Top
Best
New

Posted by jmsflknr 1 day ago

AOL to be sold to Bending Spoons for $1.5B(www.axios.com)
278 points | 254 commentspage 3
elAhmo 1 day ago|
Not sure how actively AOL is used, probably not really, but anything Bending Spoon touches is entshitified soon after. They most recently bought Komoot, and have already made questionable choices with a lot of firings and promoting paid plans. Same has happened to Meetup.

It is a sad reality that this company keeps buying good products and making it hostile for users who made it good, such as in the Komoot's or Meetup's case.

jimnotgym 14 hours ago||
>promoting paid plans

You might say, however, that a business that wants you to actually for a product is a real sustainable business.

reaperducer 1 day ago||
Not sure how actively AOL is used

Perhaps more than you think.

I was recently looking through an e-mail distribution list that my company uses and was surprised how many @aol.coms were on there. Easily hundreds.

People in the tech bubble vastly underestimate the number of @aol.com, @yahoo.com, @hotmail.com, @earthlink.net and other legacy e-mail addresses regular people still use. After all, it's their e-mail address. Why would they ever change it?

NickC25 1 day ago||
what does AOL even do these days? genuinely curious.
Jordan-117 1 day ago||
In addition to ads on their web properties, they still have a sizeable (though aging) userbase that they milk for unnecessary services. I cancelled my mom's AOL subscription years ago and they were charging something like $25/mo when the only thing she used was their (free) email service -- though of course during the cancellation they touted things like antivirus and ID theft protection that she apparently had access to. It's a legacy of when people paid them for their internet access -- no telling how many retirees (or estates) continue paying each month.
underlipton 1 day ago||
"Unexamined legacy subscriptions paid without a thought," is another way of saying, "Has too much money." If this is a widespread Boomer phenomenon, it explains a lot. I still kick myself for spending 6x MVNO pricing on my cell phone plan with a legacy carrier whose features I didn't need.
nemothekid 1 day ago|||
>"Unexamined legacy subscriptions paid without a thought," is another way of saying, "Has too much money."

I constantly see ads for services like RocketMoney which helps people find and cancel subscriptions. I could arguably be in the "too much money" camp, but I couldn't imagine seeing an unknown/unused charge on my credit card bill and not immediately cancelling it. Nonetheless, RocketMoney seems like a widely used product.

plorkyeran 1 day ago|||
A surprising number of people clearly simply do not look at their credit card bills.
IncreasePosts 1 day ago|||
Doesn't help that sometimes the charges are coded like *TST VENDOR ACCT #1541*

I don't go over my bill every month but get a notification upon every new charge, and sometimes the only way I know that a charge I just put on at a store is the same one I got a notification for is because the charge amount is some relatively unique number.

palmotea 1 day ago||||
> I still kick myself for spending 6x MVNO pricing on my cell phone plan with a legacy carrier whose features I didn't need.

I have a friend who tried to switch to a MVNO (Cricket, I think) to save money and immediately switched back. Even though both companies were on the same network, the MVNO customers must have had a lower priority, because their service level was noticeably worse when literally the only thing that changed was the SIM card.

xp84 1 day ago|||
There's a good reddit, i think NoContract, where you can go to learn more about MVNOs. There are several tiers of them in practice and they each have their own "catches" and "advantages". I used Cricket many years ago when they had a punishing speed cap. In the modern days some of these caps have been relaxed, but as you suspected, prioritization is the main way the actual carriers differentiate themselves from the MVNOs that sell access to the same towers. The worst MVNOs have terrible priority and in any well-populated area congestion makes them super slow almost all the time.

The thing is, this is highly variable -- and also geographically variable -- and some MVNOs can now offer similar priority as a mainstream plan. US Mobile is one, which I've been using for a couple years. Their neat advantage is that they will sell you a SIM (or e-sim) that rides on your choice of the big 3, and they'll also let you port between them without any other change to your account. They call this "Tele-Port". Some people will do that even just to go on a vacation to a state with different "best carrier", since there's nothing stopping you.

havaloc 1 day ago||||
Not all MVNO are the same in this regard, some sell the same quality of service data tier.
underlipton 7 hours ago||||
The only time deprioritization has been a problem for me is when I've run out of data on my limited plan. With the major carrier, it was still usable; with the MVNO, it was not. As long as you stay below your plan limit (or, for those on unlimited, don't try to tether and use hundreds of gigabytes a month), it's essentially the same service.
jandrese 1 day ago|||
I switched from T-Mobile to Google Voice a few years ago for this reason. With 5 lines on the plan the T-Mo version was way too expensive. But then Google Voice raised their prices and T-Mobile offered as much better multi-line discount and I ended up switching back. Also, Google Voice tech support is absolute dogshit.
LogicHound 1 day ago||||
It is easy to miss a subscription for something on a bill when it is less than £30. I had a match.com subscription I had forgotten about for about 7 years.

