<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:,2009:/1/tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-</id>
  <updated>2009-10-30T14:01:00Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for Yahoo: &apos;Everything But The Kitchen Sink&apos; Approach Not Paying Dividends</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.23-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=6557" title="Yahoo: 'Everything But The Kitchen Sink' Approach Not Paying Dividends" />
    <published>2008-06-16T05:07:25Z</published>
    <updated>2009-03-28T04:39:27Z</updated>
    <title>Yahoo: &apos;Everything But The Kitchen Sink&apos; Approach Not Paying Dividends</title>
    <summary>Yahoo! Everything (But The Kitchen Sink)</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Richard MacManus</name>
      <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="Analysis" />
    
    <category term="Features" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/yahoo_everything_logo.jpg" width="200" />There's been a lot of <a href="http://www.techmeme.com/080615/p16#a080615p16">hand wringing</a> in the media over the weekend about Yahoo's rejection of Microsoft's takeover bid. Most of the coverage has focused on the (very serious) financial and people issues that Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang is now facing. But let's turn some attention to <strong>Yahoo's product line</strong> for a moment. How will that be affected? Remember the <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_new_mission_about_the_people.php">Peanut Butter Manifesto</a>? Or <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/100_days_for_yahoo_intro.php">Jerry Yang's 100 days</a> of strategic planning? Both aimed to create a more streamlined and focused product range. Yet nearly a year later, it's still 'everything but the kitchen sink'. And the shareholders are pissed.</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.aplus.net/?CID=RWW_smallbiz_125x125" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/rww_inpost_aplus.jpg" border="0" alt="Aplus.net" /></a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=2229">According to comScore</a>, Yahoo recently slipped from the number 1 spot in the list of top Web properties in the US. In April 2008 Google became number 1 for the first time <em> [although interesting to note that if AOL was combined with Time Warner, as it appeared to be in 2007, </em>they<em> would be number 1 <b>UPDATE:</b> a couple of commenters pointed out that it is Unique Visitors and so there'd be some overlap if AOL and TW were combined; so they wouldn't be #1]</em>:</p>
<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/comscore_top50_apr08.png" /></p>
<p>One year ago, you can see that Yahoo had a reasonably healthy lead:</p>
<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/comscore_top50_apr07.png" /></p>
<p>comScore's CEO <a href="http://www.forbes.com/prnewswire/feeds/prnewswire/2008/05/15/prnewswire200805151433PR_NEWS_USPR_____AQTH533.html">noted that</a> Google took the top property position &quot;thanks to continued search growth and rapid growth at YouTube&quot;. We knew search was causing Yahoo (and Microsoft) major grief in website growth, but interesting that Google's 07 acquisition YouTube is also contributing to Yahoo's woes.</p>
<h2>The Core Yahoo Products</h2>
<p>In July last year we identified what we considered to be the <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/top_10_yahoo_properties.php">Top 10 Yahoo! Properties</a>:</p>
<ol>
  <li><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/">Yahoo News</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/">Answers</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.flickr.com">Flickr</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://pipes.yahoo.com/">Pipes</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://new.mail.yahoo.com/">Yahoo Mail</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://messenger.yahoo.com/">Messenger</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://music.yahoo.com/">Yahoo  Music</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://del.icio.us/">del.icio.us</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://mobile.yahoo.com">Yahoo Mobile</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://my.yahoo.com">My Yahoo</a></li>
</ol>
<p>Those were our picks almost a year ago of Yahoo's top products. To be frank, not a lot has changed since then - and perhaps that's half the problem. There have been incremental improvements in all of them, and products like MyBlogLog and Buzz are showing healthy growth. But none has become a runaway success, like YouTube has for Google.</p>
<h2>Not Enough Focus?</h2>
<p>Is the problem that Yahoo just isn't focusing enough on those core products? Sean Percival has <a href="http://www.seanpercival.com/blog/2008/06/15/18_easy_ways_to_fix_yahoo/">a great post</a>, in which he points to Yahoo's <a href="http://everything.yahoo.com/">Everything list</a> -- a giant list of products that Yahoo owns. Sean has 18 suggestions to &quot;fix&quot; Yahoo, most of them involving nixing a product.</p>
<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/yahoo_everything_610.jpg" /></p>
<p>Here is Sean's list of products that he thinks Yahoo should review (along with his comments):</p>
