×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo Pinkie-Swears It Won't Ruin Tumblr

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the you-will-be-assimilated dept.

Yahoo! 162

Nerval's Lobster writes "Yahoo has agreed to acquire Tumblr for $1.1 billion. As you know, Yahoo is a major corporation with a need to monetize its assets in a way that makes its shareholders happy, leaving open the question of whether it'll alter Tumblr's DNA in order to make the latter more of a significant cash generator. But at least for the moment, Yahoo seems content to leave its new property alone. 'Per the agreement and our promise not to screw it up, Tumblr will be independently operated as a separate business,' read the company's press release. 'The product, service and brand will continue to be defined and developed separately with the same Tumblr irreverence, wit, and commitment to empower creators.' Tumblr CEO David Karp, who has been known to make some very anti-advertising comments in the past, will remain in place. Even so, anyone who likes Tumblr may have some cause for concern, because Yahoo has a history of making high-profile acquisitions that subsequently implode. Back in 1999, for example, it paid over $3 billion for GeoCities, another blogging network that it eventually shut down after years of failing the update the property. In 2005, it acquired popular photo-sharing Website Flickr, which it likewise allowed to languish and die. That same year it bought Delicious, a popular Webpage-bookmarking site, and did exactly nothing with it. So when Yahoo starts off its Tumblr press release with a promise not to screw things up, it's a self-deprecating nod toward all that history. New Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer has been on a bit of a buying spree of late, snatching up startups such as Summly in an attempt to make her company 'cool' and relevant."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

162 comments

Justice Department obtained records of Fox News (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773501)

The Justice Department obtained a portfolio of information about a Fox News correspondent's conversations and visits as part of an investigation into a possible leak, The Washington Post reported Monday -- in the latest example of the government seizing records of journalists. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/20/justice-department-obtained-records-fox-news-journalist/#ixzz2TqU7HoNv [foxnews.com]

Fox "News" are Illegal Leak Publishing Traitors (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773631)

That's what happens when you leak confidential information.

Should we have congratulated Fox "News" for their continuing their treason campaign against the United States of America...

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773657)

So, how much does one make in the social media manipulation gig?
Is it enough money to fill the empty feeling you get when you look at yourself in the mirror?

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0, Offtopic)

mabhatter654 (561290) | about a year ago | (#43773695)

Yeah! Fox News needs to be investigated... I'm sure the DOJ will give Fox the proper consideration Fox News gives when "investigating" for its programs.

Turnabout is fair play... Fox didn't complain when Bush was singeling out individual reporters from other agencies and sending them home if Bush didn't like their stories.... That started BEFORE 9/11. Not to mention Bush took out 30+ year vets (with character assination) Rather and Brokow because they READ news (another editor approved) the White House didn't want read.

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (-1, Offtopic)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about a year ago | (#43773771)

Rather did himself in. He posted as news a flawed and forged story, because he "believed it to be true". Or did you forget what actually did Rather in? He then blamed it on his Producer(s), and that he was just reading the story. Or did you forget that part too?

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (3, Informative)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about a year ago | (#43773893)

Rather did himself in. He posted as news a flawed and forged story, because he "believed it to be true". Or did you forget what actually did Rather in? He then blamed it on his Producer(s), and that he was just reading the story. Or did you forget that part too?

Dan Rather got ratfucked by Karl Rove, that's what happened. George Bush's military records had been published years before Dan Rather reported on them, by J.H. Hatfield in Fortunate Son. Bush's people had been working for years to bury those records. So what did they do? They forged real documents and then tipped people off to the tells.

It was brilliant! Now people think the documents were faked and the story was false. It wasn't; George Bush was in a "champagne unit" of the TANG, and still went AWOL to work on his Dad's campaign. But Rather got taken in by forged versions of real documents that were forged in order to cast doubt on the authenticity of the real documents. Like I said, brilliant!

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (-1, Offtopic)

Zordak (123132) | about a year ago | (#43774127)

You may want to loosen your tinfoil hat. If you tighten the straps too hard, sometimes it can cause extreme irritability. Ideally, the fit should be "snug" but not "tight."

