DoubleClick may have spurned offer from Microsoft

John Battelle, chairman of Federated Media and renowned Google watcher, is claiming that not only was Microsoft interested in DoubleClick, but apparently the advertising giant shunned a better deal from Microsoft and decided to accept Google’s offer regardless. If this is true, Microsoft's calls to the US government to scrutinize the Google/DoubleClick deal were quite understandable. Battelle writes, "This raises a very important question - why didn't Microsoft match Google's $3.1 billion offer. Smith would not comment on this, but I can report from very good sources that in fact the company did offer to match it, and was willing to pay even more to insure that Google did not corner the online ad market. But for whatever reasons, the private equity firm that owned the majority of DoubleClick's shares decided to go with Google."

Battelle's sources are anonymous, and so for now this must all remain unconfirmed. He's certainly right about one thing: Microsoft has the money, and could have easily afforded to beat Google's offer. This was an all-cash deal with Google, perhaps Microsoft would only offer a mixed stock/cash deal? Unless there is increased government scrutiny of the deal, we may never know how this deal went down exactly. What does Neowin think, why did the owners of DoubleClick choose Google over Microsoft?

News source: Ars Technica

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google courts broadcasters with YouTube ads

Next Story

Hack Your Way to a 120GB Xbox 360 HDD For $100 Less

19 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

maybe they thought microsoft was on the decline and google was only getting better... so you take a little less now, but in a few years it'll pay off...

Hm... Wasn't double click a public company? if so... welol then I think this whole story just validates Microsoft's request for inquiry...Even if not...the fact that the owners seemed more then willing to sell out but didn't go to highest bidder plays at something...weird going on

come on its google...

They probably wanted to use the rock-wall and get all that free grommet food.


I'm sure I would! heh :P Google offered a lot more perks than just cash is my opinion!

DoubleClick is evil. Evil attracts evil. Google's "don't be evil" policy is a cheap marketing ploy. They have no revenue generating product or service other than advertising and their stupid generic search appliances. They are leading the second internet bubble and it will pop in their face.

Did someone from Google crap in your Wheaties this morning? It's just a company like any other company. A group of investors and employees that are working towards a common goal. Just like Microsoft or Apple. As a technologist and consumer, I'm glad we have companies around like Google and Mozilla. This competition drives innovation and efficiency which is good for the industry and the consumer. Look at the the big picture. Plus, Google is not going anywhere, anytime soon... so you might as well accept that they are going to be involved with changing the landscape of technology for years to come. BTW - what is "evil" is a mater of opinion.

lbmouse said,
Did someone from Google crap in your Wheaties this morning? It's just a company like any other company. A group of investors and employees that are working towards a common goal. Just like Microsoft or Apple. As a technologist and consumer, I'm glad we have companies around like Google and Mozilla. This competition drives innovation and efficiency which is good for the industry and the consumer. Look at the the big picture. Plus, Google is not going anywhere, anytime soon... so you might as well accept that they are going to be involved with changing the landscape of technology for years to come. BTW - what is "evil" is a mater of opinion.

Oh don't go spewing this crap. You sure as **** wouldn't be saying that if MS and Google's positions were swapped in this whole ordeal.

-Spenser

No, I'd be saying the same thing if MS and Google's positions were reversed.

Microsoft, like Google, is nothing more or less than a company that produces technology tools and services. A group of investors and employees that are working towards a common goal. A long time ago I worked at the MS campus in Redmond when I was employed at an on-site consulting firm in Seattle. I still have many friends there (the ones who haven't moved to Mountain View, CA). I'm currently employed by one the world's largest Microsoft Certified Partners and primarily work on MS centric projects, but the last thing I'll ever do is be blinded by brand loyalty (currently known as fanboyism). I encourage my developers to use the tool that is best for the job at hand and I would never hire anyone who is not open to using alternative technological tools. So your presumptions of my view is very incorrect. Now get your lips off of Gates' backside so that you can see the wonderful diversity we have in this industry.

stifler6478 said,

Oh don't go spewing this crap. You sure as **** wouldn't be saying that if MS and Google's positions were swapped in this whole ordeal.

-Spenser

If MS didn't have any real marketable products or services I would most certainly spew asterisks at them as well.

GreyWolfSC said,
DoubleClick is evil. Evil attracts evil. Google's "don't be evil" policy is a cheap marketing ploy. They have no revenue generating product or service other than advertising and their stupid generic search appliances. They are leading the second internet bubble and it will pop in their face.

So, are you going to perhaps give us some examples to prove that either company is, as you say, "evil". It might be more believable then, I think. I also think it would be interesting if you could prove your "evil attracts evil", theory. Until then, I think I'll stay impassive.

Also, of course it's a cheap marketing ploy. I've never heard of a policy or motto that was not for advertising purposes of some sort. If they're motto was, "we're evil as hell", I probably would trust them even less than I do now, even though I know it's a cheap marketing ploy.

lastly, so what? Are you actually complaining about them making money off advertising as opposed to charging for all their services? I'm sure you can donate if you really feel that strongly about it.