

Microsoft and Yahoo Reach Agreement on Search - helloworld
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/technology/companies/30soft.html

======
oneplusone
Here is the article for those that don't want to hunt down a login:

Microsoft Corporation and Yahoo announced on Wednesday that they had agreed to
collaborate on Internet search and online advertising, a deal that should
create a more formidable to Google Inc.

In a statement, the companies said that Microsoft will now power Yahoo search
while Yahoo will become the relationship sales force for both companies’
premium search advertisers.

Under the deal, Microsoft will get a 10-year license for Yahoo’s “core search
technologies,” and Microsoft will have the ability to integrate Yahoo search
technologies into its existing search platforms;

Microsoft’s Bing will be the exclusive algorithmic search, the companies said
in a statement.

------
jsz0
Probably a good deal for both companies. Microsoft wasn't going to organically
grow their search platform fast enough without a marketshare buy. Yahoo can
focus on the other services they own and maybe figure out how to make them
more a more cohesive offering. There was way too much redundancy between the
two companies for a straight buyout to ever make sense. I don't think Google
will have much to worry about either way. People are set in their ways. A
competitor that as "just as good" isn't enough. Google's biggest competitive
burden is simply not screwing up.

~~~
misterbwong
I agree-looks mutually beneficial. Yahoo's strength hasn't been search for a
long time and MS is trying to break into that market. Sounds like MS gets more
traffic to search and Yahoo gets more traffic to sites where they actually
have strength (e.g. yahoo finance, yahoo sports, etc).

If I've learned anything about MS over the years it's that they don't break
new ground very well but they do a helluva job coming in after the fact and
muscling their way up (eg Windows, Xbox, now search...)

------
vijayr
I guess this is a good deal. Bing is at least as good as Yahoo search, if not
better. If MS had bought yahoo last year, they may not have released bing at
all. Now they can merge the strengths of both bing and yahoo search, and
hopefully come up with a strong contender to G. Overall this is good for
users.

EDIT: it is also better than last year's failed deal because Yahoo can still
stay alive, instead of being swallowed by MS completely.

------
TrevorJ
Read: MS can't get traction, Yahoo devolved their homepage away from usability
years ago and now neither of them is strong enough to be a player by
themselves.

~~~
teej
Really? To me, it seems like Microsoft finally has a compelling search product
and they're trying to ramp up usage as much as possible. Nothing indicates
that Bing "can't get traction".

~~~
TrevorJ
I guess my point is that MS hasn't been able to make much of a dent in
Google's hold on search, working on it pretty hard for the last few years.

~~~
teej
Rome wasn't built in a day. The big difference this time around is that
-people like Bing-. You'll have to give Microsoft more than two months to put
a dent in Google, but I'm positive they will.

------
tarkin2
Their logic is two substandard search technologies and systems combined will
beat google?

If the core essence of both technologies were magically complementary, then
perhaps.

But trying to beat a company, google, known for its simplicity by combining
two known for their complexity seems a somewhat poor strategy.

~~~
raganwald
> Their logic is two substandard search technologies and systems combined will
> beat google?

IIRC, Fake Steve Jobs described it as taking the number two and number three
runners in a race and having them try to beat number one by running three-
legged.

It was one of those similes that had the tears of laughter coursing down my
cheeks as I nodded in complete agreement with the expected result.

~~~
vijayr
neither MS nor Yahoo can beat Google on their own. That _is sure_. so what is
wrong in them trying together? there is at least a chance, however _small_ it
is.

its more like merging the strengths of second and third contestants, helping
the resultant runner run faster than making a three legged runner.

~~~
raganwald
I agree that when #2 and #3 pool their efforts the _goal_ is to merge their
strengths. But all too often the _result_ is to merge their weaknesses as
infighting, politics, and the inevitable friction of trying to get two
disparate cultures working together smoothly takes over.

------
kitcar
and here is the press release, right from "the horse's mouth":

[http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2009/jul09/07-29rel...](http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2009/jul09/07-29release.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases)

------
calambrac
_Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive, said in an interview that Ms.
Bartz had driven a hard bargain. “Look,” he said, "she got 88 percent of the
revenue and none of the cost.”_

I can't help but read this like Ballmer's trying not to bust out laughing
while he's saying it. Is it possible to say something like this at all
sincerely?

------
gojomo
A sad day for whatever remnants of Inktomi, AltaVista, FAST (the part bought
by Overture in 2003, not the part bought by Microsoft in 2008), and Overture
still exist inside Yahoo.

------
drhowarddrfine
Dinosaurs mating.

~~~
evgen
Perhaps, but one result of dinosaurs mating was this new thing called a
"mammal" that ended up working out pretty well...

------
datums
I'm asking myself what will search look like in 10 years ? I think the MSFT vs
GOOGLE battle is going to get ugly soon. So MSFT will license Yahoo Search
Technology (?????), I'm not sure what that means , sounds like an exchange of
$$$$.