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0, Offtopic)

Bigbutt (65939) | about a year ago | (#43774159)

Don't listen to him! Read his .sig. He's misleading you.

Tighter! Tighter!

[John]

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about a year ago | (#43775397)

You may want to loosen your tinfoil hat. If you tighten the straps too hard, sometimes it can cause extreme irritability. Ideally, the fit should be "snug" but not "tight."

Oh, right, call me crazy, that'll work. You're a lawyer. Don't you know how politics is played? Don't be so naive.

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774909)

They forged real documents and then tipped people off to the tells.

Dude - Bush has been gone for what, 5 years now, and you're still feverishly spewing conspiracy theories about him? Let it go already.

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about a year ago | (#43775489)

They forged real documents and then tipped people off to the tells.

Dude - Bush has been gone for what, 5 years now, and you're still feverishly spewing conspiracy theories about him? Let it go already.

Feverishly spewing? LOL. The fact that he's out of office doesn't make what I said any less true. If you were a supporter of his, then I'm sorry to make you feel bad all over again. And before you make any more assumptions, I have never voted for Obama.

Re: Justice Department obtained records of Fox New (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43775033)

Inconcievable!

I believe Yahoo, really. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773503)

Yahoo is where the Internet goes to cash out and die.

Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773613)

Yahoo is where the Internet goes to cash out and die.

I was skeptical at first - I was thinking she was buying shit up like what's her face at HP years ago for the sake of buying shit up.

Then It downed on me. What do all of those websites have in common?

Registered users. Many of whom with real and pretty accurate personal profiles.

Merge all that data together - not hard at all - and BINGO! She's got a multibillion dollar portfolio of people's profiles for ...wait for it .... aaw man! ...

Yeah, that's right, for marketing shit.

She's gonna out "Facebook" Facebook.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (4, Interesting)

cayenne8 (626475) | about a year ago | (#43773725)

Registered users. Many of whom with real and pretty accurate personal profiles.

Interesting.

I'd not really heard of Tumblr before, and went to their site, and to even get in and find out WTF the site is about, they seem to insist on you setting up an account with email.

So, I didn't get to see what Tumblr is or what it is about.

I've not seen a site before, that requires an account to even get far enough to find a FAQ or anything to find out if you WANT to join.

Are so many people willing to just give out their information at less than a drop of a hat these days?

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773765)

I'm with you on that. I had heard of Tumblr, but had no idea really what it was and went through the same exercise you did. Apparently it is something like Blogger - but who knows for sure? I imagine I could go to Wikipedia and find out more - but like you said, the site apparently doesn't deign to describe itself for potential users so who cares what it does? Certainly not me.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (5, Informative)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about a year ago | (#43773857)

If you want to know what tumblr is really about these days, think of a sexual fetish, then put it into Google with 'tumblr' tacked on, and you'll get whatever you want stream dumped from tons of different sources. When it comes to jacking (pun huhuhu) still images from porn producers, the fetish catagorizing fans on tumblr are second to none. Granted sometimes the "blogs" (haha yeah right) get shut down for infringement, but there's always another dozen that spring up to fill the void.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (4, Informative)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about a year ago | (#43773983)

Are so many people willing to just give out their information at less than a drop of a hat these days?

In a word; yes. It's definitely a tiny (albeit vocal) minority who even give it a second thought.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (3, Insightful)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43774431)

I worked briefly on a site launch for a startup a couple of years ago (selling overpriced designer shit to Austrailians, basically) and the founder was absolutely insistent that people had to sign up before they were even allowed to look at any products.

His main argument in favor of that tactic was that it gives the user a sense exclusiveness... they are now part of the "club"... one of the cool kids... with accounts not automatically approved (they would have to wait an artificial amount of time) the delay helped build anticipation for looking at stuff and then being able to purchase it.

I was strongly opposed to the founder's idea, but he insisted, and I left shortly thereafter (not really because of this, however, was offered a better position elsewhere).

Last I heard, they completely changed their business model, so I am guessing their choices had failed.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (4, Informative)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#43774265)

I'd not really heard of Tumblr before, and went to their site, and to even get in and find out WTF the site is about, they seem to insist on you setting up an account with email.

