I don’t know how closely you’ve been watching the Yahoo debacle, but yesterday’s letter from Carl Icahn to the board at Yahoo was a doozy.

If you somehow don’t know who Carl Icahn is, think “possible role model for Gordon Gecko“.  He’s very, very  effective at what he does.  And he’s not someone to be toyed with on any level.

Some highlights from his letter (in case you’re too lazy to click the link):

"It is clear to me that the board of directors of Yahoo has acted irrationally"

and

"It is irresponsible to hide behind management's more than overly optimistic financial forecasts."

and just in case you still thought he was kidding:

I have therefore taken the following actions: (1) during the last 10 days, I have purchased
approximately 59 million shares and share-equivalents of Yahoo; (2) I have formed a 10-person
slate which will stand for election against the current board; and (3) I have sought antitrust
clearance from the Federal Trade Commission to acquire up to approximately $2.5 billion worth
of Yahoo stock.

Ouch.  I think he means it.

Now I personally think a Yahoo/Microsoft combination is a bad idea.  Adding big companies together is rarely a way to drive innovation — it usually has just the opposite effect.

But here’s the thing: Microsoft offered a significant premium over Yahoo’s stock price.  When the offer first came in at $30-odd, Yahoo was trading below $20 a share.  Whether you liked the idea or not, Microsoft were paying a huge premium over what the market believed Yahoo was worth.

And at the end of the day, most shareholders hold stock to see a return on their investment.  It was a very foolish decision by Yahoo to just try and ignore them.  At best it was naive…

And don’t forget, the board of directors are answerable to the shareholders. Not Yahoo founders or employees.

Let me put it this way:  Imagine your Mom’s car hadn’t been running too smoothly for several years.  Out of the blue, someone offered you 150% of the Kelly Blue Book value if you’d sell it.  You said no, we can fix the car and make it worth much more than that.

When you explain your “no” to Mom later in the day, is she happy or pissed?

By ignoring Microsoft, Yahoo have attracted the attention of a much more dangerous suitor in Mr. Icahn (and by dangerous, I mean dangerous to whatever chance they had of hanging on to their company).

Is this the point where the Yahoo board step up and start playing the game well?  If this letter is anything to go by, apparently not.

At this point I see zero chance of Yahoo continuing to exist in anything like it’s current form.  Congratulations to the board on successfully shooting yourselves in the head…

Categories: Old Posts
181No Comments »http://blog.nicholasnapp.com/2008/05/16/the-icahn-ouchie/The+Icahn+Ouchie...2008-05-16+15%3A42%3A49NickN

With apologies to Monty Python…

I’ve had a Yahoo email address for about 10 years, so I get quite a bit of spam.  A few weeks ago, I noticed they tweaked their spam filter.

The old filter wasn’t great, but the new one has been a pain in the butt.  It routinely puts legitimate emails in the spam folder, even when the sender is in my Yahoo address book.

At the same time, there are certain spam emails I get again and again in my inbox.  These messages have the same subject line and same originating address.  I flag them as spam each time, but they still end up in my inbox.

Here’s what I don’t understand:  Yahoo can store gigs and gigs of email, a bunch of profile data, inbox rules and a lot of other data that is specific to me… and yet they can’t remember any personalized data about what I think is spam?   What gives?

I just can’t see how hard it is to have a personal blacklist based on when I press the spam button, and a personal whitelist based on (a) my address book and (b) other emails in my inbox.

As a rough estimate, those two measures would decrease false positives and false negatives by 60-75% for me.

We all lose a lot of time to spam.  It seems to me that the next big leap in anti-spam will be driven more by common sense and user behavior than a clever algorithm…

Categories: Old Posts
180No Comments »http://blog.nicholasnapp.com/2008/05/14/spam-spam-spam-egg-and-spam/Spam%2C+spam%2C+spam%2C+egg%2C+and+spam...2008-05-14+17%3A27%3A19NickN

Phillip Rhodes gave me a heads up about the newly formed Triangle Startup Drinks.

From the TSD site:

A simple concept: startup culture in cities around the world gathers around a bar to have a pint and discuss what they are working on, what they need help with and what they can do for each other

Sounds good, no? The first meeting is this Friday, May 16, 2008. It’ll be held at Champps @ Streets at Southpoint and it starts around 6:00pm.

C’mon kids… Beer, entrepreneurs and chit-chat. What could go wrong?

