John Battelle, chairman of Federated Media and renowned Google watcher, is claiming that not only was Microsoft interested in DoubleClick, but apparently the advertising giant shunned a better deal from Microsoft and decided to accept Google’s offer regardless. If this is true, Microsoft's calls to the US government to scrutinize the Google/DoubleClick deal were quite understandable. Battelle writes, "This raises a very important question - why didn't Microsoft match Google's $3.1 billion offer. Smith would not comment on this, but I can report from very good sources that in fact the company did offer to match it, and was willing to pay even more to insure that Google did not corner the online ad market. But for whatever reasons, the private equity firm that owned the majority of DoubleClick's shares decided to go with Google."
Battelle's sources are anonymous, and so for now this must all remain unconfirmed. He's certainly right about one thing: Microsoft has the money, and could have easily afforded to beat Google's offer. This was an all-cash deal with Google, perhaps Microsoft would only offer a mixed stock/cash deal? Unless there is increased government scrutiny of the deal, we may never know how this deal went down exactly. What does Neowin think, why did the owners of DoubleClick choose Google over Microsoft?
News source: Ars Technica
Battelle's sources are anonymous, and so for now this must all remain unconfirmed. He's certainly right about one thing: Microsoft has the money, and could have easily afforded to beat Google's offer. This was an all-cash deal with Google, perhaps Microsoft would only offer a mixed stock/cash deal? Unless there is increased government scrutiny of the deal, we may never know how this deal went down exactly. What does Neowin think, why did the owners of DoubleClick choose Google over Microsoft?
News source: Ars Technica
That's a rhetorical question, right?
Oh don't go spewing this crap. You sure as **** wouldn't be saying that if MS and Google's positions were swapped in this whole ordeal.
-Spenser
Microsoft, like Google, is nothing more or less than a company that produces technology tools and services. A group of investors and employees that are working towards a common goal. A long time ago I worked at the MS campus in Redmond when I was employed at an on-site consulting firm in Seattle. I still have many friends there (the ones who haven't moved to Mountain View, CA). I'm currently employed by one the world's largest Microsoft Certified Partners and primarily work on MS centric projects, but the last thing I'll ever do is be blinded by brand loyalty (currently known as fanboyism). I encourage my developers to use the tool that is best for the job at hand and I would never hire anyone who is not open to using alternative technological tools. So your presumptions of my view is very incorrect. Now get your lips off of Gates' backside so that you can see the wonderful diversity we have in this industry.
Last edited by lbmouse on 23 Apr 2007 - 16:33
Oh don't go spewing this crap. You sure as **** wouldn't be saying that if MS and Google's positions were swapped in this whole ordeal.
-Spenser
If MS didn't have any real marketable products or services I would most certainly spew asterisks at them as well.
Not that Microsoft is exactly God's holy descendants on earth... :-p
So, are you going to perhaps give us some examples to prove that either company is, as you say, "evil". It might be more believable then, I think. I also think it would be interesting if you could prove your "evil attracts evil", theory. Until then, I think I'll stay impassive.
Also, of course it's a cheap marketing ploy. I've never heard of a policy or motto that was not for advertising purposes of some sort. If they're motto was, "we're evil as hell", I probably would trust them even less than I do now, even though I know it's a cheap marketing ploy.
lastly, so what? Are you actually complaining about them making money off advertising as opposed to charging for all their services? I'm sure you can donate if you really feel that strongly about it.
They probably wanted to use the rock-wall and get all that free grommet food.
I'm sure I would! heh
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.