You went to www.tumblr.com rather than a specific tumblr feed. I'm at work, so I couldn't provide you with any specific tumblr feed I'm familiar with, which brings us to your original question.

Tumblr is porn. Lots and lots of reasonably well organized porn. I'm sure there's other stuff there, but I have no idea why you'd bother.

(alright, there are some which are memes which start out as funny and then you get tired of after five minutes, such as this one popular during the last election. [tumblr.com] )

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774375)

Meh. That was popular? Oh well. American politics is little more than a scam to keep enough of the population in line to keep the gravy train moving right along.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (3, Interesting)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#43774735)

Despite all of the replies to you mumbling about porn, Tumblr's main draw is that it's a social base of somewhat technically literate, creatively-oriented people, mostly teenagers. They view it as an escape from Facebook's social ills. It combines some of the features of Twitter ("reblogging" things and making them appear in your feed) with richer post style controls, more like LiveJournal. In fact, it might be rather appropriate to call it LiveJournal for millennials. There's generally more emphasis on image-based communication, and a lot of the same meme-spamming you'd expect to find on a site like 4chan or Reddit, but in general the atmosphere is a little more positive and accepting than other popular social sites.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773927)

Then It downed on me.

dawned...

Sorry, but that one stood out.

Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (1, Insightful)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#43775029)

She's got a multibillion dollar portfolio of people's profiles for... tens of billions of dollars!

Doesn't seem like such a hot plan.

Geocities as a blogging site? (5, Interesting)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#43773533)

That this article suggests GeoCities was a blogging network tells me this was written by someone who never visited sites hosted by GeoCities.

Really though, Y! has a horrible track record. The question is, will enough users stay to keep it viable? Will they trust Y! enough to keep putting their efforts as users into the site?

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (4, Informative)

djsmiley (752149) | about a year ago | (#43773591)

And flickr isn't dead either,. lol.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773691)

Yeah, I was wondering WTF the author was sniffing on both these counts.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (3, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#43774047)

Flickr is probably Yahoo!'s second most useful feature, after its Fantasy Football leagues.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (2)

rgbscan (321794) | about a year ago | (#43774635)

Agreed. I pay for both every year! Flickr has been routinely updated and upgraded, and the Fantasy Football continues to work well every year. I even switched over my paid league from CBS Sportsline to Yahoo after seeing how well my 'fun' leagues were doing on the Yahoo platform.

Not for lack of trying (1)

foreverdisillusioned (763799) | about a year ago | (#43774959)

They keep adding more and more slow loading interactive crap to the interface, and making more and more crazy barriers to actually being able to save any of the pictures (short of a screenshot.) And it used to be the uploader had to opt-out of letting people see the original-sized picture, now it's opt-in. Apparently letting people have access to nice wallpaper-sized pics is just too useful a feature.

It's one thing to encourage users to stay on your site by disabling the right-click menu and using 'favorite' lists and such, it's quite another to continuously update your protocols to break compatibility with third party tools, offer lower resolution pictures, and make it slower and slower to actually view said pictures.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43773653)

That this article suggests GeoCities was a blogging network tells me this was written by someone who never visited sites hosted by GeoCities.

Really though, Y! has a horrible track record. The question is, will enough users stay to keep it viable? Will they trust Y! enough to keep putting their efforts as users into the site?

..what was geocities then?
what do you think homepages with regular updates were..

I think the real question is what is yahoo going to do about the popular content on tumblr now that they're footing the bill for transfers.

https://www.google.com/search?num=30&safe=off&site=&source=hp&q=tumbler+tits+and+ass [google.com]

flickr isn't dead though. it still serves it's purpose quite nicely - and has actual paying users.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773825)

'Blogging' wasn't even a term then. They were just websites that got updated frequently, christ.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (3, Insightful)

pezpunk (205653) | about a year ago | (#43773875)

describing Geocities as "a blogging network" is like referring to medieval town criers as social media newsfeeds.

