“We’re open for business in making strategic acquisitions both large and small,” Schmidt said. “Because of what we’ve seen, we have the confidence to be optimistic about our future and we’re going to invest as a result.”

And what sort of acquisitions is Google (GOOG) looking to make? Smaller strategic acquisitions mostly. Buyouts the size of YouTube or DoubleClick will be, according to Schmidt “quite infrequent.”

The Google CEO’s latest comments echo remarks he made earlier this month and back in September when he first said the company had begun seriously looking at acquisitions again. “Acquisitions are back on again at Google and we are doing our normal maneuvers, which is small companies,” he said. “My estimate would be one-a-month acquisitions and these are largely in lieu of hiring. There may be larger acquisitions, but they really are unpredictable.”

So what’s the M&A outlook? What will Google acquire next? Dynamic ad optimization start-up Teracent, perhaps? The oft-rumored Twitter? Or something else entirely?

“The interesting thing about cloud computing is that we’ve redefined cloud computing to include everything that we already do,” Ellison said. “I can’t think of anything that isn’t cloud computing with all of these announcements….These people who are writing this crap are out there. They are insane. I mean it is the stupidest. Is it ‘Oh, I am going to access data on a server on the Internet.’ That is cloud computing?…Maybe I’m an idiot, but I have no idea what anyone is talking about. What is it? It’s complete gibberish. It’s insane. When is this idiocy going to stop?”

In conversation with former Sun (JAVA) CEO Ed Zander at a Churchill Club event a little over a year later, Ellison expanded on those remarks, suggesting that if the cloud is anything, it’s a cloud of BS.

Cloud’s water vapor….Cloud computing is not only the future of computing, it is the present and the entire past of computing.

…Salesforce.com has been around for a decade. And so has NetSuite…and people are saying, “Well, that’s cloud computing.” Google is cloud computing. Everyone is cloud computing….Everything is in the cloud now….It’s this nonsense.

…But it’s not water vapor. All it is is a computer attached to a network. What are you talking about? I mean, what do you think Google runs on?…Water vapor? It’s databases and operating systems and memory and microprocessors and the Internet!

…And the VCs, I love the VCs. [They ask their start-ups] “Oh…is that cloud?” [And the start-ups go] “Oh! Oh! Microsoft Word! Change ‘Internet’ to ‘cloud’! Mass change. Give it back to these nitwits on Sand Hill Road.”

…What do you mean by “cloud computing”?…All the cloud is is computers on a network.

Our industry is so bizarre. They just change a term and they think they’ve invented technology….You can’t just come up with a [slogan] like “Let’s call that ‘cloud.” [But] it sure beats innovation.”

Below, the full video. Ellison’s rant begins around the 45:54 mark.

Until then, the market will have to make due with merger-and-acquisition deals, which themselves aren’t doing so well. There were just 68 M&As in the first quarter of 2009, the lowest number since 1999. And they generated just $3.2 billion–down 65 percent from a year ago. Seems acquiring companies are on the lookout for bargain-basement deals and there are unquestionably few to be had given the souring economy. “Acquiring companies are simply looking to be very aggressive buyers and frankly are looking for rock-bottom pricing because that’s what they should be doing in this kind of environment,” Jim Watson, managing general partner at CMEA Capital, told VentureWire. “If you’re a seller now it’s because you have to be a seller.”

Election 2008
Whether or not those voting machines malfunctioned or miscounted votes, Barack Obama was set to become the 44th President of the United States, much to the chagrin of comedians like Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, who–since the beginning of the McCain/Palin partnership–were handed once-in-a-lifetime material. Between the brilliant “Saturday Night” Live parody sketches of (and by) both Palin and McCain, and Obama’s victory speech, the other big winner (by a mile) was Google’s (GOOG) YouTube. All 500 video versions of the speech generated nearly seven million views. It doesn’t beat the nearly-naked Britney Spears, with over nine million views, but one can dream.

Yahoo
This week, Yahoo (YHOO) was kind of like a high school senior with a prom night dilemma: Since Microsoft (MSFT) backed out of acquisition negotiations earlier this year, Steve Ballmer insists there’s no deal, but there’s a lot of back-and-forth that makes BoomTown wonder. Google backed out of the much-discussed search ad partnership with the company after the DOJ made it clear that it was not going to happen without a fight. The also-much-discussed merger with Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL has not fared much better. According to BoomTown, where you’ll find the straight dope on all of the rumors, all of this (for starters) has turned CEO Jerry Yang into the Internet’s human pinata.
You know what they say: “Play hard-to-get and you won’t get got.”

Econalypse
Rupert Murdoch admits business is worse than he previously thought. Disney (DIS) admits that ad spending has been declining for more than a year. Does that make it official? Either way, reality sinks in further among the non-start-up set–Time Inc. is laying off hundreds and reorganizing the rest. Viacom (VIA) may or may not have layoffs. Among the start-up set, as witnessed at the recent Web 2.0 conference this past week, companies are in survival mode, getting lean for the downturn. Well, not everybody. MySpace’s over-arching theme, judging from this BoomTown video of the giant’s Web 2.0 party, is “Masque of the Red Death.” Party on, Garth–and have a pleasant tomorrow.

This afternoon, Microsoft said it will acquire the search start-up for a sum believed to be more than $100 million.

