Today’s Wall Street Journal story talking about yet another takeover attempt of Yahoo is incorrect, say our own sources. And unlike The Times’ story over the weekend, which was equally fictitious (and, here’s an interesting fact – both publications are owned by News Corp.), this story had direct consequences in the market.
Today’s story has former AOL CEO Jonathan Miller out pitching private equity funds to raise “$28 billion to $30 billion” to acquire all of Yahoo.
Miller, along with his partner Ross Levinsohn at Velocity Interactive Group, were also center stage in The Times’ story over the weekend.
Our sources say that while Miller and Levinsohn have been talking to Yahoo and Microsoft executives and shareholders for months about Yahoo’s future (and at different times both Miller and Levinsohn have been proposed as Yahoo board members), they have not had any serious discussions with private equity funds about raising capital to take over the company.
The two, along with their other partners at Velocity, have been busy trying to raise a new $300 million fund over the last year anyway. And so far, we understand, they’ve only received commitments for $150 million. So trying to simultaneously raise $30 billion to take over Yahoo seems more than far fetched.
Another reason the story makes no sense – Miller is bound by a non compete agreement with AOL that prohibits him from serving as an employee or board member to certain companies, including Yahoo. In fact, that non compete agreement is the reason Miller couldn’t join Yahoo’s board this last summer. The agreement doesn’t terminate until March, so any near term deal is impossible without AOL’s explicit consent. They wouldn’t give it last summer, and there’s no reason to believe they’d give it now.
Velocity won’t say much about the story, other than to comment that the WSJ made no real effort to contact them for comment before the story was published.
Our sources, combined with basic common sense, tell us the WSJ story is dead wrong. And there were consequences to the story – Yahoo’s stock jumped 11.7% today on the the incorrect news, before settling back down for the day. People lost money, and the SEC should be very interested in whoever was the source for this story.
Michael said “our sources”. Hey Michael, who is your sources? Are they credible?
The SEC should request a subpoena to Michael so he can reveal his source. It’s only fair if Times gets investigated because a defendant should have the right to face his accuser.
Michael, next time don’t use the word “source”. Put a name to it, or you’re just like every other journalists out there, liars.
IMHO, there is WAY, WAY, too much of this type of hit & run stock price manipulation taking place on Wall Street these days – I agree that the SEC should take a good, close look at this situation, but, it probably doesn’t have the guts – at least not until after Jan 20, 2009. Perhaps the new administration will rid the Street of these despicable Bush-era tactics.
Mike, no offense, but ‘your sources’ would probably be less inclined to tell you if it’s true or not since you run TechCrunch. This story could still have some merit behind it.
wow Michael you will lose a lot of credibility if you are wrong.
And a lot of kudos if he’s right! I think that in this particular story TC (new media) has better sources than WSJ.
This is becoming a thin line. Bash the reliable media network as though blog networks are small potatoes while they raise another round of funding. Soon they will be holding blogs accountable for their ’sources’ and we will see how much finger pointing is done then. By the way if your stupid enough to trade stock on a rumor than you’re dumb enough to get burnt… or smart when these things pan out.
When dealing with anonymous sources and the competition to leak, this is bound to happen to everyone – even the giants.
There must have been times in the past when TechCrunch was wrong and they may be times in the future.
It is just a statistical consequence of the 24/7, global, news era we all are addicted to.
The sources were listed in the Times story, and probably not repeated here as a link is provided.
It seems unusually odd that two allegedly false stories would surface within days without either merit or deliberate stock manipulation. The SEC should take a look at this, particularly at who made money on the stock before the market correction.
“And This Time People Lost Money”
Wow, this is unheard of! People losing money in the stock market? Even people making complete gambles on unconfirmed rumors? Who would have thought!? Thanks for the news Michael….oh wait, your ‘news’ is just unnamed sources as well.
I agree with some of the earlier posts something is fishy about these so called “breaking news stories” the SEC should investigate someone out there has lots of money on the table and is getting nervous Yahoo is about to tank, i’ve always been told follow the money…let’s see who is buying enormous amounts of seemingly worthless stock? In a company where key management worldwide are leaving their posts…..follow the money….
Ooops – scratch that.
The Microsoft and Yahoo sources weren’t named.
However, somebody somewhere is spouting this stuff.