<blockquote>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://360.yahoo.com">360</a>: The social network that never was. Lose it, integrate interesting features directly into the Yahoo profile system.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://answers.yahoo.com">Answers</a>: One of the few great new services to come out of Yahoo recently. Introduce more moderators and integrate some of the Yahoo Answers content into search.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://bix.yahoo.com/">Bix</a>: This service rates videos in a &#8220;hot or not&#8221; format. Seems pretty useless, lose it.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://bookmarks.yahoo.com/">Bookmarks</a>: Why have multiple services performing the same task? Lose it and shift users to del.icio.us.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://buzz.yahoo.com/">Buzz</a>: Another of the great products to come down the pipe recently. Keep growing this, include buzzed content in search results.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/SIG=10lgnj9md/*http://del.icio.us/">del.icio.us</a>: Have you forgot about this one? It&#8217;s the best book marketing service around and you&#8217;ve barely taken it for a spin since you bought it. <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/14/delicious-20-news-finally-comes-to-new-york/">Release the redesign</a> already, expand usage of del.icio.us <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/19/delicious-integrated-into-yahoo-search-results/">content into search results</a>.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://promo.yahoo.com/broadband/">DSL/Dialup</a>: Why do you still continue to offer this service? I think by now, most consumers look to their local cable providers before thinking of Yahoo for their net connection. Lose it.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/SIG=10ni1s9i1/*http://www.flickr.com">Flickr</a>: Hard to complain about anything here, continue to push visitors to the service when possible.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://geocities.yahoo.com/">Geocities</a>: Geocities is some what of joke throughout the collective conscience of Internet users. I&#8217;m sorry, you didn&#8217;t know? Well it is, lose it.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://green.yahoo.com">Green</a>: Continue to grow vertical properties like this. Reach out to other websites (even search engines) for syndication.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/SIG=10p8tbgpo/*http://www.jumpcut.com/">Jumpcut</a>: You have yet another video/photo service? I&#8217;ve never even heard of this one. It does offer some interesting remix features. Yank these out for use on Flickr video, toss out the rest.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://mobile.yahoo.com">Mobile</a>: Keep pushing mobile, you have tons of great services here many don&#8217;t know about. Lean heavy towards the iPhone.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://omg.yahoo.com">omg!</a>: Celebrity gossip, others do this much better than you. Toss this crap out and better syndicate this type of vertical content. Look at sites like <a href="http://wesmirch.com/">WeSmirch</a> for inspiration.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://search.yahoo.com">Search</a>: The main piece, the historic yet falling search box. I don&#8217;t think there is any easy fix here. Google does advertising much better than you so let them. If they want to show search results here, I would also say let them. Look at what you do well and do a better job of integrating this content into search.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://sem.smallbusiness.yahoo.com/searchenginemarketing">Search Marketing</a>: Not really sure why you offer this or even label it as such. I&#8217;ve dealt with your &#8220;Search Marketing&#8221; division. It seems when you sign up for some credit cards or open a business license you get a call from them. They are annoying, pushy salesmen spewing BS. Fire the telemarketers first and shut the rest down.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://upcoming.yahoo.com/">Upcoming</a>: Another good acquisition that doesn&#8217;t seem to get much love. I&#8217;m not sure what can be improved here or than integration with Flickr and search.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://video.yahoo.com/">Video</a>: Your third of fourth video service, is this one profitable? If not cut it lose and focus your users to Flickr video.</p>
  <p><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/homepage/everything/tab_All%20Yahoo!/*http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting/">Web Hosting</a>: Another service that seems odd for such a company. Is it widely profitable? I ran a small web hosting business and it was a pain in the ass. Tons of low paying and low tech customers sounds like a resource nightmare to me.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Great list Sean and I don't think many would quibble with your selections. Yahoo seriously needs to clean out its kitchen. </p>
<p>Having said that, I don't think breadth of services is all of the problem. A big factor is that Yahoo hasn't managed to get a 'hit the ball out of the park' success in <strong>several key markets</strong>: they failed to compete with Facebook in social networking, haven't been able to match YouTube in online video, haven't gotten much mindshare in Mobile thanks to Apple's iPhone, and of course they have fallen hopelessly behind in search. So as well as too many properties, they have been unlucky (mixed with bad management) that they haven't managed to get a winner in any of the key markets over the past few years.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Yahoo's key properties remain yahoo.com, email, myyahoo, and even Answers can be considered special. In short, <strong>content</strong> is what continues to drive Yahoo and those core properties are still enormously popular. It's just a shame Yahoo got bumped out of the way in social networking and online video -- two high growth content segments in recent times. </p>
<p>Now that Yahoo has virtually given up the game in search, and has spurned Microsoft's advances, it really is difficult to see how Yahoo can turn their fortunes around. They can start by optimizing their 'everything' list and try to leverage their core content properties more smartly -- and Yahoo Buzz is a good example of that, as is Answers and the recent <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_searchmonkey_launches.php">SearchMonkey</a>. To have any chance at all, Yahoo needs to focus on and strengthen core properties like yahoo.com. It's a big big ask, especially with super-grumpy shareholders on Jerry Yang's back.</p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57951</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57951" />
    <title>Comment from Faizar on 2008-06-15</title>
    <author>
        <name>Faizar</name>
        <uri>http://www.eposter.blogspot.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.eposter.blogspot.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>One more yahoo service ..............</p>