Coming as it does in the aftermath of Microsoft’s failed effort to buy Yahoo, the acquisition is an interesting one. Powerset is no Yahoo. That said, it’s in some ways better.

Powerset specializes in so-called “natural language” search, which is meant to understand the intent and meaning behind the words in search queries–so that, for example, a search engine could understand the difference between a search for “yahoo” the exclamation, and “Yahoo” the search company Microsoft didn’t buy. Powerset searches the Web–well, at this point, just Wikipedia–semantically. And that’s a handy skill to have when your competing with Google (GOOG), which isn’t yet able to search the Web in that way.

Said Harvard Business School professor Andrei Hagiu, “Microsoft’s acquisition of Powerset makes perfect sense and is probably the best shot at a disruptive technology that might allow it to leapfrog Google.”

A source close to the company tells SAI that Yahoo has finalized its list of layoffs and will announce them during its fourth quarter earnings call tomorrow. Tough to say what sort of effect they’ll have at this point, given the shape Yahoo’s in these days. Certainly, CEO Jerry Yang has to do something. Since he took over, Yahoo shares have lost more than 22%, trading at $21 at this writing.

“We won’t know the financial implications until the layoffs get announced,” says Steve Weinstein, an analyst with Pacific Crest Securities. “But if it doesn’t, the expectation will grow exceedingly. This is a stock that was at $40 [two years ago]. You’re seeing investor frustration. Yahoo has to find ways to regain momentum.”

Or maybe, as Bubblegeneration’s Umair Haque suggests, it should just throw in the towel. “Yahoo’s problem is DNA,” writes Haque. “Yahoo, you’ve held back thousands of very talented people for the last five years and prevented them from making the fullest use of their talents and insights. … You guys all let Terry Semel make the third fundamental error of strategy–to mistake deal-making for strategy. In the process, you sold out a deeper set of principles; you forgot that the job of a revolutionary is never to sell out, and the point of a strategy is fundamentally to create new value. … The fundamental assumptions behind your thinking are deeply in error, and so your strategy is in massive decay. So please, don’t put up a fight–let these guys go build the cool start-ups and pioneer the radical innovation you’ve stifled and suffocated for the last half-decade.”

Still, the Silicon Valley start-up, which officially opened its Web-based telephony platform to third party developers this morning, is generating a lot of buzz for its Flash/Flex-based telephones (see video below), and rightly so. The company has essentially built a software version of an operator-class telephone switch that connects Internet-based voice communication services with mobile and landline phones and other Web-based phone applications.

Using its Ribbit API, developers can write applications that support full telephone capabilities–voice mail, call-logging, text-to-speech transcription services, etc.–and because they’re Flash/Flex-based, they can be embedded into Web sites and integrated into Web-based services.

“What we have done is made voice an object that you embed into your workflow (or software),” said Ribbit CEO Ted Griggs. “We didn’t want to change how people did things, like communicate via Skype, and wanted to integrate the platform to work with any phone.”

Smart, eh? But how’s the company going to make money? Ribbit says it plans to charge for services like calls to traditional landlines, voice-mail transcriptions and billing. A reasonable plan, but as Ovum analyst Brett Azuma notes, an unproven one. “Unless there’s a foolproof way to get the products out there and make them successful,” Azuma told Wired. “I think the consumer applications are a little unclear for now. Being able to use text-to-speech transcription services and archive voice calls are many of the features that consumers have shown interest in over the years. However, whether or not they’re willing to pay for these features is going to be the big question.”

In late September Google purchased mobile social-networking start-up Zingku. Now it’s gone and bought Jaiku, a Finnish company that offers an “activity stream and presence-sharing service” similar to the more widely known Twitter. Two months. Two mobile social-networking start-ups. Google never explained its plans for Zingku. What’s it going to do with Jaiku? Who knows …

“We plan to use the ideas and technology behind Jaiku to make compelling and useful products,” product manager Tony Hsieh wrote in a post to Google’s corporate blog this afternoon. “Although we don’t have definite plans to announce at this time, we’re excited about helping drive the next round of developments in Web and mobile technology.”

Ah. Helping to drive them the way you drove Dodgeball? To that happy place where social-networking apps go to die? Kidding, of course.

Anyway … Why did Google choose Jaiku over Twitter, a similar company with far greater brand recognition? “The answer seems pretty obvious to me,” says Tim O’ Reilly. “Jaiku isn’t a ‘lifestreaming’ company per se. They are a mobile company in the business of creating smarter presence applications. Far from being a runner-up behind Twitter, they are a leader in a category most people haven’t fully grasped yet. Google is clearly thinking a lot about mobile, and so they do grasp it.”

Of course, there’s another answer to that question as well. Twitter founder Evan Williams, whose previous company, Blogger, was acquired by Google in February 2003, may not have wanted to see another of his creations doomed to irrelevance by the search giant.

Which is not to say Twitter won’t be acquired. As RedMonk analyst James Governor points out, the company is probably looking pretty good to Yahoo right now. “Google and Yahoo are in dueling acquisition mode, and Yahoo is almost certain to respond,” said Governor. “Especially since Twitter has begun to use a footer on SMS messages it sends out–which could of course be used as a microbillboard.”