But why? Jonathan Miller, CEO of AOL was asked the question yesterday here at Web 2.0 and his answer was quite vague. He said something to the effect that Relegence provided some technology that helped AOL deal with real-time information and that real-time information was going to be an important component of AOL's offerings. This is what was described in the press release, but honestly, it seems odd to me. Any ideas?
Recent Posts
- Chris Bulkey of Technology Research Group tells us why their research is as "subtle as a punch in the face"
- Alacra, ALM Partner to Bring Alacra Pulse to Legal Market
- Alacra Pulse named SIIA CODiE finalist
- Kompass Helps B2B Marketers Improve their Results
- A News Cartel Can’t Happen
- When Clients Define The Use Cases
- Social Media By The Numbers – A Curated List of Social Media Tips
- Alacra Street Pulse featured in new Fidelity Stock Research Center
- The Alacra Knowledge Base: A rose by any other name….
- Tagging: the Heartbeat of Alacra Pulse
« Two Days at Web 2.0 | Main | Reuters Invests In Pluck »
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2dae53ef00d834c4657e53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference AOL Buys Relegence:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
PCAN
- Related Research from Alacrastore.com
I totally 2nd your confusion here. Given the activity in this space w/companies like Monitor110, CollectiveIntellect and others who are about to make their way out, I'm not sure why AOL wants to get distracted into this non-consumer market. However, if Jonathan Miller's point here is that they have valuable infrastructure, then perhaps the motives are outside of our purview. Having said this, $65M (the reported amount for this transaction) is an aweful lot of money for a technology acquisition play. This falls into the category of "things that make you go hmmm" ;-)
Posted by: p-air | November 10, 2006 at 05:32 PM