DOCSLIB.ORG

Aquantive, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Speciñed in Its Charter) Washington 91-1819567 (State Or Other Jurisdiction of (I.R.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aquantive, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Speciñed in Its Charter) Washington 91-1819567 (State Or Other Jurisdiction of (I.R.S SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 ¥ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 or n TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the Ñscal year ended December 31, 2005 Commission File Number 0-29361 aQuantive, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant as SpeciÑed in its Charter) Washington 91-1819567 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) IdentiÑcation No.) 821 Second Avenue, 98104 18th Floor, Seattle, Washington (Zip Code) (Address of principal executive oÇces) (206) 816-8800 (Registrant's telephone number, including area code) Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as deÑned in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¥ No n Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to Ñle reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes n No ¥ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has Ñled all reports required to be Ñled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to Ñle such reports), and (2) has been subject to such Ñling requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ¥ No n Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent Ñlers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge, in deÑnitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¥ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated Ñler, an accelerated Ñler, or a non-accelerated Ñler. See deÑnition of ""accelerated Ñler and large accelerated Ñler'' in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated Ñler ¥ Accelerated Ñler n Non-accelerated Ñler n Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as deÑned in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes n No ¥ The aggregate market value of the voting and nonvoting stock held by nonaÇliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2005 was approximately $1,021,396,490. The number of shares of the registrant's Common Stock outstanding at February 27, 2006 was 67,228,317. AQUANTIVE, INC. 2005 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PART I Item 1. Business ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 2 Item 1A. Risk Factors ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 7 Item 1B. Unresolved StaÅ CommentsÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 18 Item 2. Properties ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 18 Item 3. Legal Proceedings ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 19 Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security HoldersÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 19 PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity SecuritiesÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 20 Item 6. Selected Financial Data ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 20 Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations ÏÏÏ 21 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 36 Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 37 Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 70 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 70 Item 9B. Other Information ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 71 PART III Item 10. Executive OÇcers and Directors of the CompanyÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 72 Item 11. Executive CompensationÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 76 Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain BeneÑcial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 79 Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 82 Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services ÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 83 PART IV Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statements SchedulesÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 84 SignaturesÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏ 87 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE None. 1 PART I This Annual Report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This Act provides a ""safe harbor'' for forward-looking statements to encourage companies to provide prospective information about themselves so long as they identify these statements as forward looking and provide meaningful cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to diÅer from the projected results. All statements other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding industry prospects and future results of operations or Ñnancial position, made in this Annual Report are forward looking. We use words such as ""anticipates,'' ""believes,'' ""expects,'' ""future'' and ""intends'' and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements reÖect management's current expectations, plans or projections and are inherently uncertain. Our actual results may diÅer signiÑcantly from management's expectations, plans or projections. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. Certain risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to diÅer signiÑcantly from management's expectations are described in the section entitled ""Risk Factors.'' This section, along with other sections of this Annual Report, describes some, but not all, of the factors that could cause actual results to diÅer signiÑcantly from management's expectations. We undertake no obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements that may be made to reÖect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reÖect the occurrence of unanticipated events. Readers are urged, however, to review the factors and other information set forth in reports that we Ñle from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Unless the context requires otherwise in this Annual Report the terms ""aQuantive,'' the ""Company,'' ""we,'' ""us'' and ""our'' refer to aQuantive, Inc. and its subsidiaries. Item 1. Business Company Background and Overview aQuantive, Inc., a Washington corporation, is a leading digital marketing company with three distinct lines of business focused on inÖuencing, shaping, and proÑting from the digital advertising economy. From its beginning in 1997, aQuantive has believed in the marketing power of digital media and the importance of delivering services and technologies to drive measurable and accountable results on behalf of clients. As marketers shift budgets from traditional to digital media and the interactive market continues to gain complexity, we believe our experience in and focus on digital marketing service and technology innovation positions us to grow with the industry. aQuantive has the following three lines of business that help marketers acquire and retain customers and grow their businesses across all digital media: Digital Marketing Services (DMS). Our DMS segment consists of Avenue AyRazorÑsh and DNA. Avenue AyRazorÑsh is an interactive agency that provides a full-service oÅering, including website development, interactive marketing and creative development and branding. Recently-acquired DNA, located in London, is also an interactive agency. Avenue AyRazorÑsh and DNA help clients use the Internet as an integrated online business channel to build one-to-one relationships with their customers Ì ranging from consumers and business customers, to partners and employees. Digital Marketing Technologies (DMT). Our DMT segment consists of Atlas, a provider of digital marketing technologies and expertise. Atlas's software suite enables agencies and enterprise marketers to manage their entire digital marketing eÅort, including planning campaigns, displaying ads, and optimizing their websites. In addition, select publishers utilize Atlas to manage digital advertising inventory. Digital Performance Media (DPM). Our DPM segment consists of DRIVEpm and U.K.-based MediaBrokers. Both are online advertising networks and behavioral targeting businesses. DRIVEpm and MediaBrokers serve as intermediaries between online publishers and advertisers by procuring online advertis- ing inventory from publishers and reselling that inventory to advertisers on a highly targeted basis. 2 Digital Marketing Services Avenue AyRazorÑsh is an interactive agency that designs and delivers digital marketing solutions that attract, retain and service our clients' customers. Avenue AyRazorÑsh provides the following digital marketing services: ‚ Customer-Focused Websites. Avenue AyRazorÑsh provides a wide range of website design and development solutions, ranging from
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To E-Commerce EC4E Ch 01 WA 11-23.Qxd 12/10/2007 5:16 PM Page 2
    EC4E_Ch_01_WA_11-23.qxd 12/10/2007 5:16 PM Page 1 PART 1 CHAPTER 1 The Revolution Is Just Beginning CHAPTER 2 E-commerce Business Models and Concepts Introduction to E-commerce EC4E_Ch_01_WA_11-23.qxd 12/10/2007 5:16 PM Page 2 CHAPTER11 The Revolution Is Just Beginning LEARNING OBJECTIVES After reading this chapter, you will be able to: ■ Define e-commerce and describe how it differs from e-business. ■ Identify and describe the unique features of e-commerce technology and discuss their business significance. ■ Recognize and describe Web 2.0 applications. ■ Describe the major types of e-commerce. ■ Discuss the origins and growth of e-commerce. ■ Understand the evolution of e-commerce from its early years to today. ■ Identify the factors that will define the future of e-commerce. ■ Describe the major themes underlying the study of e-commerce. ■ Identify the major academic disciplines contributing to e-commerce. EC4E_Ch_01_WA_11-23.qxd 12/10/2007 5:16 PM Page 3 MySpace and Facebook: It’s All About You ow many people watched the final episode of the most popular American Htelevision show in history, the Sopranos? Answer: about 12 million (out of a total television audience size of 111 million). Only once in American history has a television show drawn more simultaneous viewers—13 million for NBC’s “America’s Got Talent” premiere in 2006. How many people visit MySpace each month? About 70 million. There are now more than 100 million personal profiles on MySpace. Almost 40 million visit MySpace’s closest social network rival, Facebook, each month.