Geocities was a free web host that provided some primitive site creation tools and injected a bunch of ads. did some people use them to create sites with regular updates? sure. but there was a heck of a lot more "chewbacca ate my balls"and "JEFFROS AWESOME PAGE OF COOL LINKS!!!! (UNDER CONSTRUCTION)" than there was anything else. i don't even think the term "blog" had been minted by the time geocities peaked.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (2)

meta-monkey (321000) | about a year ago | (#43774813)

Yes, my GeoCities page back in 1996/7 was a fan site for Decent II that I updated exactly twice. Also, it had a different background texture for each page, terrible midi files of Jimi Hendrix songs (why?!?!) and animated gifs I made of spaceships blowing up. It was terrible, but in retrospect, awesome in its terribleness.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773969)

what do you think homepages with regular updates were..

Back then, we called them "websites run by people who made regular updates", and we considered that to be a base level of making an interesting website. But no, I keep forgetting, the internet started when the first asshole came up with the corrupted phrase "blog" and made a way for idiots to be able to fart on their cell phones and make a "hip", "trendy", sterile website detailing the entire monumentous occasion. And it didn't REALLY take off until spambots and marketing whores automated ways to render the comment fields websites utterly useless. How silly of me to think there was a time when content meant more than taking pictures of your food for your other narcissistic "friends".

And yes, I AM implying that GeoCities had more interesting content than most of the blogs out there today. That's right, I went there. Your blog is less interesting than any arbitrary GeoCities page.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#43774037)

I'm afraid you're correct. Geocities was leaps and bounds above the blogs that dominate today's internet. You know, back when people mostly made their websites with either crappy drag and drop tools that came free with your free space and when people used to used to make the extra-cool sites by tweaking them in Notepad.

the real question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773711)

is Y!? would they

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about a year ago | (#43773845)

Ah, I remember Geocities. I actually was quite involved in the community there, and the biggest problem was that they did update the property. Where a vibrant community had grown up around a "neighborhood" metaphor, Yahoo replaced it with a top-down dictatorship. There were no more Community Leaders, no neighbors, and no humanity that made Geocities a friendly place to be. Members were no longer people, but rather just usernames, eventually reduced down to an email address.

This was, of course, about a decade before "social media" became a buzzword. Yahoo had a community, and could have turned it into something bigger and better. Instead, they turned it into meat for advertisements.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#43774183)

I remember actually being contacted by a community leader for my site over in Area51 with a legitimate email that reflected the first upload I made to that site. The metaphor was fascinating, and the concept hasn't been repeated successfully by anyone. Today, everyone is expected to find their own "friends", but the concept of "neighbours" was brilliant.

Another concept I think was good but has disappeared (probably due to botting) is the "webring". Today, we have seen them replaced with omnibus social sites where nobody provides actual content beyond forum posts, and I think the internet is poorer for it.

If I wanted a free bit of webspace today, I don't even know where I'd go to get it at this point.

Re:Geocities as a blogging site? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773949)

Blogging or not, Geocities die, and other Yahoo products are quickly heading there. The summary already says most of what I wanted to say. Flickr was great (I was a paying customer), but nowadays people just post their stuff on facebook or instagram or tumblr or 500px imgur or whatever. Flickr isn't dead, but in the hands of Yahoo, it went from being the market leader to something just average. Sharing on facebook makes more sense to most people as all their friends will see it, and the user base is huge. As for delicious, it was sold, and there's a lot of competition there too like evernote, instapaper.

Long story short, I'm wondering where I'll go now that tumblr will more or less die. Pinterest maybe...

Flickr (5, Funny)

carlcmc (322350) | about a year ago | (#43773537)

The news of Flickr's death has been greatly exagerated ...

Re:Flickr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773805)

Glitch, the MMO made by the original creators of Flickr, however..

Re:Flickr (1)

betso.net (950024) | about a year ago | (#43775109)

Exagerated? :)
These "news" are just wrong! Flickr is the best Yahoo! service and a flourishing community and devoted paying customers.

I am shocked by the incompetency of the author of this posting today.

Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773545)

it acquired popular photo-sharing Website Flickr, which it likewise allowed to languish and die.

I thought Flickr was still doing okay?

Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43773607)

Ok, let's take a look here: Tumblr, pre-aquisition, made $13 million in income with reported costs of $25 million. So, they are losing money, surprise, surprise...