That business model is what a lot of tech companies actually bank on that why they require a credit card on a free sign up.

underlipton 7 hours ago||
It's only easy to miss if you're irresponsible. Having enough (some would say, "more than enough") money makes being irresponsible less painful.
LogicHound 1 hour ago||
The way you are using irresponsible is perverse. e.g. Being Irresponsible in this context would be remortgaging your house, while unemployed and using all the money to buy gadgets.

Forgetting that you have a small amount deducted for a service you are no longer using, isn't. It is minor oversight.

The way that language is abused by people when it comes to these sorts of subjects is bordering on semantic manipulation. Which in itself is a form of deceit.

cpach 1 day ago||||
I hate to admit it, but it’s like me and my Digitalocean bills (:

I don’t want to think about how much money I’ve paid them over the years for VMs I no longer need. A week ago I finally pulled the plug on those servers. Not a moment too soon…

veidr 1 day ago|||
Ain't just boomers. Anybody with kids, and no existential financial crisis. I just finally managed to cancel an unexamined legacy subscription paid without a thought — after I noticed WTF I have one Adobe subscription, not 3, across 2 cards ... unfortunately the noticing part took like 3-4 years.

Additionally: it seems likely that it was the result of gas station pump skimmers, just because the card in question had never been used for any other kind of transaction.

mikestew 1 day ago|||
It wasn't until the end of last month that they finally turned off dialup:

https://help.aol.com/articles/dial-up-internet-to-be-discont...

And I have people in my contacts whose active email ends in "@aol.com".

ascagnel_ 1 day ago||
At least for my parents, there was a real fear of losing access to their 20+ year old email address if they stopped paying. I don't know if it was founded on anything, but it got them to keep paying through a decade-plus of non-AOL broadband.
pndy 1 day ago|||
They got own branded Chromium with extra features: https://youtu.be/z_NpZmk61Qo
tartoran 1 day ago||
I wasn't even aware they were still around until a couple of days ago I received an email from an aol.com domain. Best bet is they're just a dead mall.
poemxo 22 hours ago||
Part of me wonders how much of that 1.5B is the value of all those chat logs.
rchaud 20 hours ago|
Chat logs from AOL Instant Messenger, which shut down in 2017, and was obsolete for almost a decade prior to that?
Macha 13 hours ago||
And in common with other first wave chat products had entirely client side chat logs anyway.
ajross 10 hours ago||
End of an era. (Well, OK, the era ended long ago, this is just the long-delayed tombstone I guess). Those of us coming out of the pre-boom internet always sneered, but those floppies they'd pack into every magazine were the gateway for the rest of the world.
justin66 10 hours ago|
Even though we all complained (perhaps not in so many words) about the eternal September and the damage done by opening things up to a larger number of people, the early AOLers were paradigms of intellectual curiosity and urbanity compared to what came later.
gregjw 1 day ago||
Bending Spoons hoovering up old notable names
tanepiper 1 day ago||
Proof we are in the weirdest timeline
ottah 1 day ago||
Why would it even be worth that? Patents? Copyrights? Certainly not the trademark.
mattmaroon 1 day ago|
Revenue. They’ve still got millions of email/portal users and they own LifeLock, Lastpass, and a bunch of other crap. They are still rumored to do nearly a half billion a year in revenue and the margins are good.
jrflowers 1 day ago|||
> they own LifeLock, Lastpass

AOL owns neither of these

mattmaroon 13 hours ago||
You’re right, I guess they sell plans to seniors that include those bundled in but don’t own them.
dotcoma 1 day ago|||
Then 1.5 B is a steal!
sharkjacobs 1 day ago||
> That "incredibly loyal user base," as he called it, could be better served with greater investments in AOL's product and user experience, he noted.

I think there's something kind of astute here, which is that anyone who is still using AOL products at this point is someone who is very resistant to changing "email and web content properties" providers, and is likely willing to passively tolerate additional enshittification and monetization

silisili 18 hours ago|
Yeah, for another 10 years or so tops.

On the other hand, they are the easiest demographic to scam out of money, which seems fitting for a company like AOL.

card_zero 15 hours ago||
Footnote: Netscape.
ano-ther 1 day ago|
Can someone enlighten me on the economics of such a deal?

From what I know about acquisitions, valuations are in the range of 10-12 times annual EBITDA (or perhaps even profits). This would mean that AOL is making 150 million a year. Is that correct?

Invictus0 1 day ago|
From the first sentence of the half-page article: "AOL still drives hundreds of millions of dollars of free cash flow"
More comments...