Unconventional Transactions Boosted Sales
Amid Big Merger, Company Resisted Dot-Com Collapse
The merged company's new headquarters - the AOL Time Warner Building in New York. (File Photo - Associated Press)
_____AOL Responds_____
• AOL Says Accounting 'Was Appropriate' (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
_____AOL Time Warner_____
• Stock Quote and News
• Historical Chart
• Company Description
• Analyst Ratings
_____Web Specials_____
• A Rocky Road: Graphical Timeline Tracks AOL Stock Price
• AOL Documents and Deals Reviewed by The Washington Post
• Timeline: AOL Time Warner Highlights
• Graphic: AOL Everywhere America Online has more than 6 million subscribers overseas.
_____AOL In The News_____
• Pittman Leaving as AOL Time Warner Slide Continues (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
• AOL Says Accounting 'Was Appropriate' (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
• Time Warner Offers Recording Option (Associated Press, Jul 17, 2002)
• More AOL Time Warner News
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to print edition
By Alec Klein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 18, 2002; Page A01
First of two articles
In October 2000, a critical question confronted America Online Inc. as it sought to clinch the largest merger in U.S. history: Was it feeling the effects of an industry-wide slowdown in advertising?
AOL's president at the time, Robert W. Pittman, offered a resounding answer: "I don't see it, and I don't buy it," he told Wall Street stock analysts and the media.
Other AOL officials were less optimistic. While overall revenue from online ads continued to grow rapidly, internal company projections raised caution about one sector: dot-coms. Failures were accelerating among those Internet start-ups, which represented a significant amount of the company's ad business.
About two weeks before Pittman's declaration on Oct. 18, he and other executives were told in a meeting at Dulles headquarters that AOL faced the risk of losing more than $140 million in ad revenue the following year.
That would equal only about 5 percent of AOL's proceeds from advertising and commerce. AOL projected that most dot-com clients would still be able to pay their bills. But the internal warning came when investors were highly alert to any weakness in online advertising. Just a week before Pittman's public statements, for example, shares of AOL's key competitor, Yahoo Inc., plunged 21 percent after the company reported strong ad growth but acknowledged that the pace could not be sustained. A day before Pittman spoke, AOL shares dropped 17 percent on what analysts described as similar worries.
In such an atmosphere, and with its takeover of Time Warner Inc. imminent, AOL sought to maintain its breakneck growth in advertising and commerce revenue. Besides selling ads on its online service for cash, AOL boosted revenue through a series of unconventional deals from 2000 to 2002, before and after the merger, according to a Washington Post review of hundreds of pages of confidential AOL documents and interviews with current and former company officials and their business partners.
AOL converted legal disputes into ad deals. It negotiated a shift in revenue from one division to another, bolstering its online business. It sold ads on behalf of online auction giant eBay Inc., booking the sale of eBay's ads as AOL's own revenue. AOL bartered ads for computer equipment in a deal with Sun Microsystems Inc. AOL counted stock rights as ad and commerce revenue in a deal with a Las Vegas firm called PurchasePro.com Inc.
AOL also found ways to turn the dot-com collapse to its advantage, renegotiating long-term ad contracts it risked losing into short-term gains that boosted its quarterly revenue.
One AOL executive raised questions internally about some of the deals. Robert O'Connor, then vice president of finance for AOL's advertising division, said he outlined his concerns in a series of meetings last year and this year with Pittman, now in charge of the online division; David M. Colburn, who oversees its business affairs; J. Michael Kelly, chief operating officer of the online division; and other high-ranking company executives.
"Clearly, a lot of what they were living on was revenue that was not of the highest quality," said O'Connor, who resigned in March. "I don't know if they're still in denial, but there were some pretty big business issues they were not willing to face. For nine months, I tried to get these guys out of denial. I tried to take the perfume off the pig."
washington post heute
Amid Big Merger, Company Resisted Dot-Com Collapse
The merged company's new headquarters - the AOL Time Warner Building in New York. (File Photo - Associated Press)
_____AOL Responds_____
• AOL Says Accounting 'Was Appropriate' (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
_____AOL Time Warner_____
• Stock Quote and News
• Historical Chart
• Company Description
• Analyst Ratings
_____Web Specials_____
• A Rocky Road: Graphical Timeline Tracks AOL Stock Price
• AOL Documents and Deals Reviewed by The Washington Post
• Timeline: AOL Time Warner Highlights
• Graphic: AOL Everywhere America Online has more than 6 million subscribers overseas.
_____AOL In The News_____
• Pittman Leaving as AOL Time Warner Slide Continues (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
• AOL Says Accounting 'Was Appropriate' (The Washington Post, Jul 18, 2002)
• Time Warner Offers Recording Option (Associated Press, Jul 17, 2002)
• More AOL Time Warner News
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to print edition
By Alec Klein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 18, 2002; Page A01
First of two articles
In October 2000, a critical question confronted America Online Inc. as it sought to clinch the largest merger in U.S. history: Was it feeling the effects of an industry-wide slowdown in advertising?
AOL's president at the time, Robert W. Pittman, offered a resounding answer: "I don't see it, and I don't buy it," he told Wall Street stock analysts and the media.
Other AOL officials were less optimistic. While overall revenue from online ads continued to grow rapidly, internal company projections raised caution about one sector: dot-coms. Failures were accelerating among those Internet start-ups, which represented a significant amount of the company's ad business.
About two weeks before Pittman's declaration on Oct. 18, he and other executives were told in a meeting at Dulles headquarters that AOL faced the risk of losing more than $140 million in ad revenue the following year.
That would equal only about 5 percent of AOL's proceeds from advertising and commerce. AOL projected that most dot-com clients would still be able to pay their bills. But the internal warning came when investors were highly alert to any weakness in online advertising. Just a week before Pittman's public statements, for example, shares of AOL's key competitor, Yahoo Inc., plunged 21 percent after the company reported strong ad growth but acknowledged that the pace could not be sustained. A day before Pittman spoke, AOL shares dropped 17 percent on what analysts described as similar worries.
In such an atmosphere, and with its takeover of Time Warner Inc. imminent, AOL sought to maintain its breakneck growth in advertising and commerce revenue. Besides selling ads on its online service for cash, AOL boosted revenue through a series of unconventional deals from 2000 to 2002, before and after the merger, according to a Washington Post review of hundreds of pages of confidential AOL documents and interviews with current and former company officials and their business partners.
AOL converted legal disputes into ad deals. It negotiated a shift in revenue from one division to another, bolstering its online business. It sold ads on behalf of online auction giant eBay Inc., booking the sale of eBay's ads as AOL's own revenue. AOL bartered ads for computer equipment in a deal with Sun Microsystems Inc. AOL counted stock rights as ad and commerce revenue in a deal with a Las Vegas firm called PurchasePro.com Inc.
AOL also found ways to turn the dot-com collapse to its advantage, renegotiating long-term ad contracts it risked losing into short-term gains that boosted its quarterly revenue.
One AOL executive raised questions internally about some of the deals. Robert O'Connor, then vice president of finance for AOL's advertising division, said he outlined his concerns in a series of meetings last year and this year with Pittman, now in charge of the online division; David M. Colburn, who oversees its business affairs; J. Michael Kelly, chief operating officer of the online division; and other high-ranking company executives.
"Clearly, a lot of what they were living on was revenue that was not of the highest quality," said O'Connor, who resigned in March. "I don't know if they're still in denial, but there were some pretty big business issues they were not willing to face. For nine months, I tried to get these guys out of denial. I tried to take the perfume off the pig."
washington post heute