Google's still talking to YouTube about a buyout. One paragraph in the New York Times sums up the situation: "Barring a last-minute snag in the talks, the boards of both Google and YouTube were scheduled to hold separate board meetings on Monday to approve the deal, with an announcement possible after the close of regular trading. Discussions could still break down, however, or another party could present a more-attractive offer." [NY Times DealBook]
The best evidence that Google won't outright buy YouTube this week is that the video site made three content and licensing deals with CBS, Universal Music Group, and BMG Music. That's the behavior of an independent company, not one about to sell. [USA Today]
The second-best evidence is the logic outlined by billionaire blogger Mark Cuban: Google should buy the revenue, not the liabilities. [Blog Maverick]
Michael Arrington, who broke the rumor of YouTube's impending acquisition at his blog TechCrunch, points to the media that confirmed that YouTube and Google are at least talking about such a deal. [TechCrunch]
A back-of-the-envelope calculation, assuming that YouTube's founders, VCs, and employees split a $1.5 billion windfall evenly three ways, would give Sequoia Capital a $500 million return on its $30 million investment. Granted, if $500 million goes to the 60 employees, everyone down to the receptionist should walk a way a comfortable millionaire. Again, this three-way split is just a wild guess. [Mr. Wave Theory]
Valleywag commenters build theories. For example, YouTube could be pulling an old trick, announcing the Google deal just before talks go sour, then seeing who else bites. [Valleywag]
The Wall Street Journal expects a possible announcement today of a merger that would leave YouTube an independent fiefdom, keeping its name and its offices. [IP Democracy]
