Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) I'm guessing this would make the Marvel buyout seem inconsequential. Not from an objective point of view. Marvel has a ton of super popular licenses for characters in comics, movies, games, toys, etc. EA makes video games. Edited September 24, 2009 by Purkake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian Kalthorne Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Of course in the wildest possibilities that Alpha Protocol and Fallout New Vegas are beyond popular giving Obsidian enough capital to by both Microsoft and EA. I could go for that. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Of course in the wildest possibilities that Alpha Protocol and Fallout New Vegas are beyond popular giving Obsidian enough capital to by both Microsoft and EA. I could go for that. But SEGA would still be publishing all the games... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syraxis Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) But perhaps the doctors could smoothtalk Ballmer, just like they did with Riccitello. They could try, he'd just throw a chair at them. edit: While chanting Developers! Developers! Developers! Edited September 24, 2009 by Syraxis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I'm guessing this would make the Marvel buyout seem inconsequential. Not from an objective point of view. Marvel has a ton of super popular licenses for characters in comics, movies, games, toys, etc. EA makes video games. Talking from a money perspective. Inconsequential is probably not the right word, but "less ridiculously expensive" is more what I was looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 No one in their right mind would pay anywhere near $4 billion for EA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowtrain Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 The less Microsoft owns the better. Especially anything game related. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 The less Microsoft owns the better. Especially anything game related. They should totally buy Apple and have Steve Jobs delivered to Redmond, in chains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowtrain Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I can't stand the current crop of PC vs MAC ads from either side. I'm a pc! I'm a Mac! Burn in hell both of you. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) I was kidding Apple makes awesome hardware, but their total control over the platform is pretty annoying. Microsoft screws stuff up over and over. Edited September 24, 2009 by Purkake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 No one in their right mind would pay anywhere near $4 billion for EA EA paid 3/4 of a billion for JUST BioWare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoonDing Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 No one in their right mind would pay anywhere near $4 billion for EA Don't underestimate the Sultan of Brunei! The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 EA isn't Microsoft and Bioware was WAY overpriced. I'm just not seeing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) Well, then it must not be true then. What with your exquisite knowledge of the value of companies and so forth. I'll admit, I always have been surprised that you aren't spending more time elsewhere given your business acumen. Edited September 24, 2009 by alanschu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepenthe Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I dunno, my antitrust antennas are peaking just at the thought. I preferred even the old rumor of Apple buying EA. They might be updating the guidelines in the US. That said, has the government ever turned its attentions to the video game industry in regards to anti-trust? What about movies or book publishing? Since the 1980s, the number of book publishers has shrunk dramatically. Well, I was talking about my own personal antitrust antennas (they go with my GF's arse antlers, but...), but it's definitely a scary concept. The EC Commission probably already has a department just to keep an eye on Microsoft, and a M$/ You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purkake Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) Well, then it must not be true then. What with your exquisite knowledge of the value of companies and so forth. I'll admit, I always have been surprised that you aren't spending more time elsewhere given your business acumen. So you are more qualified? I'm just stating my opinion based on my knowledge past acquisitions and reading articles etc. Edited September 24, 2009 by Purkake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bos_hybrid Posted September 24, 2009 Author Share Posted September 24, 2009 No one in their right mind would pay anywhere near $4 billion for EA EA paid 3/4 of a billion for JUST BioWare. It wasn't just Bioware, Pandemic was part of the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 (edited) Well, then it must not be true then. What with your exquisite knowledge of the value of companies and so forth. I'll admit, I always have been surprised that you aren't spending more time elsewhere given your business acumen. So you are more qualified? I'm just stating my opinion based on my knowledge past acquisitions and reading articles etc. I'm stating my opinion based on precedent. BioWare alone had two significant buyouts in recent years for large amounts of cash. Writing it off as being "oh, well that's overpriced" is a bit convenient. Specifically, I can't say if Electronic Arts over OR underpaid for BioWare, because quite frankly I'm not qualified to make that claim. But I'm sure that those articles you read were all of top notch quality. It wasn't just Bioware, Pandemic was part of the deal. Ah you're right. My point still stands. Edited September 24, 2009 by alanschu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