    [Show full text]
  • Up Acquisitions: Introducing the Economic Goodwill Threshold Test Andrew Mclean
    Series A Financial Capitalism Perspective on Start- up Acquisitions: Introducing the Economic Goodwill Threshold Test Andrew McLean Centre for Law, Economics and Society CLES Faculty of Laws, UCL Director: Dr. Deni Mantzari Founding Director: Professor Ioannis Lianos CLES Research Paper Series 2/2020 A Financial Capitalism Perspective on Start-up Acquisitions: Introducing the Economic Goodwill Threshold Test Andrew McLean July 2020 Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES) Faculty of Laws, UCL London, WC1H 0EG The CLES Research Paper Series can be found at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/cles/research-papers All rights reserved. No part of this paper may be reproduced in any form without permission of the author. ISBN 978-1-910801-31-4 © Centre for Law, Economics and Society Faculty of Laws, UCL London, WC1H 0EG United Kingdom A Financial Capitalism Perspective on Start-up Acquisitions: Introducing the Economic Goodwill Threshold Test Andrew McLean1 Abstract This paper discusses the acquisition of start-ups by major technology firms. Such transactions pose a significant anticompetitive threat, yet often escape competition scrutiny because they fail to trigger merger notification threshold tests. Alongside a financial analysis of historic acquisitions by Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft, the paper introduces a new threshold test—the economic goodwill test. The economic goodwill test is a concerned with the value of a target’s net tangible assets as a proportion of total transaction value. The difference between these figures largely represents the gains an acquirer expects to realise from a strengthened competitive position, therefore reflecting the logic driving the mass acquisition of technology start-ups.
    [Show full text]
  • From Legi(Macy to Informed Consent: Mapping Best Prac(Ces and Iden
    From legimacy to informed consent: mapping best pracces and idenfying risks A report from the Working Group on Consumer Consent May 2009 PEN paper 3 About the Working Group The Working Group on Consumer Consent is a project convened by the Information Systems & Innovation Group of the London School of Economics and Political Science and administered by 80/20 Thinking Ltd, based in London UK. The Working Group aims to bring together key industry players, consumer experts and regulators to achieve the following goals: • To better understand the implications of the Article 29 Working Party Opinion on data protection issues related to search engines (April 2008) and its potential impact on the processing of personal information in the non-search sectors. • To foster dialogue between key stakeholders to map current practices relating to notification and consent. • To inform regulators about limitations and opportunities in models and techniques for informed consent for the processing of personal information. • To help inform all stakeholders on aspects of the pending Article 29 Opinion on targeted advertising planned in 2009. Membership The members of the Working Group included: AOL, BT, Covington & Burling, eBay, Enterprise Privacy Group, Facebook, the Future of Privacy Forum, Garlik, Microsoft, Speechly Bircham, Vodafone, and Yahoo! We also sought comments from a number of privacy commissioners and regulators from across Europe. Methodology, Meetings, and Outreach We have been actively engaging with policy-makers and regulators since the creation of the group. This networking not only enhances the quality of the research, but also goes some way to identify and prepare the audience for our discussion papers.
    [Show full text]
  • View Annual Report
    TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS, CUSTOMERS, PARTNERS AND EMPLOYEES: This is a unique letter for me – the last shareholder letter I will write as the CEO of the company I love. We have always believed that technology will unleash human potential and that is why I have come to work every day with a heart full of passion for more than 30 years. Fiscal Year 2013 was a pivotal year for Microsoft in every sense of the word. Last year in my letter to you I declared a fundamental shift in our business to a devices and services company. This transformation impacts how we run the company, how we develop new experiences, and how we take products to market for both consumers and businesses. This past year we took the first big bold steps forward in our transformation and we did it while growing revenue to $77.8 billion (up 6 percent). In addition, we returned $12.3 billion (up 15 percent) to shareholders through dividends and stock repurchases. While we were able to grow revenue to a record level, our earnings results reflect investments as well as some of the challenges of undertaking a transformation of this magnitude. With this as backdrop, I’d like to summarize where we are now and where we’re headed, because it helps explain why I’m so enthusiastic about the opportunity ahead. Our strategy: High-value activities enabled by a family of devices and services We are still in the early days of our transformation, yet we made strong progress in the past year launching devices and services that people love and businesses need.