Categories: Old Posts
178No Comments »http://blog.nicholasnapp.com/2008/05/12/beer-n-entrepreneurs-what-can-go-wrong/Beer+%27n%27+Entrepreneurs+--+What+can+go+wrong%3F%3F%3F2008-05-12+23%3A48%3A18NickN

As some of you may know, I’m not allowed to vote. When asked, I like to pretend it’s due to a felony conviction incurred after viciously assailing an annoying pollster, but the truth is that I’m still a Brit, not a US Citizen.

[I've floated "No taxation without representation" to the IRS a couple of times, but apparently the time when that argument lead somewhere has long since passed.]

One of the perks of not voting is that I get to wash my hands of the whole election process and claim plausible deniability for the often absurd actions of the US Government. (Just to be clear, the UK Government is often equally as absurd, but due to the way voting works over there I can’t vote in the UK now either).

Anyway. The point being that my opinion on politics has no bearing whatsoever on reality… which is why I don’t usually talk about it much. But the forthcoming general election promises to be a doozy, so why keep quiet!

In that spirit, here is my one and only post (probably ever) on the subject of politics. Let’s pretend I’m a responsible Super Delegate — who would/should I vote for?

Early on, I saw an interview with Obama and I wasn’t too impressed. But the more I heard Hillary talk, the more I realized she would say just about anything to get elected. War’s popular, vote for it. Blue collar’s the way to go — hide my Yale/Wellesley/$100M+ lifestyle and do Bud with a chaser. 9/11 might still scare people, so throw it into your speeches Rudy-style… Yikes.

In short, six months ago I wasn’t crazy about either candidate.

But if there’s one thing I’ve learned again and again, it’s that actions speak louder than words. I think there is a lot to be learned from how each candidate has run their campaign, and there are two simple tests:

1. Finances

If there’s one thing I hope to see different in the next Presidential term, it would be enough of a grasp of basic math that we can dig ourselves out of the ridiculous mountain of debt we’re in.

So let’s compare and contrast…

Clinton, we are told, is the epitome of experience. Yet her campaign is $10 Million in the hole. The UK’s Guardian had this to say:

“According to Clinton’s latest campaign finance report, at the end of March the campaign owed $10.3m in unpaid bills but had only $9.3m available to spend on the primary election.

Her campaign has also been criticised for its lavish spending, for instance the more than $25,000 spent at the Bellagio luxury hotel in Las Vegas in the days before the Nevada caucuses.

Her campaign apparently has also left a trail of unpaid bills behind it, failing to pay the very people she claims to understand and support..

In contrast, with “no experience”, Obama has $625,000 in debts and $31 MILLION in cash.

I think he wins that round by some margin.

2. Planning

Another thing that would be “neat” in our next President would be the ability to plan. And not only plan, but respond to changing circumstances and modify a plan as necessary. So again, let’s compare.

Hillary has repeatedly talked about how much Obama is spending. I also heard some folks on NPR today whining that Hillary’s team had no idea that the contest would go on so long and that’s why they were so cash strapped. I doubt Obama & team thought it would go on this long either.

But here’s the thing: Obama & team made a plan B (and probably a C & D) so that if things did drag on, they would be okay. Sure, he’s spending a lot of money, but he PLANNED to do that and he HAS THE MONEY. Clinton kept barreling along without regard to the changing circumstances which is a classic sign of poor planning.

So if I could vote, and if my political opinion mattered, I’d go with Obama. His campaign has apparently been run very well, it has coped with positive and negative changes in fortune and he’s kept it pretty clean. Above all, the financial numbers make sense and there’s clearly always been a well crafted and evolving plan.

And that is a refreshing change I can believe in…

Categories: Old Posts
1771 Comment »http://blog.nicholasnapp.com/2008/05/08/politics-imagine-you-were-a-superdelegate/Politics%21++Imagine+you+were+a+superdelegate...2008-05-08+04%3A03%3A04NickN

In case you didn’t know, BarCamp is returning to the Triangle on August 2, 2008 at the Red Hat offices in Raleigh.

If you don’t know what a BarCamp is, it’s time to find out. BarCamp is an “unconference”. It’s based on the idea that the best/most useful parts of a typical conference are the random conversations & meetups that happen in the hallways. Everyone shows up and the conference is assembled on the fly. Anyone with something to talk about can pitch a session idea and folks attend whatever they want to learn about. Last year, sessions ranged from Ruby on Rails to Open Moku to “How to be a CTO” to marketing & sales, and how to juggle.

It’s a great learning, teaching & networking event.

You can find out more at the BarCampRDU website.

Categories: Old Posts
175No Comments »http://blog.nicholasnapp.com/2008/05/06/barcamprdu-returns/BarCampRDU+Returns...2008-05-07+02%3A46%3A51NickN