I seriously doubt the WSJ would have run an unconfirmed story so closely after the Times debacle without a solid source to back it up. Large media outlets do not say “Ooops! My bad!” or run anything that opens them to that possibility, particularly when their competition was so recently humiliated by a similar story.
ha ha ha. Isn’t Miller constantly pretending to be raising a giant fund? Wasn’t it a $1B web 2.0 rollup fund that he was working on not too long ago.
I believe he really is looking for it and equally believe he will not find it.
Why on earth would Yahoo want the AOL CEO even close to its business. Was the Pets.com CEO not available?
Miller was instrumental in the growth of AOL in the years before Falco was hired. He was abruptly fired after the company’s stock rose over 40% in a six month period after he convinced AOL to move to an ad revenue based model.
Honestly – this guy is going to do something soon. It may not be Yahoo but I can’t imagine another company suitable for a do-over.
No Miller, don’t lose your way
lol
mike you are full of it and you know it…
I bet it was Cuban deflecting!!!
they did not deny it outright “no serious discussions” does not mean there has been no talks of such…. get real.
A solution:
“RE: Your account titled CHRIS , ending in XXXX
Your electronic funding transaction request for $XX000.00 on 12-01-2008 is complete as of 12-01-2008.
The transaction ID for your electronic withdrawal request is XXXXXXXX.
Please note that this transaction may be a periodic withdrawal that was previously requested.
For more information, or if you have any questions, please click “Reply” to send us a message, or call a Client Services representative.
Sincerely,
John B. Bunch
President
TD AMERITRADE”
Hooray for common sense!
In case you were wondering, that was AWAY from Ameritrade and to the old bank. No more risky business for me. Working for a living is way safer than day trading(in the morning before you leave for work)
In short, the answer to this TechCrunch experiment is “yes, techcrunch is too small to have any effect on Yahoo stock prices as a result of a bullshit story post.”
you obviously missed this and many other stories that techcrunch broke.
http://www.tech...this-afternoon/
You obviously didn’t read the post we’re commenting on right now.
Bringing up true positives has no bearing on the presence of false positives.
this is bullshit story which doesn’t make any sense….
Wow, this whole thing looks to me like a lottery that a few people know how to play and a whole lot of others who are funding the jackpot.
While the story of Miller raising $30b is not believable, your argument about his non-compete being a factor is somewhat weak. March is right around the corner. By the time he raises the money, makes an offer, settles on an offer, and completes the acquisition, his non-compete will have expired.
Does anyone remember this many false rumors involving a company? It seems like these stories are no more verified than a Yahoo message board story from the late 90s. It’s amazing that many people are getting duped.
As soon as read them on Drudge or other sources, I check Techcrunch for the truth!
Where are the private equity funds that have $20-30 billion to spend these days?
Wasnt Jessica one of the Cypress vid kids? And her reporting can move markets? That’s truly frightening.
It gives bullshit taste, plesae google buy yahoo
http://www.iamlittle.net
So what Arrington is really saying is that the WSJ has as much credibility as he does.
Wasn’t it expected with Ruper in charge?
Microsoft should buy Yahoo! to compete against G!
this is a sick story…. not sure but for some reason TechCrunch is way much biased for yahoo. Sick story… sick poster….
I knew it is a fake one.But Michael,do you think there is someone behind all this fake news?
I think may be there is someone behind them who wants to blow yahoo’s stock price.
What do you think of it,everyone?
This is just a market ploy to drive down the value of Yahoo and take it over for a bargain price.
All these false acquisition stories do nothing but hurt the value of the company on the stock market.
No serious person is going to give information to Michael Arrington. This is the big leagues and TechCrunch is all about the bush leagues. Do you get it?
I think publishing false rumors for gain is fraud, is it not? I would be surprised if Newscorp were willing to play that game – could get them into a lot of trouble…
NO. Posting false rumors should not be prosecuted even if it’s for gain. Investors need to be smarter. If you are dumb to trust every news you read, you are at fault to lose all your money.
I get tips from people that Yahoo will tank EVERY MINUTE. Why is it that I don’t bet on that news?!??! It’s because I’m not stupid. I let the first mover make their move, then I make mine.
TechCrunch attacking the WSJ over ethics is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read.
Mike just jumped the shark.