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study on Merger of Skype and Microsoft
    European Journal of Business, Economics and Accountancy Vol. 8, No. 1, 2020 ISSN 2056-6018 VALUATION OF TARGET FIRMS IN MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS: A CASE STUDY ON MERGER OF SKYPE AND MICROSOFT Nguyen Vuong Bang Tam Thu Dau Mot University VIETNAM [email protected] ABSTRACT Mergers and acquisitions have become the most popular used methods of growth for the company and it’s one of the best ways to make a shortcut to get the success. They create the larger potential market share and open it up to a more diversified market, increase competitive advantage against competitors. It also allows firms to operate more efficiently and benefit both competition and consumers. However, there are also many cases that the synergy between acquiring company and acquired company failed. The most common reason is to not create synergy between both of them. In recent months, the merger between Microsoft and Skype is a very hot topic of analysts and viewers…etc. This acquisition presents a big opportunity for both firms, Skype give Microsoft a boost in the enterprise collaboration. To exchange for this synergy, Microsoft paid $8.5 billion in cash for Skype, the firm is not yet profitable. Skype revenue totaling $860 million last year and operating profit of $264 million, the company lost $6.9 million overall, according to documents filed with the SEC. Is that a good deal for Microsoft? Many analysts have different point of view but most of them have negative perspective. Research was to provide the analysis of Skype’s intrinsic value with an optimistic view of point about Skype’s future, Microsoft overpaid for Skype.
    [Show full text]
  • Microhoo: Lessons from a Takeover Attempt Nihat Aktas, Eric De Bodt
    MicroHoo: Lessons from a takeover attempt Nihat Aktas, Eric de Bodt, and Richard Roll This draft: July 14, 2010 ABSTRACT On February 1, 2008, Microsoft offered $43.7 billion for Yahoo. This was a milestone in the Microsoft versus Google battle to control the internet search industry and the related online advertising market. We provide an in-depth analysis of this failed takeover attempt. We attempt to identify the sources of overbidding (signaling, hubris-overconfidence, rational overpayment) and we show that the corporate control market has a disciplinary dimension but of an incidental and latent nature. Our results highlight the existence of takeover anticipation premiums in the stock prices of the potential targets. JEL classification: G34 Keywords: Overbidding; Competitive advantage; Rational overpayment; Latent competition Aktas de Bodt Roll Univ. Lille Nord de EMLYON Business UCLA Anderson France School 110 Westwood Plaza ECCCS Address 23 av. Guy de Collongue Los Angeles, CA 90095- 1 place Déliot - BP381 69130 Ecully 1481 59020 Lille Cédex France USA France Voice +33-4-7833-7847 +33-3-2090-7477 +1-310-825-6118 Fax +33-4-7833-7928 +33-3-2090-7629 +1-310-206-8404 E-mail [email protected] eric.debodt@univ- [email protected] lille2.fr 1 MicroHoo: Lessons from a takeover attempt 1. Introduction Fast Internet access, software as a service, cloud computing, netbooks, mobile platforms, one-line application stores,…, the first decade of the twenty-first century brought all the ingredients of a new technological revolution. These new technologies share one common denominator: the Internet. Two large competitors are face to face.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. the Advertising-Supported Internet 21 2.1 Internet Advertising Segments 2.2 the Value of the Advertising-Supported Internet 3