entrerix Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 first, i agree with nepenthe in general. m$ would very likely have to deal with an antitrust case if they drastically changed EA's business to favor themselves. Im not 100% sure m$ would lose that case though. ubi/activision whatever is large too, and sony has their own studios. it may not be enough to really constitute the strangehold. i also dont really follow antitrust cases though so maybe it is sufficient. It probably would be in europe, but the US likes its monopolies... really, and more important in my opinion, is that it doesnt make much sense to me for m$ to buy EA. ea makes a lotta dough and is worth vastly more as a company that's able to sell to all sides. m$ wouldnt likely be as willing to pony up that level of cash knowing that they were going to then downgrade the profit levels of the company by forcing it to sell only to itself. i could imagine m$ buying EA and letting it continue to operate basically as is, just with slightly favorable edges to all m$ stuff. things like early releases on xbox and more exclusive dlc's etc. that way m$ is also making cash off every EA to sony product sale. so it'd be a way to start profiting off of the ps3 as well as bulking up their own xbox division. sony would be non pleased knowing that half the games sold for the ps3 are now netting gains to their competition. i'm kinda rambling and thinking out loud, so a lot of this is probably nonsense and has big logic holes. Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Your edit is the 'bingo' here and what I was thinking. I doubt the bingo would directly prevent the sale, though. Might lead to constraints on it of course (such as compulsory cross-platform deployments). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Anyway, I hate this idea because EA has been a fairly decent support of Mag gaming in the past, and has recently been making noise about the growth of Macs and how it plans to expand its Mac market even more. So a Microsoft acquisition would be... less than ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
entrerix Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 for so many reasons. im starting to think this whole thing sounds about as plausible as when m$ was going to buy nintendo. its just not gonna happen. Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoraptor Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I'm stating my opinion based on precedent. BioWare alone had two significant buyouts in recent years for large amounts of cash. Writing it off as being "oh, well that's overpriced" is a bit convenient. Both those buyouts were by the same person though- John Riccitiello- just wearing different hats. He's hardly going to sell (himself, effectively) Bioware for less than he paid for it originally, if for no other reason than he'd get sued by Elevation Partners if he did so. Bioware is overvalued as it stands- you can, after all, work out their income streams roughly from their sales and compare that to other companies'. The big question being how SWTOR performs, if it's a genuine WoW killer then 750mUSD for Bioware alone would be a steal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niten_Ryu Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 The big question being how SWTOR performs, if it's a genuine WoW killer then 750mUSD for Bioware alone would be a steal. No doubt that this is what EA is betting on but we have to remember that Lucas takes big cut from overall profits so theoritically KotOR online need to be REALLY popular in order to reach WoW like profits for EA. Let's play Alpha Protocol My misadventures on youtube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Masterfade Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I'm stating my opinion based on precedent. BioWare alone had two significant buyouts in recent years for large amounts of cash. Writing it off as being "oh, well that's overpriced" is a bit convenient. Both those buyouts were by the same person though- John Riccitiello- just wearing different hats. He's hardly going to sell (himself, effectively) Bioware for less than he paid for it originally, if for no other reason than he'd get sued by Elevation Partners if he did so. Bioware is overvalued as it stands- you can, after all, work out their income streams roughly from their sales and compare that to other companies'. The big question being how SWTOR performs, if it's a genuine WoW killer then 750mUSD for Bioware alone would be a steal. SWTOR is being published by LucasArts and using their IP so I'm not sure how much EA will get out of it. Elevation Partners made a terrific deal out of VG Holdings, buying Bioware and Pandemic for 300+ milliions and selling them two years later for doubling at least. Riccitiello personally got 5 millions for overseeing the buyout. I feel it's EA shareholders who got the shift and paid much more than it's worth. This time, if Microsoft promised, say 20 or so million dollars, to Riccitiello if the buyout is carried out, I can totally imagine him trying to persuade the EA board to sell out. But as people said, this deal make no sense for Microsoft. Maybe it's just someone trying to cash out his EA shares and made up the rumor. Wonder if market regulators will make some investigations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now