Today's Most popular News

Source:Mashable!

Google has acquired Russian contextual advertising company Begun from Rambler Media for a total of $140 million.

Begun is currently owned by two companies: Rambler Media owns 50.1% of Begun, while Bannatyne Limited owns the remaining 49.9%. Under the terms of the deal, Rambler will first buy Bannatyne’s stake and then sell the entire company to google.

Begun is one of the leading ad services in Russia’s huge market, but knowing Google’s acquisition history, they’re probably not in it only for the market share, but also for the technology.

*Update: Svetlana Gladkova from Profy, who’s well informed on the subject, explains in a comment below and in a blog post that Begun is not only one of the leaders in Russia’s contextual ad market, it’s almost a monopoly, so market share is definitely a big reason for Google’s acquisition.

From the official PR [PDF link]:

“Rambler Media Ltd. (“Rambler” or “the Company”), operating one of Russia’s most popular internet brands, announces that it has agreed to sell its contextual advertising company ZAO Begun (“Begun”) and related subsidiaries to Google. Rambler currently holds 50.1% of Begun. The transaction will consist of Rambler buying the remaining 49.9% stake in Begun from Bannatyne Limited, affiliated with the Finam group of companies, immediately after which Rambler will sell 100% of Begun to Google subject to certain approvals and conditions precedent for a total cash consideration of US$140 million, of which US$69.9 million is attributable to Bannatyne, with customary closing adjustments.

Rambler’s net gain from the disposal is expected to be approximately US$50 million after all direct costs associated with the transaction. Proceeds received in respect of the sale of its holdings in Begun will be retained by the Company for further investments and potential acquisitions in line with Rambler’s stated strategy. The Company’s net cash position after the completion of this sale is expected to reach US$100 million. The Company’s directors consider, having consulted with its nominated adviser, ING, that the terms of the transaction are fair and reasonable insofar as its shareholders are concerned.”

—Related Articles at Mashable! - The Social Networking Blog:LiveJournal Announces Russian PartnershipIt’s Official…Google Buys MeasureMapAsk.com Launches AdSense CompetitorBlinkx Launching Video AdSenseGoogle Answers to Make Triumphant Return?How I Spent My Billions: A Brief History of Ad Network AcquisitionsGoogle Answers to Bring Back Human Powered Search

Source:Mashable!

There’s a wikipedian event called Wikimania 2008 happening in Alexandria, Egypt from 17-19 July. One of the main topics discussed is something called “flagged revisions”, an experiment that’s already taken place in some iterations of Wikipedia - its German version, for instance. Simply put, it means that no changes will appear on Wikipedia without the approval of an expert.

Without going into the technical implications of this obviously large-scale operation, or even the problems that might arise when you try to define who’s “expert” in what field, the main thing that interests me is this: will this make Wikipedia just another boring encyclopedia?

I know that Wikipedia has problems with vandalism. I also know that it’s not 100% accurate (no encyclopedia is, but Wikipedia is probably a bit worse with this regard). And I know about the issues of gaming Wikipedia, be it for fun or profit.

However, I’ve gotten used to this. I don’t care if some jerk somewhere will change the national anthem of some country to a Morbid Angel tune. If it happens, the community will fix it soon; and if someone gets really offended and worked up in the meantime, well, that someone has too much time on his hands.

The experiment is being conducted carefully, which is a good thing. NYTimes writes:

“The Germans who are implementing the idea stress that the checkers are not a heavy hand, but are doing the most cursory examination to see that no curse words or obvious non sequiturs have been added. While some revisions can wait a day, usually they only take minutes, as checkers like Mr. Schindler spend hours going through lists of changes to approve.

Also, they point out that edits that haven’t been approved are still in the system and show up to anyone who later wants to make edits. So contributions would not be lost or overwritten as they wait for a checker to approve them.“

The bottom line, however, is that Wikipedia is an incredibly fast source of news on not only important events but also on a million little things such as the color of the lightsaber, and having to wait for editors to go through all that might make Wikipedia a bit dull. Hopefully, the final solution they come up with will manage to avoid that.

—Related Articles at Mashable! - The Social Networking Blog:Despite Recent Drama, Wikipedia Gets $3 Million DonationWikipedia Bans Overstock.comWikipedia: 2 Million EntriesWikipedia May Add Color-Coding to Mark Bad EntriesMashups Page Now on Wikipedia!Wikipedia Now Uses Creative CommonsWikipedia Interest Shows Support for Ron Paul. Why?

This entry was posted on Friday, July 18th, 2008 at 7:56 am and is filed under social networking, web 2.0, web, wikipedia, approvals. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.