Yahoo, Won’t You Be Our Web Hero?

With the Yahoo and Microsoft rumor mill STILL buzzing, it’s hard to know whether Yahoo, after all the drama, will eventually land on their feet. Yahoo just announced a reshuffling of some top executives after the recent exodus of top-level employees. Everyone has their own opinion on the matter. Here is my open letter to Yahoo:

Dear Yahoo,

You are one of the most visited, if not the most visited, web property in the world. You had the insight to buy Delicious and Flickr while others were still questioning Web 2.0. You had all the properties necessary to compete with Facebook and Myspace and yet you didn’t unify your offerings into a cohesive social networking product. This has happened time and time again where you miss an opportunity to capitalize on your strengths and compete in a new market.

Another new market is emerging. This market is tired of being stuck in walled gardens. This market wants open access to all applications and information streams. You have the ability to provide this new market what they’re looking for. Focus on aggregating information. Don’t be a competitor to anyone. Be above everyone. Be that top layer (see what FriendFeed is trying to do). You have the ability now to redefine what Yahoo is. Make it a consumer evangelist company. Make it something we, as web users, can get behind and be proud of. Google’s mantra “Don’t be evil” has been running thin lately. We need a new web hero. Be our web hero.

Don’t worry about your investors. If they haven’t sold your stock by now, they’re in it for the long haul. Focus on improving your products. Were behind you. Just be communicative. Let us know what is going on. Be honest about it. We’re ok with delays, but not lies. Others are gunning to be our next web hero. The odds are not in your favor. Prove the critics wrong. It’s time to innovate. Get to it.

Ely Rosenstock

The Latest King

For all those who haven’t heard yet, Yahoo entered into a partnership with Google that will effectively make Google the ultimate king of search advertising (just in case it wasn’t before). Google can monetize search much better than any company on the planet. So even with Yahoo giving up a portion of their revenues to Google, they should still make more money than if they were doing it themselves.

So the obvious question here, is this a good thing? The obvious answer is NO! This deal eliminates any potential competition for Google in search marketing. A monopoly in any market is always bad.  On the other hand, this might not turn out badly for consumers or businesses. Dominance in technology is extremely hard to hold onto. Former incredibly dominant companies include Microsoft, Palm, AOL, Yahoo, Sony…do I need to go on? The bigger a company gets, the more of a target they become.

The majority of people started their experience with the web through AOL. People didn’t understand how the web worked. They just knew that they sign onto AOL and can email, chat, and do whatever else we all used to do on AOL. At some point, the majority gained a better understanding of the web and learned that they don’t need AOL to do what they want to do online. They can access the web through any ISP and get the same information. AOL, as a gateway, became pointless. Through Internet Explorer’s dominance/monopoly, users developed a similar relationship with IE. They felt that they can use any ISP but IE was their connection to the web. Users learned more, and now understand that any browser can get them there.

Google holds that place in the many user’s minds at this point in time. It’s a gateway to the information they want. Google, however, doesn’t hold that information. The information is out there for anyone to organize and spit back to us. Google’s algorithm is good when compared to it’s competitors, but it’s not SO much better. There is a very good chance that a competitor will come along in the next decade and show us how Google is a gateway, and we don’t need them to get the information we need. Check back for an update in 10 years. We’ll see if I was right.

The Web 2.0 Civil War

I’ve been noticing a lot of battles amongst Web 2.0 giants lately. Let’s just take a look at a few of them:

• Microsoft’s battle to buy Yahoo (now it’s more like Yahoo’s battle to be bought by Microsoft)
• eBay’s battle with Craigslist
• Michael Arrington’s battle with Wired
• and more recently, Google’s battle with Facebook

What I find most interesting about these battles is that, only recently, are we seeing the dark side of business with some Web 2.0 darlings. eBay and Craigslist! They’re such good companies that have helped consumers communicate and get better prices for their goods. Why are they fighting? Well, it’s because eBay bought 25% of Craigslist and then launched a competing service. What about Michael Arrington and Wired? Well, Techcrunch is going to be syndicated at the Wall Street Journal website and Wired is pissed about it.

What is comes down to is that none of these companies (even Craigslist) is about anything other than money. Each company has its own agenda and it all comes down to dollars and cents. Find me one successful web 2.0 company that seems to be altruistic in its ways and I’ll show you how all they’re doing is focusing on the $$$. You have to love capitalism.