    Economic Value of the Advertising- Supported Internet Ecosystem June 10, 2009 Authored by Hamilton Consultants, Inc. With Dr. John Deighton, Harvard Business School, and Dr. John Quelch, Harvard Business School HAMILTON CONSULTANTS Cambridge, Massachusetts Executive Summary 1. Background 8 1.1 Purpose of the study 1.2 The Internet today 1.3 Structure of the Internet 2. The Advertising-Supported Internet 21 2.1 Internet advertising segments 2.2 The value of the advertising-supported Internet 3. Internet Companies and Employment by Internet Segment 26 3.1 Overview of Internet companies 3.2 Summary of employment 3.3 Internet service providers (ISPs) and transport 3.4 Hardware providers 3.5 Information technology consulting and solutions companies 3.6 Software companies 3.7 Web hosting and content management companies 3.8 Search engines/portals 3.9 Content sites: news, entertainment, research, information services. 3.10 Software as a service (SaaS) 3.11 Advertising agencies and ad support services 3.12 Ad networks 3.13 E-mail marketing and support 3.14 Enterprise-based Internet marketing, advertising and web design 3.15 E-commerce: e-tailing, e-brokerage, e-travel, and others 3.16 B2B e-commerce 4. Companies and Employment by Geography 50 4.1 Company headquarters and total employees by geography 4.2 Census data for Internet employees by geography 4.3 Additional company location data by geography 5. Benefits of the Ad-Supported Internet Ecosystem 54 5.1 Overview of types of benefits 5.2 Providing universal access to unlimited information 5.3 Creating employment 5.4 Providing one of the pillars of economic strength during the 2008-2009 recession 5.5 Fostering further innovation 5.6 Increasing economic productivity 5.7 Making a significant contribution to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • PFSWEB Annual Report 2021
    PFSWEB Annual Report 2021 Form 10-K (NASDAQ:PFSW) Published: April 30th, 2021 PDF generated by stocklight.com UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 _________________________________________ Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) _________________________________________ ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission file number 000-28275 _________________________________________ PFSWEB, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) _________________________________________ Delaware 75-2837058 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification Number) 505 Millennium Drive, Allen, Texas 75013 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code 972-881-2900 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, $.001 par value PFSW Nasdaq Capital Market Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None _________________________________________ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Y es ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • An Antitrust Analysis of Google's Proposed Acquisition of Doubleclick
    JOINT CENTER AEI-BROOKINGS JOINT CENTER FOR REGULATORY STUDIES An Antitrust Analysis of Google’s Proposed Acquisition of DoubleClick Robert W. Hahn and Hal J. Singer Related Publication 07-24 September 2007 An Antitrust Analysis of Google’s Proposed Acquisition of DoubleClick Robert W. Hahn† Hal J. Singer†† By serving as a key revenue source for online content providers, online advertising has been instrumental in the development of innovative websites. Continued innovation among content providers, however, depends critically on the competitive provision of online advertising. Suppliers of online advertising provide three primary inputs—(1) advertiser tools, (2) intermediation services, and (3) publisher tools. Certain suppliers such as Google provide a platform that combines the inputs into one integrated service. In this paper, we focus on the overlapping products sold to advertisers by Google and DoubleClick—namely, the supply of advertiser tools. Because the supply of advertiser tools is highly concentrated, Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick raises important questions for antitrust authorities. Proponents of this acquisition argue that Google and DoubleClick do not compete—that is, buyers of search-based or contextual-based advertising (the two advertising channels in which Google participates) do not perceive graphic-based advertising (the advertising channel in which DoubleClick participates) to be substitutes. Thus, they conclude that the proposed acquisition would not lead to higher prices. In this paper, we examine economic evidence and legal precedent to help identify the relevant antitrust product market for Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick. According to the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice Horizontal Merger Guidelines, product markets are defined by the response of buyers to relative changes in prices.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Acquires Massive, Inc
