We have been hearing all the arguments for a merger between Yahoo and MSN and they basically come down to one that is the same excuse we have heard for all the banking mergers of the 90’s & up along with many other industry’s we now wish never happened.
What is wrong with this is fairly fundamental. It is based on the idea in the free market that you should build a better mouse trap but has become if you can’t build a better mouse trap, buy your competitor out or put them out of business by any means possible to get more market share as we do not seem to be smart enough to do it on are own.
By allowing this idea to fester even more, you will find yourself with only two choices and no real innovation as the better mouse traps that come along will not be able to stand up to start and compete as teams of lawyers by very wealthy company’s can make it so very difficult in the Patent, Trademark and Copyright offices as well as the court system. It does not matter if they win, they will cost you more than your new company starting costs and you never make it off the ground. Please look up the history of the “Tucker” automobile as that is when this stuff started to be so fruitful.
Just ask Microsoft, they have been very successful at it for many years but were at least challenged some in the E.U. courts. The problem for my statements is that no one will ever notice what they are missing. It is like preventative medicine or maintenance that you can’t measure failures that never happen. You only need to look at the Netscape story to realize this but Microsoft has done this with more than 1 industry that they were not initially interested in till the money showed-up and then they could not dominate so they destroyed the industry by taking the profit out for others that had made good money doing what they were not smart enough to do on their own.
Who would think of starting a new Search engine now? You would have a hard time raising venture capitol for a launch of anything of the size needed to just get off the ground if you allow only two giants. What would happen if somewhere else in the world they actually do build that better mouse trap as it would be easier there, should we allow Microsoft and Google to merge. Do not expect any new Google’s here. Its B.S.
What is at stake here is really the future of Online Advertising and True results from your search, not contorted results based on advertising and user search terms.
Microsoft has made its best attempt to build a better search engine now called BING.com. Why do they need Yahoo? Its all about the ad dollars and market share of them folks. I’m sure Yahoo could afford to to some revamping if it had not spent so much time & money defending itself against a hostile Microsoft take-over a short while ago.
Imagine only two banks in your zipcode or only two retailers. How do you like your choices now?
***Moot Point = What you really meant to search for was “a gun pointed at your head” ***
Yes I would accept a merger if Microsoft were split-up into 3 comany’s
1 Operating systems & Networking
2 Application software
3 Internet Apps & Advertising
This should have been done back in ’03
It shall be interesting to see if the Open Source Software world of Linux will squish Microsoft at there own game or will they be strong enough to lobby congress for some protection against the tactics that they themselves started. The future will tell.
Update:08/18>
Looks as if I struck a nerve with someone as I have been told that you can not find this site on Bing.com anymore, I checked, seems you can not. Even if you type the url in directly. Yea…. good for who?
To much control by so few. Think of what this could do in politics?
Still standing tall with Google and Yahoo but for how long with Yahoo?