Wired is running an excellent look at the past, present, and potential future of Yahoo called, oddly enough, "How Yahoo Blew It".  It's a long article (5 pages) but totally worth the read.  Covering everything from Yahoo's attempted purchase of Google to the long-delayed release of Panama, Fred Vogelstein leaves few stones unturned in his brutally honest look at Yahoo's business practices over the past six years.

One thing I don't agree with is Vogelstein's assertion that, had Yahoo purchased Google when it had the chance, Yahoo would be in the same position today that Google currently enjoys.  I think a Yahoo purchase of Google would have effectively killed the very innovation that really powers Google's success:  its culture.

As far as businesses go, Yahoo and Google couldn't be any more different.  And no, I'm not talking about the business of search.  I'm talking about the corporate culture of each company.  Google has a very distinct and advantageous culture behind it.  People love working for Google and happy employees turn out better work.  I don't know if people love working at Yahoo.  Part of the reason for that is because Yahoo's corporate culture doesn't allow for the public displays of employee affection that we're used to seeing from Google.

Had Yahoo purchased Google in 2002, that spectacular Google culture wouldn't have integrated well with Yahoo.  In effect, Yahoo would have killed the best thing Google had going for it.  Another "Google" would have stepped in to take over the spot.  Yahoo would not be sitting where Google is today.  Yahoo would be exactly where it is today:  following in the #2 spot.  Who knows who this other "Google" would have been.  But Yahoo would still have sealed its own fate, even if Google had been purchased years ago.

In another article on Yahoo, Read/Write Web took a look at recent Yahoo acquisitions.  The author concludes that Yahoo has made several "smart" and "cheap" acquisitions that should help it better prepare to take on Google in the future.  The acquisitions in question include Blo.gs, Flickr, Upcoming.org, del.icio.us, Konfabulator, Jumpcut, Bix, MyBlogLog, TeRespondo, AdInterax, and a 20% stake in RightMedia.

In all honesty, I don't agree one bit that Yahoo is a "smart" acquirer of businesses.  Nothing that they've bought can be easily monetized or capitalized.  There's no rhyme or reason to any of their purchases other than the fact that most of them were made in an attempt to play catch-up or follow another proven leader.  And if they were really smart, they'd be buying more than 3 companies a year.  Of the acquisitions mentioned in the article, only Flickr was really worth anything and even it has yet to be monetized.  It does no good to buy these companies up if they don't ultimately benefit the parent company in some way.

I also think the author's assertion that Yahoo is buying companies as part of a de-portalization strategy is also off.  Yahoo is the king of portals.  And if these companies weren't purchased as part of the Yahoo portal, why is Yahoo's name slathered all over so many of them?  Linkage at the bottom of most page points back to Yahoo… to Yahoo's privacy policy… Yahoo is all over these companies.  That's not de-portalization.

Bottom line:  read the first article to see how Yahoo ended up in the position of follower that it is in now and read the second article to see how they continue to fumble around with other properties instead of focusing on their real, internal problems.