No Bigger Yahoo Than Steve Ballmer

Published by • February 6th, 2008 RSS News Feed

5 videos that prove Yahoo and Microsoft are a perfect match

In reverse order, here are a few videos that show without a doubt that Steve Ballmer and Yahoo are a perfect match.  I mean, could you argue that there is a bigger Yahoo in silicon valley than Steve Ballmer?  I didn’t think so!

#5 The iPhone… what a joke, that concept will never fly!

YouTube Preview Image

#4 Steve Ballmer gets pwn’d

YouTube Preview Image

#3  Remember when Redmond introduced its latest product to flop? Microsoft Deodorant

YouTube Preview Image

#2 In the 80s, did anyone predict Ballmer would be the CEO of a multinational corporation?

YouTube Preview Image

#1 Steve Ballmer, I’ve got four words for ya:  Prozac!

YouTube Preview Image

So is there any doubt now that Steve Ballmer’s era of MS is a match for Yahoo? I didn’t think so.

Itola Author

is an Attorney, Entrepreneur, and Blogger from the Silicon Valley.
Email this author | All posts by

RSS feed | Trackback URI

2 Comments »

2008-02-07 15:23:03

Funny videos.
I don’t know… I don’t think the merger will happen.
Very interesting to watch though.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Infamous Anonymous
2008-06-16 15:43:12

Nope. Yahoo! has made it very clear Microsoft will never get ahold of them. Even a histile takeover isn’t an option since the shareholders have made it clear they’re not about to give Microsoft what they think is a great value.

Of course, Yahoo! has, for the past decase, overestimated its own value.

Still, since it’s looking like Google will be acquiring Yahoo, MS will have less of a chance of getting what they want.

Oh well, maybe MS can acquire another faltering company simply so they can destroy them.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Name
E-mail
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.