Comments on: Time Warner Gives Up on AOL http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/ Trusted Insights and Conversations on the Next Wave of Technology Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:47:41 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Jesse Kopelman http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/#comment-948733 Jesse Kopelman Sun, 31 May 2009 23:27:35 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=51968#comment-948733 <p>How was it TW's mistake when it was AOL that bought TW and not the other way around? I'd argue it was a good move too, as what would AOL be worth today as a standalone company if they hadn't made that deal? The only mistake was that made by investors that didn't cash right after this acquisition -- it was a clear signal from AOL that they believed their stock to be overvalued.</p> How was it TW’s mistake when it was AOL that bought TW and not the other way around? I’d argue it was a good move too, as what would AOL be worth today as a standalone company if they hadn’t made that deal? The only mistake was that made by investors that didn’t cash right after this acquisition — it was a clear signal from AOL that they believed their stock to be overvalued.

]]> By: The Leading Class and the Lagging Class on the Web http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/#comment-948345 The Leading Class and the Lagging Class on the Web Sat, 30 May 2009 17:02:35 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=51968#comment-948345 <p>[...] None of these laggards will see a quick end. They’ll be able to endure for years serving the people who haven’t taken to Facebook or maybe tried and then abandoned Twitter, people who are comfortable with a simpler, more familiar experience on the web. But it’s an ever-shrinking crowd. A decade ago, AOL chose a complacent path by maintaining its gated online community, shunning the migration of content and services to the web itself. And look where AOL is today. [...]</p> [...] None of these laggards will see a quick end. They’ll be able to endure for years serving the people who haven’t taken to Facebook or maybe tried and then abandoned Twitter, people who are comfortable with a simpler, more familiar experience on the web. But it’s an ever-shrinking crowd. A decade ago, AOL chose a complacent path by maintaining its gated online community, shunning the migration of content and services to the web itself. And look where AOL is today. [...]

]]> By: Gadget Sleuth http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/#comment-947644 Gadget Sleuth Thu, 28 May 2009 18:26:05 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=51968#comment-947644 <p>Eh,,,the company is old news these days, and with their spammy, polluted image, it'll be tough to do anything with it.</p> Eh,,,the company is old news these days, and with their spammy, polluted image, it’ll be tough to do anything with it.

]]> By: Make way for AOL | iSawNEWS.com http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/#comment-947632 Make way for AOL | iSawNEWS.com Thu, 28 May 2009 18:03:53 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=51968#comment-947632 <p>[...] it will focus on three areas: content, advertising and social networking. But things haven’t exactly been rosy at AOL, revenue-wise. So for the time being, it gets to hold on to the access line business, which [...]</p> [...] it will focus on three areas: content, advertising and social networking. But things haven’t exactly been rosy at AOL, revenue-wise. So for the time being, it gets to hold on to the access line business, which [...]

]]> By: MichaelSF http://gigaom.com/2009/05/28/time-warner-gives-up-on-aol/#comment-947594 MichaelSF Thu, 28 May 2009 15:54:22 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=51968#comment-947594 <p>I was a victim long ago of AOL's spam practices. Then when I tried to cancel it took a year to get rid of them. I had to eventually close the AmEx account and cancel the card that AOL was tapping.</p> <p>That was in 1999. Since then I have always hoped AOL would die a horrible death. I am disappointed that the company still has 6 million subscribers.</p> <p>Can't the FBI throw the company principals in prison for something? Maybe for polluting the environment with those CD mailings?</p> <p>Yeah, AOL certainly has a built a nice legacy. "You've got mail" my ass.</p> I was a victim long ago of AOL’s spam practices. Then when I tried to cancel it took a year to get rid of them. I had to eventually close the AmEx account and cancel the card that AOL was tapping.

That was in 1999. Since then I have always hoped AOL would die a horrible death. I am disappointed that the company still has 6 million subscribers.

Can’t the FBI throw the company principals in prison for something? Maybe for polluting the environment with those CD mailings?

Yeah, AOL certainly has a built a nice legacy. “You’ve got mail” my ass.

]]>