Yahoo! Inc.'s [YHOO] earnings report on April 22 looms as a key date in its ongoing attempt to either avoid a buyout by Microsoft Corp. [MSFT] or elicit a higher bid than the software maker's $31 a share offer, though the events from last week suggest there could be more behind-the-scenes maneuvering ahead of that report. The New York Times said Saturday that Yahoo!'s board of directors authorized management to continue negotiating with Microsoft and Time Warner Inc. [TWX] regarding a possible merger with its AOL property.

Despite potential tie-ups with Google Inc. [GOOG] to outsource its search business or a merger with AOL, a takeover by Microsoft continues remains the most likely scenario. And while those alternatives floated by Yahoo! last week could be enough to get Microsoft to raise its price, there remains a chance that Microsoft could abandon its bid, watch Yahoo!'s stock price fall and then come back with its original bid.

UBS Securities LLC's Ben Schachter is among those analysts who still expect Microsoft to prevail in its takeover attempt. In a research note today, Schachter says he would not be surprised to see a deal struck sometime this week at a price above the original $31 a share our. He writes that an all-cash offer would be preferable to the current half cash-half stock offer since Microsoft's shares are trading at a lofty 14 times 2008 earnings. 

Shachter hosted a conference call with Duane Morris LLP's Glenn Manishin to discuss antitrust concerns of a Microsoft-Yahoo! tie-up, concluding that there would be a 15% to 25% chance that antitrust enforcers would block the deal. Regulatory clearance would likely take four to six months in the U.S. and eight to nine months in Europe.

Manshin also weighed in on the regultatory impact of a Yahoo! partnership with Google, concluding the current two-week trial in which Google ads displayed alongside Yahoo!'s search results does not fall under the filing requirements of the Hart-Scott-Rodino act given the trial's limited duration and scope. However, a long-term partnership "is likely much more troublesome from a regulatory point of view," Schachter writes. -- David Shabelman

See April 7 story from Tech Confidential
See April 10 story from Tech Confidential
See April 12 story from the The New York Times
See April 11 post from Tech Confidential
See April 14 post from Silicon Alley Insider