<p>as like a twitter ...</p>

<p><a href="http://fireeagle.yahoo.net/" rel="nofollow">http://fireeagle.yahoo.net/</a></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T06:08:27Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57952</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57952" />
    <title>Comment from SearcH◆◇ EngineS WEB on 2008-06-15</title>
    <author>
        <name>SearcH◆◇ EngineS WEB</name>
        <uri>http://seoptimization.blog.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://seoptimization.blog.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Yahoo has done everything reasonable to maintain competitiveness.</p>

<p>Google is just a mecca for search and YouTube for videos and these jewels is pulling more and more users into their stratosphere.</p>

<p><br />
Less we forget, Google videos was a failure; they ACQUIRED Youtube.  If Yahoo has done so, their stats would be much better.</p>

<p>They are beating Google at News</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T06:09:47Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57956</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57956" />
    <title>Comment from web design company on 2008-06-15</title>
    <author>
        <name>web design company</name>
        <uri>http://ooyes.net</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://ooyes.net">
        <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://scobleizer.com/2008/06/15/will-microsoft-se" rel="nofollow">http://scobleizer.com/2008/06/15/will-microsoft-se</a> ...<br />
Interesting interview with MSN techies, who claim they will beat Google at Search.<br />
Wonder how they would have incorporated Yahoo search with MSN if they had acquired it?</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T06:57:13Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57957</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57957" />
    <title>Comment from neiz on 2008-06-15</title>
    <author>
        <name>neiz</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>yahoo pipes rox my sox!</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T06:58:46Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57958</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57958" />
    <title>Comment from Ian Kennedy on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Ian Kennedy</name>
        <uri>http://everwas.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://everwas.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Don't count OMG out. They've surpassed tmz.com, the leader in their vertical, and are going strong from what I hear (don't read the stuff myself).</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T07:00:18Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:57964</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c57964" />
    <title>Comment from pwb on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>pwb</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>There are some major properties missing: Sports, Finance, Personals, Stores. And these are all areas where Yahoo dominates Google and others.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T08:49:09Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58010</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58010" />
    <title>Comment from Simone on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Simone</name>
        <uri>http://www.harael.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.harael.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Nice post Richard, totally agree that some integration would definitely benefit users' sanity and Yahoo's bottomline.</p>

<p>Just one comment on your point about AOL + TimeWarner traffic:</p>

<p>"[although interesting to note that if AOL was combined with Time Warner, as it appeared to be in 2007, they would be number 1]"</p>

<p>If I didn't get your numbers totally wrong, you can't actually state that, as AOL and TW traffic may very well be overlapped (and most likely are since the total traffic is 178MM users).</p>

<p>Ciao<br />
Simone</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T14:27:00Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58015</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58015" />
    <title>Comment from Bryan on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Bryan</name>
        <uri>http://breakpointdesigns.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://breakpointdesigns.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Am I one of the only people who feels Yahoo! is making the correct decision? Why sell out to the conglomerate Google? Honestly, I am getting sick of Google and their take over of the internet. If it were up to me I would let the government investigate into Google and cut down on what they can buy/sell.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T14:38:53Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58016</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58016" />
    <title>Comment from Joe on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Joe</name>
        <uri>http://www.medlawplus.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.medlawplus.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Great list and thoughts on each strategic topic.</p>

<p>"It's just a shame Yahoo got bumped out of the way in social networking and online video -- two high growth content segments in recent times."</p>

<p>And I'd add blogging (i.e., blogger.com) to social networking and video.  My thought is that Yahoo needs a strategic acquisition if they are turning away from Microsoft.  How about buying AOL from Time Warner?  Yahoo has become a collection of properties, something of the conglomerate of the web.  Acquiring AOL fits that tag.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T14:39:06Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58064</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58064" />
    <title>Comment from Monk on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Monk</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>" [although interesting to note that if AOL was combined with Time Warner, as it appeared to be in 2007, they would be number 1]:"</p>