Yahoo comes along and sinks $1.1 billion into the company. Unless they are total fuckwits(a possibility that cannot entirely be ruled out), they are going to want to squeeze that cash back somehow, whether directly by 'monetizing' the Tumblr userbase, or by some farcical theory about a halo effect drawing users to their other properties...

In what possible universe is a service that is going from "VCs are paying you to use it" to "Yahoo wants to scrape 1.1 billion dollars out of you" going to improve? At best, it might improve in an absolute, technical, sense; but be accompanied by a subscription fee or something. More likely, we'll start to see increasingly aggressive frog-boiling attempts at upping the advertising, theme microtransaction, and other revenues.

They might realize some incremental efficiencies in terms of web hosting costs, given Yahoo's volume and datacenter operations experience; but unless Tumblr's previous management was wholly incompetent, they were probably already using the cheapest commodity web platforms they could get their hands on, so I find it very hard to believe that there is enough fat to cut to magically fix the situation without end-user pain.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773699)

Perhaps, a few months into the job, Marissa is realizing how bad things really are at Yahoo, and it depresses her, so she's engaging in a little "retail therapy" -- paying way too much for something she doesn't really need in order to feel better about herself.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (-1, Troll)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | about a year ago | (#43774189)

Perhaps, a few months into the job, Marissa is realizing how bad things really are at Yahoo, and it depresses her, so she's engaging in a little "retail therapy" -- paying way too much for something she doesn't really need in order to feel better about herself.

You are realizing how bad things really are in your life, and it depresses you, so you're engaging in a little misogyny in order to feel better about yourself.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774421)

He didn't say "women", he said Marissa Meyer. Some people, both men and women, buy things simply because it makes them feel better. Any misogyny was added by you.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773935)

That's not accurate even in the slightest. Yahoo! was sitting on a pile of cash; they exchanged that cash for an asset that ideally will generate value. Even if it doesn't generate cash, it can still grow in value allowing Yahoo! to leverage them for cash and build up other assets that do generate cash. At this big, it's entirely an accounting transaction; a transfer from a cash balance to an asset; they do not necessarily need to generate cash.

I say follow the people in these kinds of deals. The old Yahoo! management sucked; they let the brand grow lax and did little to stay competitive while also making a series of acquisition flubs. Marissa Mayer is younger, more in tune with the current trends, and she's aggressive. That doesn't mean she'll succeed, but I suspect she'll at least do something different than the old management, so there's at least a chance she'll succeed with this acquisition.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (2)

Lazere (2809091) | about a year ago | (#43774103)

I think you're missing something. While what you say is true, she still has shareholders to answer to. They're going to expect the new acquisition to generate revenue in step with how much Y! spent on it. When it fails to, she'll essentially be forced to "monetize" it, which is where the previous management was.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (3, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43774165)

I don't see how bringing out the speculative accounting hat changes things: yes, it's an 'asset'; but it's an asset whose current rate of return is worse than what you'd get by plunking $500 in a retail-bank savings account... Unless there is a yet greater fool waiting in the wings(who wasn't willing to outbid Yahoo and acquire tumblr now...), Yahoo just turned a huge pile of liquid assets into an asset whose rate of return isn't even positive. Compared to even a low-yield, highly conservative, investement of the money, that's a lot of opportunity cost that they'll need to scrape out of tumblr somehow, probably in a way that its users won't like...

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (0)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#43774029)

Didn't you say the same thing when Google bought YouTube ($1.65 billion, no revenue)?

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#43775199)

And then took six years and a few more billions to make them profitable (maybe)?

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774073)

More likely, we'll start to see increasingly aggressive frog-boiling attempts at upping the advertising, theme microtransaction, and other revenues.

This is exactly what happened to LiveJournal, almost in a nutshell. It seems to be the inevitable life-cycle of "free" services.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#43774781)

Merchandising, merchandising, where the real money from the website is made. Tumblr-the T-shirt, Tumblr-the Coloring Book, Tumblr-the Lunch box, Tumblr-the Breakfast Cereal, Tumblr-the Flame Thrower.

