David Dalka has put together ten unanswered questions about the YouTube Google deal:

10 Unanswered Questions:

1. Will users stay with the recently scrubbed and censored Youtube or will they migrate to other alternatives?

2. Why are the investment analysts and “major media” only allowed on the announcement conference call? Why not bloggers, why not the person, Michael Arrington, who broke the rumor and story in the first place?

3. Why can’t the Investor Relations, Press and Blogs at Google ever be in sync? The Official Google Blog still has no information about it. Instead there are posts on “Inside Macs at Google”…very strange.

4. This is what a multi-million dollar rat looks like, will the next of kin receive their fair share?

5. The Google Press Release states “This afternoon, we announced that we are acquiring YouTube for $1.65 billion in stock. YouTube will operate independently following the close of the transaction, which is expected in the fourth quarter of this year.” Why is this the first company that Google has ever kept independent?

6. There are a few theories on number five. I’m no lawyer, but if it’s kept as a seperate legal entity, it might be able to limit any content liabilities to that entity?

7. How much is 44 seconds of everyone’s time (maybe a bit more now) worth?

8. Eric was forceful in the call about stating that these will remain seperate entities and curiously he asserted Google Video will become even more important. Am I the only one that is mildly confused by this statement? Or is there some larger segmentation or story here?

9. Many people have asked “Why didn’t Microsoft buy Youtube?” With a large stake held by the people who funded Google, it was clear that Google had the right to make (...read more...)