<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google&#8217;s AOL Stake Down By Half?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/</link>
	<description>The Business of Technology</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Google Bemoans AOL Investment - GigaOM</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-892649</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Bemoans AOL Investment - GigaOM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 02:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-892649</guid>
		<description>[...] Back in April, I had pointed out that Google&#8217;s investment in AOL was worth $500 million, mostly because there were rumors that AOL was being valued at $10 billion as it was being prepped for a sale.  At the time Google made an investment in AOL, its estimated value (as per deal terms) was $20 billion. Some people believe that AOL is worth less than $10 billion these days. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Back in April, I had pointed out that Google&#8217;s investment in AOL was worth $500 million, mostly because there were rumors that AOL was being valued at $10 billion as it was being prepped for a sale.  At the time Google made an investment in AOL, its estimated value (as per deal terms) was $20 billion. Some people believe that AOL is worth less than $10 billion these days. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Microsoft To Yahoo: Take a Hike! - GigaOM</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-876705</link>
		<dc:creator>Microsoft To Yahoo: Take a Hike! - GigaOM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 00:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-876705</guid>
		<description>[...] Yahoo has no real suitors and its viable options as a standalone company are limited. * By choosing to sleep with [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Yahoo has no real suitors and its viable options as a standalone company are limited. * By choosing to sleep with [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Om Malik</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870618</link>
		<dc:creator>Om Malik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870618</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;@ Sony. Yes, and I wonder how that goes down with the FTC/DoJ anti-trust officials.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Sony. Yes, and I wonder how that goes down with the FTC/DoJ anti-trust officials.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sony</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870601</link>
		<dc:creator>sony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870601</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;in other words, if AOL manages to buy yahoo, Google will own some of Yahoo.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>in other words, if AOL manages to buy yahoo, Google will own some of Yahoo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Goldman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870574</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Goldman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:46:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/2008/04/10/googles-aol-stake-down-by-a-half/#comment-870574</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Re: Loser dialup business.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Yes, the business is losing close to 200,000 subs per month, but I know of many outfits that would like to buy part or all of this base.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Dialup itself is profitable. One problem, of course, is that this user base is afflicted with AOHell, a popular nickname for AOL software because it appears to be designed to prevent users from leaving.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, some ISPs have become skilled at making the switch, as have services like TrueSwitch.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The dialup base would be valued at # of subscribers at a certain date &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; purchase. Generally, at less than 1x annual revenue.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If dialup ARPU is $15, and AOL has 8,000,000 to sell, that's $90 x 8 million = $720 million.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It's not many billions, but it's also not spare change.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Loser dialup business.</p>
<p>Yes, the business is losing close to 200,000 subs per month, but I know of many outfits that would like to buy part or all of this base.</p>
<p>Dialup itself is profitable. One problem, of course, is that this user base is afflicted with AOHell, a popular nickname for AOL software because it appears to be designed to prevent users from leaving.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, some ISPs have become skilled at making the switch, as have services like TrueSwitch.</p>
<p>The dialup base would be valued at # of subscribers at a certain date <em>after</em> purchase. Generally, at less than 1x annual revenue.</p>
<p>If dialup ARPU is $15, and AOL has 8,000,000 to sell, that&#8217;s $90 x 8 million = $720 million.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not many billions, but it&#8217;s also not spare change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