Tumblr users may loathe advertising, but the site is also a huge reservoir of creative people and their fans. Even if Tumblr offered just a shop interface in the style of an eBay buy-it-now storefront, they'd make a killing. DeviantART taps into the same user base as Tumblr, and while they do offer premium accounts, most of their revenue comes from skimming off user sales.

Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#43775127)

My guess is they bought it for the same reason Google made Plus.....to get user information from a bunch of people so they can sell it to advertisers. Facebook did it first, then Google, now Yahoo wants into the game.

Languish and Die? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773621)

Flickr is a tremendous service, I use it frequently, as do many many other people from around the world. It has a huge community of more serious photographers and amateurs alike.

Just because it isn't "the big thing" anymore doesn't mean it is dead.

The only thing (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773629)

...that anyone really cares about: will there still be porn?

Ruining a newly acquired asset is a trope now? (1)

bimozx (2689433) | about a year ago | (#43773637)

It is bizarre to me that a company with such prowess in buying power, most of the time have no idea how to handle their brand-new assets. It even got to the point that Yahoo swears to not fuck it up, compared to drawing this grand vision of improvement that most of what other companies would've done. Though I think it is the right decision to back-off, there are barely anything Yahoo can provide to Tumblr (except huge sums of money that is). Also correct me if I'm wrong, isn't Flickr pretty successful as it is now, not in a bombastic way, sure, but it's making decent money [thomashawk.com] .

RIP Tumblr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773639)

I don't see how they can make good on the promise.

Once they start to monetize, which is why they bought it. (They saw all the traffic, views generated per month and could not stop salivating) They will ruin it.
Obnoxious adds, sidebars will clog the minimalist and clean interface. The exact reason people were driven to tumblr is the obnoxious shit that other social sites insert in to all of your pages.

It also means all of the "interesting" stuff will go away, as no advertisers want their stuff showing up on pornographic sites (Or hundreds of angry trannies crying for the death of all you cis scum)

Really, the biggest reason is that tumblr is utterly replaceable there is nothing special about it all, save it's open policies and ease of use. Once is starts to suck, people will jump to a copycat site free of yahoo's influence.

Hell, that's what I'd do if I were tumblr's now cashed out founders. Laugh like mad, found another site exactly like it (Maybe make some well thought out changes to reflect the realities/tech advancements of 2013 and the near future), and welcome all my users back.

Re: RIP Tumblr (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43773705)

yeah, but who will fund it?

tumblr raised over $100 million in VC funding along the way. if the business craters after the buyout no one is going to fund another site like that

i need $100 million dollars (2)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43773645)

i want to create a free blogging site with no advertising and no hope of profits

it will be cool because everyone knows advertising makes you blind

Leave it alone right up until... (5, Insightful)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#43773673)

It's only going to be left alone if it can make giant piles of money and Yahoo management doesn't think they can boost some other property by linking them together.

Given that Tumblr is currently not profitable and Yahoo management most definitely thinks they can use it to boost their other properties, a promise that it'll be left alone isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Re:Leave it alone right up until... (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43773829)

It's only going to be left alone if it can make giant piles of money and Yahoo management doesn't think they can boost some other property by linking them together.

Given that Tumblr is currently not profitable and Yahoo management most definitely thinks they can use it to boost their other properties, a promise that it'll be left alone isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

which gets us to the question, what if tumblr was profitable, let's pick numbers like 20 million in costs and 24 million in revenue - would it have been worth 10 billion dollars then? like, what the fuck yahoo, what the fuck?? was tumblr trolling them that google was going to buy them??

Re:Leave it alone right up until... (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year ago | (#43774559)

which gets us to the question, what if tumblr was profitable, let's pick numbers like 20 million in costs and 24 million in revenue - would it have been worth 10 billion dollars then?

No.

$4 million annual income as a return on $10 billion isn't as good as parking the $10 billion in your typical savings account. Hell, at ONE billion, the savings account would probably still be a better choice.

Much less some real investment...

Ms Pie will be VERY upset if you break a pinky pro (2)

mabhatter654 (561290) | about a year ago | (#43773741)

They need to take pinky promises VERY seriously... Have you seen what those Bronies are capable of?

It's right there in NSFW on Tumblr!

