<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Learn to Adapt &#187; fuzzy math</title>
	<atom:link href="http://learn2adapt.com/blog/tag/fuzzy-math/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://learn2adapt.com/blog</link>
	<description>Occasional prattle on life and learning in the 21st century</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:03:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is AOL Only Worth $12.25 Billion?</title>
		<link>http://learn2adapt.com/blog/2008/04/10/is-aol-only-worth-1225-billion/</link>
		<comments>http://learn2adapt.com/blog/2008/04/10/is-aol-only-worth-1225-billion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:46:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Kelly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acquisition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fuzzy math]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[merger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MySpace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Corp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Time Warner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://learn2adapt.com/blog/2008/04/10/is-aol-only-worth-1225-billion/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is some undoubtedly errant math from a former AOLer (me): In December 2005, Google purchased 5% of AOL for just over $1 billion, pegging its market value of about $21 billion. The Washington Post ran this article today: Murdoch and AOL Join Fight Over AOL So, from the numbers in the article (notably all [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>Here is some undoubtedly errant math from a former AOLer (me):</p>
<p>In December 2005, Google purchased 5% of AOL for just over $1 billion, pegging its market value of about $21 billion.  The Washington Post ran this article today:</p>
<p align="center"><strong><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/09/AR2008040903694.html?sub=AR">Murdoch and AOL Join Fight Over AOL</a></strong></p>
<p>So, from the numbers in the article (notably all based on hear-say and conjecture), I did some back-of-the-envelope math:</p>
<p>Supposing first that Yahoo&#8217;s contention that the Microsoft offer of $42 billion undervalues them, let&#8217;s give them a 7% markup, bringing their current value to about $45 billion.  From the article:</p>
<p style="margin-left: 40px"><span style="font-style: italic">&#8220;Under the terms of the possible Time Warner deal, the AOL unit would become part of Yahoo. In exchange for AOL and an undisclosed sum, Time Warner would receive a 20 percent stake in the enlarged company, said the source, who cautioned that the terms were not final and that the deal could founder.&#8221;</span></p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to ignore the &#8220;and an undisclosed sum&#8221; to make my fuzzy math easier.  Assuming the 80% of the new venture that Yahoo would keep reflects their current $45 billion value, then the resulting entity would be valued at about $56.25 billion.  So, Time Warner&#8217;s 20% would be worth about $11.25 billion.</p>
<p>Now, that probably does not reflect the full current value of AOL.  Earlier in the article it states:</p>
<p style="margin-left: 40px"> <span style="font-style: italic">&#8220;Yahoo, meanwhile, is working out a complicated deal to acquire most of AOL from Time Warner, the world&#8217;s second-largest media company&#8230;&#8221;</span></p>
<p>I&#8217;m guessing the part they won&#8217;t buy is the AOL access (i.e., dial up) business.  It&#8217;s not news that Time Warner is seeking a buyer for that already, but I haven&#8217;t seen any guesstimates of what the selling price would be if they can find a buyer. So, I&#8217;m going to pull a sale price out of my elbow (see &#8211; clean language Mom!) and say they could sell it for $1 billion.  That would give AOL a current market value of $12.25 billion (under the deal outlined in the Post).</p>
<p>So, loads of fuzzy math aside, that means since the Google purchase in 2005, the value of AOL has dropped 40%. Let&#8217;s compare that to the TWX stock price.  On December 21, 2005 (the day after the Google purchase was announced), the TWX closing share price was $15.58.  Yesterday it closed at $14.43 &#8211; a drop of 7%.  If what Google paid in 2005 was just, and the AOL value tracks with TWX overall (a great simplification), then AOL&#8217;s current value would be about $19.5 billion.</p>
<p>So, if all the fuzzy math and conjectured prices in today&#8217;s article are correct, one (or more) of three things is true:</p>
<ol>
<li>  Google paid too much for its 5% stake in 2005, and/or</li>
<li>The other Time Warner divisions have compensated for the 40% drop in AOL&#8217;s value such that TWX overall value only dropped 7%, and/or</li>
<li>The deal speculated in today&#8217;s Post undervalues AOL by about $7 billion</li>
</ol>
<p>Given the conjecture in the post article, &#8220;In the unlikely event that both deals close, News Corp. and Microsoft would control Yahoo, MSN, MySpace and AOL&#8230;&#8221; and the fact that Google can decide to sell (or keep) its 5% of AOL this July, 2008 is going to be a very interesting year for AOL.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://learn2adapt.com/blog/2008/04/10/is-aol-only-worth-1225-billion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