    S T A N F O R D U N I V E R S I T Y! 2 0 0 7 - 3 5 3 - 1! W W W . C A S E W I K I . O R G! R e v . M a y 2 9 , 2 0 0 7 MICROSOFT ACQUIRES MASSIVE, INC. May 4th, 2006 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S 1. Introduction 2. Industry Overview 2.1. The Advertising Opportunity Within Video Games 2.2. Market Size and Demographics 2.3. Video Games and Advertising 2.4. Market Dynamics 3. Massive, Inc. ! Company Background 3.1. Founding of Massive 3.2. The Financing of Massive 3.3. Product Launch / Technology 3.4. The Massive / Microsoft Deal 4. Microsoft, Inc. within the Video Game Industry 4.1. Role as a Game Publisher / Developer 4.2. Acquisitions 4.3. Role as an Electronic Advertising Network 4.4. Statements Regarding the Acquisition of Massive, Inc. 5. Exhibits 5.1. Table of Exhibits 6. References ! 2 0 0 7 - 3 5 3 - 1! M i c r o s o f t A c q u i s i t i o n o f M a s s i v e , I n c .! I N T R O D U C T I O N In May 2007, Microsoft Corporation was a company in transition. Despite decades of dominance in its core markets of operating systems and desktop productivity software, Mi! crosoft was under tremendous pressure to create strongholds in new market spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics Resource Center (2013) a Scary Headline
    If I Were Trying to Get and Keep an Ethical Culture . Prof. Marianne Jennings Emeritus W.P.Carey School of Business Arizona State University Jennings Where we are SOME SCARY SLIDES 2 Ethical Lapses . Davis-Besse . Google (3 times) . Bear Stearns . Adelphia (FENOC) . GroupOn . Berkshire Hathaway . Deloitte Touche . ADM . Hallmark Westland . Biovail . Delphi . AIG (three times) . HealthSouth . BNY . Deutsche Bank . Allergan . Body Shop . Diamond Nuts . Helig-Myers . American Apparel . Boeing . Downey Savings & . Herbalife . American Express . BP (three times) Loan . HP . Apple (twice) . Bristol-Myers . Duke Energy Squibb . HSCB . Apollo Group . DuPont . Calpers . ImClone . Arthur Andersen . Edward Jones . Cardinal Health . IndyMac . AstraZeneca . Eli Lilly . Cendant . Ernst & Young . Johnson & Johnson . AT & T . Chase . Facebook . Autonomy . Kmart . Chesapeake Energy . Fannie Mae (twice) . Avon . KPMG (twice) . Chiquita . Fidelity Investments . Bally Total Fitness . Chrysler . Krispy Kreme . Galleon Hedge Fund . Bank of America . Cintas . Lehman Brothers . General Electric . Barclays . Citigroup . Lennar Corp. GlaxoSmithKline (2) . Bayer . Columbia HCA . Lucent . BCBS . Computer . Global Crossing Associates . Madoff Investment . BCCI . Global Research Securities . Countrywide . BDO Seidman Financial . GM . Marsh & McLennan . CSFB . Goldman Sachs (2X) . McNeil (Tylenol) . CVS Ethical Lapses . Medtronic . Qwest . Mellon Bank . Razorfish . Tyco International . Mercer . RBS . UBS . Merck . Reebok . UnitedHealth Group . Refco . Merrill Lynch . Universities and . MF Global . Royal Ahold sports . Royal Shell . Microstrategy . UPS . Milberg Weiss . SAC Capital . Wachovia . Moody’s . Saks Fifth Avenue . Morgan Stanley . Sallie Mae . WaMu . Navistar International . Samsung . Wells Fargo . New Century Financial . Satyam (India) . World Bank . Shaw Group . New Orleans Saints . WorldCom . Nortel . Siemens . Xerox . Novartis . Société General . Options scandals (200 . Standard & Poor’s . Zynga companies) . Stanford Investments . Oracle . Student loan lenders .
    [Show full text]
  • Google/ Doubleclick REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1)
    EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.4731 – Google/ DoubleClick Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1) Date: 11-03-2008 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 11/03/2008 C(2008) 927 final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 11/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4731 – Google/ DoubleClick) (Only the English text is authentic) Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................4 2 THE PARTIES...........................................................................................................5 3 THE CONCENTRATION.........................................................................................6 4 COMMUNITY DIMENSION ...................................................................................6 5 MARKET DESCRIPTION......................................................................................6 6 RELEVANT MARKETS.........................................................................................17 6.1. Relevant product markets ............................................................................17 6.1.1. Provision of online advertising space.............................................17 6.1.2. Intermediation in
    [Show full text]