Re:Ms Pie will be VERY upset if you break a pinky (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774009)

Pretty sure the terms of a Pinkie Promise require a heart in order that you may cross it and hope to die.

Re:Ms Pie will be VERY upset if you break a pinky (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774707)

Pretty sure the terms of a Pinkie Promise require a heart in order that you may cross it and hope to die.

Stick a cupcake in my AAW, BUCK NAW, WHY DID I CLICK THAT!

Re:Ms Pie will be VERY upset if you break a pinky (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774013)

Have you seen what those Bronies are capable of?

It's right there in NSFW on Tumblr!

Child molestation?

"...make [Tumblr] a significant cash generator..." (4, Interesting)

tlambert (566799) | about a year ago | (#43773785)

"whether it'll alter Tumblr's DNA in order to make the latter more of a significant cash generator"

Perhaps they could first make Yahoo a significant cash generator, and when they have a proven method for that, THEN apply it to Tumblr and other properties.

Re:"...make [Tumblr] a significant cash generator. (1)

jfengel (409917) | about a year ago | (#43775233)

Over the past 12 months, Yahoo's revenue was $4.91B, for a gross profit of $3.37B. They have enough cash on hand to buy Tumblr three times over ($3.01B), and practically no debt ($.036B).

Whatever is is wrong with Yahoo (and it's a LOT) it's still a massive revenue-generating machine. (Whether this Tumblr acquisition will contribute to that in the future... that's far less clear.)

Here on Slashdot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773799)

Google: Good

Yahoo!: Baaaaad

You may now return to your two minute hate.... idiots

Re:Here on Slashdot (5, Informative)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#43774007)

The AC is right about the Orwellian two minutes hate [wikipedia.org] . As soon as I read the headline I knew it would have been submitted by Nerval's Lobster and link to a slashdot/topic/cloud or slashdot/topic/bi opinion piece by Nick Kolakowski.
  • The headline evokes childish playground antics
  • The headline is about a news story we already covered yesterday
  • The headline takes the position that big company buying little company will ruin it, but provocatively flips it around to get a rise out of Slashdotters who will inevitably argue against it

As [slashdot.org] previously [slashdot.org] noted [slashdot.org] , "Slashdot Editor" Nick Kolakowski [slashdot.org] is once again promoting his own "Business Intelligence/Cloud" [slashdot.org] opinion pieces under the guise of the fake user Nerval's Lobster [slashdot.org] . He's simply trolling for pageviews, as he does just about every weekday... but this one is particularly shameless, as he's writing something almost no one will believe about a story we discussed yesterday. It's almost like his day consists of reading the comments of slashdot stories to see what deeply-seated opinions he can play off the next day to justify his job.

Don't feed the troll. Don't comment on stories "submitted" by Nerval's Lobster.

Emotion not an option (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#43774107)

Google: Good

Yahoo!: Baaaaad

You may now return to your two minute hate.... idiots

Except you need to start getting informed, this is not a pissing contest between search engines...if it was Yahoo already gave up search;it is a glorified from end for Microsoft. This is discussing about taking over of a social network *cough* by Yahoo! in the hope of reversing its fortunes, and the value of acquisition.

Re:Here on Slashdot (-1, Troll)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#43774267)

Nonono!

it's:

Google: Evil scumbags.
Yahoo!: Incompetent fools.
Facebook: All of the above.

The real story should be... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43773881)

A largely irrelevant search engine apparently has 1.1 Billion lying around?

Re:The real story should be... (1)

meta-monkey (321000) | about a year ago | (#43774913)

http://ycharts.com/companies/YHOO/cash_on_hand [ycharts.com]

About $3 billion in cash and short term investments. While that ain't just walkin-around money, sinking a third of what you've got into something that 1) isn't currently profitable and 2) your press release about the acquisition announces your plan is to "do nothing with it" is head-assplode crazy. If I had stock in Yahoo I'd be dumping it about now.

Customers and zero price. (4, Interesting)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about a year ago | (#43773891)

Once customers get used to getting something for free or close to free, they are not going to pay more, no matter what. All these VC's paying customers to use their product for free is setting up the mentality. When they stop subsidizing it, it founders.