<p>The chart speaks about unique visitors. If many of 50mln of Time Warner visitors visited also AOL (which is likely), they wouldn't be counted twice for the umbrella entry.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T18:03:23Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58077</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58077" />
    <title>Comment from Justin on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Justin</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Pipes is their fourth most important property? Seriously?</p>

<p>I'm a professional web developer and aside from a few little web 2.0 start ups (with no actual business models naturally) is anybody even using pipes? I can't think of one significant site that uses pipes. But you've got pipes as more relevant than email and messenger, seriously? Mail should be no lower than number two and is arguably a first place property, it keeps people coming back to the yahoo home page and driving traffic. Pipes maybe a novelty for web 2.0 wonks but realistically it could disappear completely and yahoo would not suffer in any discernible manner.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T19:24:21Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58100</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58100" />
    <title>Comment from Richard MacManus on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Richard MacManus</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Justin (#11), good point. That top 10 was from a year ago and I have to say Pipes hasn't really made much impact since.</p>

<p>Thanks Simone and Monk re the AOL issue. Points taken.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-16T23:14:23Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58111</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58111" />
    <title>Comment from Ari on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Ari</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>"although interesting to note that if AOL was combined with Time Warner, as it appeared to be in 2007, they would be number 1"</p>

<p>you can't combine unique user counts like that.  probably the majority of time warner's 52 million are already included in aol's.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-17T02:12:50Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58121</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58121" />
    <title>Comment from Christopher on 2008-06-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Christopher</name>
        <uri>http://socialinteraction.wordpress.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://socialinteraction.wordpress.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Hi Richard,</p>

<p>An interesting read...  When I look at Yahoo! this is the product map I see.</p>

<p>1. Mobile.  Yahoo! has some serious leads and some decent implementations in various mobile categories, with mobile being hot hot hot they should focus and push this area hard. One thing I think they need to do is combine and unify their other assets (especially social and financial) more seamlessly into the mobile offering.  Additionally while supporting the multiple platforms out there I think they need to choose either the blackberry or the iPhone and be "THE" provider for that phone.  I personally love and use Google Mobile Email, Calendar Sync and GTalk but this game is not won yet and Yahoo! has more than a fighting chance.</p>

<p>2. Social Applications.  Yahoo! starting with Flickr has some really great social applications.  They need to figure out how to pull this all together into a social communication platform based on open standards.</p>

<p>3. Mail and IM.  A strong stable areas, leverage it. </p>

<p>4. Finance.  Yahoo! finance is quite good but I think they could go further...</p>

<p>So as I see it there's the 4 most valuable silos or divisions if you will.  </p>

<p>I think Yahoo! is definitely still relevant and can be more so.  A good example of a company in similar straits years ago was IBM but they showed re-invention while maintaining your core is possible.</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

<p>Christopher</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-17T06:41:03Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557-comment:58467</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6557" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yahoo_everything_but_the_kitchen_sink.php#c58467" />
    <title>Comment from BillyWarhol on 2008-06-21</title>
    <author>
        <name>BillyWarhol</name>
        <uri>http://www.BillionDollarBaloney.blogspot.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.BillionDollarBaloney.blogspot.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Well I've never given Yahoo! much of a thought til they bought Flickr - still Thee Shining Light of the Web2.0 Universe*  I use Google for my Search so I never bothered Yahooing with the other Wahoos!!</p>

<p>Frankly I'm not impressed with much of Yahoo! ie Email - Dumb + Ugly + Boring - not what I was expecting from a c0ol non Microsoft/POOP co. with c0ol Purple + Yellow Colourz + Name*</p>

<p>I can see how they gained an Early Foothold on Users with their Portal (remember those!) - U look at the alternative MicroPOOP + U Run!!</p>

<p>I agree they haven't capitalized in the Social Networking market compared to MyPOOP + FacePOOP - 2 Juggernauts that aren't really all that great*</p>

<p>Flickr excels in the Social aspects of having Amazing Content in Photos + Interesting Diverse People + the real Key - Comments - that create Social Interaction*  U don't see that to any real extent on the other 2*</p>

<p>Since Flickr was always marketed as a Photography site it has been mired + relegated to an also Ran in the Web2.0 World but to my mind is the Highest Quality*</p>

<p>Kinda like the Movies i guess where Morons Flock to see Spiderman but the Top 5 Oscar Contenders don't Score the Success in Numbers + the all important $$$ Dollars*</p>

<p>sigh............</p>

<p>;))         Peace*</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-06-21T18:50:04Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>