Google has apparently won the battle to retain AOL’s affections, edging out a bid from Microsoft. But the cost is high, and establishes several precedents for the Mountain View company that might have been unthinkable a couple of years ago. While AOL’s parent Time Warner has yet to make a public statement, published reports claim that Google has paid $1 billion [EUR 832.5 million] to take a 5 per cent stake in the media giant. AOL’s sales team gets access to the Google Network, and Google will also give Time Warner’s media properties preferential treatment.
Do no evil?
we’ll have MSN+Yahoo vs AIM+Google(+Jabber community ?) ?
I respect you guys as a tech site, but in a purely economical snese, Google did no snatching. Considering the condensed state of the shares concentrated in the hands of a few key investors, Google’s sway over AOL is minimal. Heck, one man, Carl Icahn, has more influence with his shares than Google does.
Barring that, however, Microsoft could still buy more shares itself, expecially as current investors jump off a percieved sinking ship. The next 6-18 months will be very interesting over at AOL/Time Warner, especially if the possible AOL spinoff occurs. If such an IPO is facilitated, look for another ticker symbol, MSFT, to purchase large quantities. Many of us in the tech community do not like AOL, granted, but their name itself is unforgetable and thus holds value.
aol buys netscape and kills it.
aol buys winamp and kills it.
google and microsoft buy aol and…
we can only hope…
Part of the deal was that google would favor AOL content in searches. I guess they only abide by their moto of do no evil when it suits them.
“I guess they only abide by their moto of do no evil when it suits them.”
But of course. “Do no evil” is just an other empty business statement. In reality it means nothing and it makes Google no more or less “evil” than any other large corporation.
Part of the deal was that google would favor AOL content in searches. I guess they only abide by their moto of do no evil when it suits them.
Oh pulease, they’ll do what they’ve always done, shove it in a big blue box at the top showing that its THEIR suggestion because its THE content THEY’RE providing – there is nothing unethical about that.
As for the deal, AOL TIme Warner needed a partner who had its internet shit together and I’m sorry, AOL is hardly what I would call a company who has its internet shit together, from their bloated website, crap media content, unstable and unreliable instant messaging, I’m not surprised!
Google will have a large presence at the 2006 Southern California Linux Expo, SCALE 4x. In addition to being a Silver Sponsor of this year’s show. They will exhibit on the expo floor and ahve provided 2 speakers Chris Dibona and Dan Kegel.
For more details see: http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/speakers.php
It’s all downhill for Google’s reputation as an open, innovative and dynamic company. They were bought by the devil when they did their IPO and now they are getting in bed with AOL-TimeWarner.
It’s no secret that Google wants to be in our hearts and minds as much as Microsoft and TimeWarner and other big corporation.
Atleast if your going to comment on something atleast know what your talking about, Google has been in bed with TW for years.
Who do you think provides AOL Search, Google make a big profit from providing the AOL Search service.
It makes perfect sence for Google to invest in a company that makes them alot of money
MSN+Yahoo vs AOL+Google vs the consumer
.
Doesn’t sound to pretty
I don’t see why people are making such a big fuss about this, since there is not enough information to panic about yet.
Just like the article states, it is not known if Google is going to favor AOL content in the searches themselves or alongside. If its the former, I *would* panic. But if its the latter, it would be just an issue of seeing AOL content together with the text ads. That I don’t really care, since the searches themselves would not be affected.
Logic tells me that it is the latter. I don’t see a reason why Google would go for the former, especially since AOL is not doing that well anyways.
– Seiken
In the US, perhaps, but AOL Europe is a growing, profitable company and a market leader in DSL subscription.
People seem to forget that Aol is more than America online.
Where was europe again?
It’s some city in IL no?
Europe is somewhere to the east of US, it’s also the place who got rid of all the scum and lowlifes, because they were all sent to colonize the US..sorry, but obligatory response
I feel kinda bad for MS, they might have to do a better job at competing now! Maybe they can redo that horrible MSN site now!
All I know is that when MS has competition to put fire in its ass, it is the only time innovation really occurs.
“and a market leader in DSL subscription.”
How does line-share work over in Europe?
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/cm/cm05/telecommunications.pdf
is where you can find the information on the UK. AOL is not a force.
The long term puts on Google are looking better and better every day.