I see mundane things in bed bath and beyond, 12$ for the shower curtain or 250$ for a window treatment kit. People just shrug and pay. The very same people pick a flight that is 10$ cheaper but needs an additional stop and 3 more hours. All the price maximizing optimizing strategies by the airlines have created a sense that" my fellow passenger probably paid 10$ less for the very same ticket" and that changes the way people shop and decide. All these social networks are going to find it difficult to make money off their users.

In a country like India where piracy is rampant and no one wants to pay anything for any kind of music, video, movie or software, the telephone ringtones are raking in several hundred million dollars to the phone companies. So how users arrive at a consensus fair price is a very difficult thing to understand or predict.

Was the purchase made in fear? (2)

CHK6 (583097) | about a year ago | (#43773951)

If Yahoo wanted to more tightly integrate with Tumblr, then why a complete buyout? It makes far more sense to partner with Tumblr at a lower cost. If Yahoo plans to bet the farm on Tumblr add to the legal agreement that in the event Tumblr goes under, that Yahoo retains the rights to the technology. Unless Tumblr already has that in place with another entity, which means an out and out buyout is required. They could have had a partnership where by if Tumblr falls below a market value, then Yahoo has first buy out option. Which circles back that Yahoo doesn't feel that it can partner with Tumblr in fear of lost assets and sunk costs, because there is a real potential of the Tumblr not succeeding in the future. This is not a case to flop one billion dollars on the table.

I understand the model Yahoo is fielding with Tumblr, many companies do this. But they mostly do this in areas where the "mother ship" has no direct experience in that market. It's best to keep the business models separate. But for Yahoo who is in the same market space as Tumblr to have a hands off approach is a testament that Yahoo's executives have no idea how to incorporate technology. Which gets back to this is an overpaid partnership.

Yahoo is not trust-worthy. Tumblr is dead (1)

gweihir (88907) | about a year ago | (#43773955)

Quite obvious. They were stupid in the past, they are stupid now, why should anyone believe them.

what about the other direction? (1)

stenvar (2789879) | about a year ago | (#43774209)

Does Tumblr pinkie-swear they are not going to bankrupt Yahoo? I mean, they cost a lot of money, how are they going to deliver a return on that investment?

Sergeant Shultz (1)

minstrelmike (1602771) | about a year ago | (#43774293)

Yahoo's promise seems a lot like Shultz' in Hogan's Heroes. "I know nothing."
Yahoo seems to operate under a binary system of choices. either they will do nothing at all to the site, including no maintenance (geocities, flickr) or else they will add stuff such as advertising. Yahoo's problem is that their internal bureaucracy has only those two options.

Changing something to make it better is just not in their DNA. I even wonder how many of their own employees use Yahoo as their home page.

And if they're at work, the firewall probably prevents Yahoo employees from "wasting" time reading Tumblr.

Google to purchase Yahoo in... (1)

cjjjer (530715) | about a year ago | (#43774619)

3...2...1

With all that user data it would seem rather logical as the next step.

Re:Google to purchase Yahoo in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43774749)

3...2...1

With all that user data it would seem rather logical as the next step.

Logical, yes. Perhaps, ultimately, even desirable, if only from the utilitarian standpoint of "Save Yahoo! from itself". But there's no chance in hell Microsoft would let that happen, either via deals they have with Yahoo! or the World's Most Obvious Antitrust Lawsuit.

No, it's far more likely Microsoft is going to buy them out.

Two possibilities (1)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about a year ago | (#43774809)

Yahoo will sooner or later realize that they can't buy "cool", and that their either going to render Tumblr into yahoo, thereby ruining it, or let Tumblr go off on its merry way by selling it to someone else, or to it's prior owners who, thanks to Yahoo, have $1.1 billion to buy it with.

IMO, the net of this purchase is that in a few years, Yahoo will again not own Tumblr and will be about $900 million lighter for their trouble.

Pron (3, Insightful)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about a year ago | (#43774849)

There is significant chunk of pron on Tumblr - ahem, I mean, so I've heard - and now it's owned by a publicly traded company? They will definitely be the first casualty (followed by about 75% of Tumblr's employees in 13 months or so).
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...