????親愛的、正在考慮收購（至少部分收購）雅虎的私募股權公司：

????我相信，你們有很多理由想要接手這只正在暴跌的互聯網股票?；蛟S你們認為雅虎（Yahoo）的業務過于分散，公司業務重心應該回到郵件、內容和/或電子商務上來?；蛟S你們認為它的業務還不夠分散，需要繼續大舉收購?；蛟S你們只是想讓這個曾經輝煌的品牌再現輝煌【就像私募股權公司Cerberus投資克萊斯勒（Chrysler）一樣】，從而名垂青史。

????不管你們的計劃是什么，你們要做的第一件事顯然應該是炒掉雅虎董事會。

????不是像某些公司據稱正在考慮的做法，炒掉2、3個董事。也不是光炒掉那些可能會投票反對你們掌權的那些董事。而是統統炒掉。

????這幫人靠不住。上周三，一開始有報道稱，包括銀湖資本（Silver Lake Partners）和微軟（Microsoft）在內的幾個投資者出價16.50美元/股，擬收購雅虎20%股份。隨后又有消息稱，TPG 資本出價17.50美元/股，收購相同數量的股份。最后，《紐約時報》（NY Times）又報道，貝恩資本（Bain Capital）、百仕通集團（The Blackstone Group）、阿里巴巴（Alibaba.com）和軟銀（Softbank）正在協商，擬以每股約20美元價格的全盤收購雅虎。

????或許我過于天真，但我絕不相信上述任何一家公司會對外泄露這些具體的價格信息。比如，銀湖資本為什么要讓別人知道它出價16.50美元/股？除了從競爭出價角度對其不利外，還會人為推高市價（換言之，他們要基于市場溢價的基礎上再支付一個溢價）。對于TPG資本、貝恩資本、百仕通或阿里巴巴，道理也是一樣的。

????而另一方面，雅虎董事會確實有泄密的動機。各種各樣的動機。而且，我相信消息走漏得很快，就像過篩子一樣。

????當然，你可以說推高售價最符合雅虎的利益，董事為股東們做了好事。但這違反了保密協議，他們日后將難以得到信任。除非最終買家能確定具體的泄密者，否則所有董事都得走人。要不然，將來還會帶來更大的禍患。

????Dear private equity firms thinking about buying (at least part) of Yahoo,

????I'm sure you have all sorts of good reasons for wanting to catch one of the Internet's sharpest falling knives. Maybe you believe that Yahoo (YHOO) has become much too scattered, and believe it needs to refocus around its mail, content and/or commerce businesses. Maybe you believe it hasn't been scattered enough, and needs to go on an acquisition spree. Maybe you just want to be known for trying to turn around what was once a great brand (we'll call this the Cerberus/Chrysler prerogative).

????No matter the game plan, your first order of business should be obvious: Fire Yahoo's board of directors.

????Not two or three directors, as some firms reportedly are thinking. Or just the ones who might vote against your stewardship. All of 'em.

????It is just not a trustworthy group. Yesterday reports began to surface that a group including by Silver Lake Partners and Micosoft (MSFT) had bid $16.50 per share to acquire a 20% stake. Then came news that TPG Capital was bidding a buck more per share for a similar amount. Finally, the NY Times suggested that Bain Capital, The Blackstone Group, Alibaba.com and Softbank all are talking with each other about a $20 per share takeout of the entire company.

????Maybe I'm being hopelessly naive, but I just cannot believe that the specific pricing leaks came from any of the aforementioned firms. For example, why would Silver Lake want anyone to know it bid $16.50 per share? Not only does it hurt Silver Lake from a competitive bidding perspective, but it also could help artificially inflate the current trading price (i.e., force them to pay a premium upon a baked-in premium). Same goes for TPG or Bain or Blackstone or Alibaba.

????Yahoo's board, on the other hand, does have motive. All sorts of it. And I believe that it's leaking like a sieve.

????You certainly can make an argument that it's in Yahoo's best interest to drive up its sale price, which would mean that its directors are doing right by shareholders. But they also would be violating confidentiality agreements, and could hardly be trusted going forward. Unless the eventual buyer is able to determine the specific leaker(s), then everyone must go. Otherwise the knife will become much, much sharper going forward.