is the limit. Now, in the dark hours of this economic extreme, the tendency is to be negative. Focusing on what is wrong, how everything needs to change. We forget that we still live in a great society. As Americans we have become jaded with all that we have, and not grateful for the ability to have purchased all of it. Our government will hopefully turn things around, but we need to do our part. Vote.


RE: proof
By straycat74 on 10/4/2008 8:54:57 AM , Rating: 1
You must be an NOBAMA voter. His campaign is based on negativity. You don't need him to give you HOPE if if already have it. He speaks to the hopeless, the down people who feel sorry for themselves and only see bad things on the horizon. I heard the same things from Gore and Kerry, same message, this time with a bit of white guilt thrown in. Sorry, I gave at the office.


RE: proof
By foolsgambit11 on 10/5/2008 6:51:58 PM , Rating: 2
You can be doing well and still want to do better, either personally or as a society. Maybe the reason Gore and Kerry (and now Obama) had essentially the same message is because there's a large portion of the population who feel that there are some things we could do better on as a nation. They expect greatness of America, and are disappointed when we fall short in certain areas. Maybe instead of rephrasing the Phil Gramm 'nation of whiners' critique, you could give specific examples of Democratic platform or policy you disagree with. You know, something constructive. Because as it stands now, there are major items of Republican policy (deregulation (blame falls to a lesser extent, but still some, on Democrats as well), War On Terror handling, the existence of the War On Terror, the loss of American respectability in the world, Iran non-proliferation, &c.) which lend themselves to trying another direction, just because we know the current direction isn't working too well. So without even getting into the specifics of Obama's policy suggestions on these topics, I've given an argument for change - change on topics where McCain is fundamentally in line with Bush doctrine.

Now, to my own non-constructive comment (which I swear is satire, thereby elevating it to the level of constructive comment by demonstrating the non-constructivity of your comment):

McPalin (to play your 'toy with names because that somehow discredits their policy ideas' game) plays the same game, though. They play to people who only see bad things on the horizon. It just depends on what you see on the horizon. Do you see turban-clad, freedom-hating fanatics clutching hands with baby-killing, Jesus-hating tree huggers and baby-making, job-stealing border jumpers on the horizon? Vote McPalin!


RE: proof
By BansheeX on 10/4/2008 3:55:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The simple truth? A pure capitalist or pure communist society cannot exist. Corruption prevails and the foundation of the society crumbles. There has to be a balance and right now the scales are teetering back and forth, with a mix of capitalist and communist ideologies and a heavy sprinkle of corruption. And the sad part? There aren't many other better places to be living in. Welcome to the American Dream.


They can exist, but they can't exist for long. Although people realize this, they are consistently wrong about the balance itself. Societies with small governments are indeed rare throughout history. The only thing keeping a government from getting more and more pervasive in the markets is the will of the majority, and a constitution (until politicians realize they can ignore it with impunity). What's weird is, the majority of Americans opposed the bailout, but the majority of their representatives voted for it. Democracy is not a very effective system either, it turns out. Get a lot of money, join a major party, get on a podium, make some motivational speeches, and you're in. Even if you suck, you've got a good chance because a lot of people refuse to vote for anyone not in the two major parties. They still vote for people who subsidize, they still vote for people who want income taxes and special tax credits borne of them, they still want inflationary money. They're clueless, they're voting for collusive enablements over and over again. Hell, you have to fail a test in basic economics to get an economics degree in this country. Why do you think all these people with doctorates in economics couldn't see or prevent all this crap from happening? Because they're all taught the equivalent of astrology instead of astronomy. When inflation filtered into real estate after the tech stock bubble burst, nobody but Mises-type guys like Schiff saw it because the inflaters who are calculating inflation exclude many products from inflation calculations to understate how much they're doing it. Food, fuel, and houses, for example. They even categorize inflation as if the products themselves are causing it. In reality, dollars created at no labor or material value can raise prices anywhere, and shift between them to create devastating booms and busts. It should be obvious, but to idiots like Swonk, they're completely oblivious into thinking its real labor-backed demand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucDkoqwflF4


RE: proof
By foolsgambit11 on 10/5/2008 7:03:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's weird is, the majority of Americans opposed the bailout, but the majority of their representatives voted for it. Democracy is not a very effective system either, it turns out.


Democracy can be effective. But it's unwieldy in large or dispersed populations. That's why we don't have democracy. We have a republic. What is more, we have a republic where the founding fathers specifically wanted a system that would insulate the legislative body from the whims of the mob. Now whether you think our representatives are voting as they do because they are more knowledgable than the average person on these matters or because they are corrupt and out of touch with America is a matter of opinion. An opinion that is difficult to separate from whether they voted the way you would have, admittedly, but an opinion that in any case says little about how well the government functions. Evaluating how well a government functions is about results, not intention. So until we know the results of the bailout, we should withhold judgement.


“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki