If you aren’t aware of a recent bid by Microsoft to buy Yahoo, this article certainly wasn’t meant for you. However, if you have, you may also know that Microsoft pulled its offer last weekend.

Some speculate that Microsoft will try to install a more take-over friendly board in June. Some speculate that Microsoft is letting Yahoo’ stock fall so they can retry later at a better price.

Both of these are incomplete speculations; after all, if the offer is off the table, how does microsoft install a new board? And how does a dip in yahoo’s stock price help microsoft? After all, if they put the offer back on the table, the stock prices will immediately rise again.

The answer to both of those questions might be the following idea, which so far I haven’t seen on any blogs:

In the movies, the CIA sometimes has ‘front companies’ - companies secretly owned by the CIA through a long line of other front companies and individuals, for business. The idea is not totally unheard of; plenty of corporations are actually conglomerates of hundreds, sometimes even thousands, of smaller (but very real) companies. if you were to map out the ownership of all those subcompanies it would make quite a picture.

Microsoft can have many front companies if it wants. And those front companies can buy yahoo stock. At its current lowered price. Microsoft is also rumoured to be behind SCO’s attack on Linux; its far less of a leap to consider microsoft leaning on friendly companies to buy some yahoo stock as well.

Because at the end of the day, buying yahoo is all about controlling some stock. The more stock microsoft controls (either through front companies or through friends), the less of a percentage of the rest of the yahoo-stock-owning world needs to be convinced that microsoft is the future for Yahoo. The stock holders decide the board. For hostile takeovers, Microsoft needs to control more than 50% of the stock. That’s a lot easier to get to if 25% of all yahoo stock is already under your control.

I’m not streetwise enough in the finance sector to actually figure out if microsoft has front companies and if those are buying yahoo stock right now. However, if you have a vested interest in the Microhoo future, that’s where I’d look to see if Microsoft threw in the towel or if its just switching tactics.

Last week the newest version of OpenOffice was announced, and the new release revived the discussion whether or not OpenOffice is better than Microsoft Office. Although I don’t particularly like Microsoft and normally don’t care about office suites, this latest release did get me thinking.

Disclaimer

Before I start talking about what I think of OpenOffice, let me explain that I appreciate their attempts. OpenOffice has been great at enforcing the Open Document Format that is becoming more and more mainstream. I salute the people behind ODF that make sure that there will be a real standard (unlike OOXML) that will be usable by anyone who wants to make an office suite.

The Players

When you look at some of the current office suites being used, you can probably limit them to the following leaders:

• Google Docs
• Apple iWork ‘08
• Microsoft Office
• OpenOffice.org

Both Microsoft Office and OpenOffice obviously try to play to the same crowd: office addicts. I am not trying to say anything bad about these users, but these people simply need their office suite because of their business, workflow, or other important external factors. Apple iWork and Google Docs on the other hand try to do something different. Call it a niche, call it innovation or call it the long tail, but in the end both of these products make sure they have something specific that makes them more interesting than the big two.

Google Docs

Google Docs has a clear advantage above all other products: collaboration. Because of the online nature of Google Docs they are the only suite of the four that makes collaboration extremely easy. Universities, companies, and even individuals all see the advantages of this. Google recently even proved that Google Docs is destined to coexist next to big suites, by providing OpenOffice in their Google Pack. Admittedly, Google Docs is not the most powerful suite, but unless you are an office addict, you really don’t need anything that powerful.

iWork ‘08

Apple iWork ‘08 on the other hand is making life easier for Apple fans. The suite doesn’t focus on business or students, but just people wanting to make something nice. Like most things Apple it is absolutely simple to use and attracts all kinds of people that aren’t in it for using the tool, but for making a product. Sadly there is nothing like iWork for Windows, but there is a clear niche for tools that enable simple creation of beautiful documents.

Microsoft Office

Clearly, Microsoft Office has a long history with business users. These users enjoy the full integration of Office with products like Outlook and Exchange, and the full range of possibilities the suite offers. OpenOffice is slowly gaining on Microsoft Office, especially in the public sector, but for most companies the economic reasons for a switch to OpenOffice might not be clear. Furthermore, although open standards are nice, not every company has the same to gain by adopting them.

So What About OpenOffice?

What’s OpenOffice’s niche? What sells them? Surely it is not things like ease of use or collaboration, as those are clearly better handled by Google Docs and Apple iWork. Will it sell because it is open source? Maybe governments and other IT companies might understand the importance of open source, but others mighty simply not care to change their workflow.

Then, is there a reason for OpenOffice to exist besides it being open source? Do we still need OpenOffice if ODF ever becomes an industry standard? I personally hope that OpenOffice will be here to stay, but it is clear that with the increase of interoperability, less and less people will be interested in big office suits. And as less people will need Microsoft Office, less people will also need OpenOffice.

Maybe, once we are done standardizing, it is time to leverage the power of open source to the point of innovation?