-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wall Street was Betting That Microsoft-Activision Deal Will Fail
- Status
oldergamer
Member
Its what I thought. Can we officially ban jason as a source now? he literally worse then any other source banned in the past.
WoodyStare
Member
Scary Movie 2
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
This story doesn't require sources. It's just a shit click bait take.
Last edited:
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Jason Shrier is such a clown:
I think it's safe to assume that Richard Hoeg just got blocked assclown Schreier
Topher
Identifies as young
Factually, there is no source for this "story" at all. His source is supposedly the entirety of "Wall Street" based entirely on the current stock price and yet the stock price is still higher than it was prior to the announcement that MS intended to acquire AB.
Hoeg is right. This is total bullshit.
ATVI stock price, last 6 months
Stock price shot up after the announcement and has stayed relatively flat since then.
Last edited:
Dr Bass
Member
No negative effects?
So there are tons of Playstation/Nintendo only gamers out there. They won't get any Bethesda games anymore. Games they've had access to for decades, and MS has had nothing to do with for all of that time.
There are several users celebrating that fact with glee on this board. I personally think that behavior is pathetic. If you liked a game, and thought it was great, why would you want less people to share in the experience? I love Nintendo games. If Nintendo put their games on PS or Xbox, I think that would be cool! Because then more people could play them (and I could finally play BotW at a decent frame rate and resolution without looking at PC emulation). So basically, if someone is happy about these kinds of buyouts, I don't think they are gamers. They are losers living vicariously through the wins and losses of these companies, much like overweight sports fans that religiously follow their favorite sports teams.
The Activision/Blizzard acquisition falls under that same umbrella. This is a massive third party group that no one should be happy about being taken exclusive, unless you're a total douche. Again, do people like games, or do they like console warring? I don't really play A/B games, and I have everything anyway, so it doesn't affect me, but it's the wrong way to go about things. Spencer likes to talk about "growing" the industry while being directly responsible for completely reductive behavior. He's a two faced liar, and can't even manage the studios he has.
If you think there are no negative effects resulting from MS' behavior I don't think you're thinking of the gaming community as a whole, just what it's like to be an Xbox owner. I don't see how you can refer to removing classic series from the number 1 and 2 platform in the world, and relegating them to the 3rd place platform as "not negative"? If it is not negative, it's a positive thing?
I know you're not a fan of Elden Ring but let's look at the enthusiasm around it. Because everyone has access to it (aside from Nintendo players, but they know why)! I just see a lot of discussion, and basically no fighting over it because, again, everyone can play it! It's what the gaming community should be, IMO. And it should be ok to not like the game too. But again, the discussion that I've seen in the MASSIVE OT, seems to mostly revolve around the game. As it should.
The board is going to be a shit show when Starfield comes out. Xbox only players are going to insist it's the best game of the year, and the best game since Skyrim, and nothing else touches it etc. etc. etc. PS only players will say it sucks, doesn't match up to Skyrim as a game, has worse visuals than the PS exclusives, Bethesda has lost it, etc etc. And as usual, Nintendo players will be playing Pokemon.
It didn't have to be this way.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Meanwhile the stockholders approve of the acquisition/merger.
Activision Blizzard Stockholders Approve Proposed Microsoft Transaction
Activision Blizzard, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) announced that its stockholders approved Microsoft Corporation’s (Nasdaq: MSFT) proposal to acquire Activisio
www.businesswire.com
nominedomine
Banned
Is Sony the one trying to buy Activision Blizzard? Did Sony buy any publisher? That's the worst possible argument.
Last edited:
Magic Carpet
Gold Member
Meanwhile the stockholders approve of the acquisition/merger.
Activision Blizzard Stockholders Approve Proposed Microsoft Transaction
Activision Blizzard, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) announced that its stockholders approved Microsoft Corporation’s (Nasdaq: MSFT) proposal to acquire Activisiowww.businesswire.com
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Ok. So? Jason was doing it for the click?Meanwhile the stockholders approve of the acquisition/merger.
Activision Blizzard Stockholders Approve Proposed Microsoft Transaction
Activision Blizzard, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) announced that its stockholders approved Microsoft Corporation’s (Nasdaq: MSFT) proposal to acquire Activisiowww.businesswire.com
nominedomine
Banned
Right after we split MS in 20 companies as well. Too bad it isn't going to happen because politicians are easily corrupted and people are easily fooled.
Topher
Identifies as young
What does Sony have to do with it?
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Meanwhile the stockholders approve of the acquisition/merger.
Activision Blizzard Stockholders Approve Proposed Microsoft Transaction
Activision Blizzard, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) announced that its stockholders approved Microsoft Corporation’s (Nasdaq: MSFT) proposal to acquire Activisiowww.businesswire.com
Great insider info, clickbait Schreier.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
I have no idea if it'll be an issue, its all very political so who knows really.
I guess the grounds would be something like CoD is the #1 franchise in its genre, and while its reasonable to accept that another entity could publish a title that competes with it when its purely a matter of competing against ABK, that existing brand dominance combined with MS' network reach and effects on PC and console could make it pass a threshold where it becomes anti-competitive.
Not saying that's a valid argument, or one that would be proffered for consideration, just that based on what I read about the intentions behind revising anti-trust legislation and regulation, it seems like the argument could be along those lines.
To be honest, although I think the instinct to curb consolidation by the tech giants is a good and necessary one, I'm not sure if acting against this particular deal is justified beyond the symbolic power of firing a shot over the bows of big tech.
But again, its all about political currency, and showing a willingness to block billion-dollar deals is a good way of getting leverage.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Stocks are down across the board. So many are using selective extraction as their personal bias and political correlations where there are none.Factually, there is no source for this "story" at all. His source is supposedly the entirety of "Wall Street" based entirely on the current stock price and yet the stock price is still higher than it was prior to the announcement that MS intended to acquire AB.
Hoeg is right. This is total bullshit.
ATVI stock price, last 6 months
Stock price shot up after the announcement and has stayed relatively flat since then.
Only thing that is true, is inflation is through the damned roof.
how is it click bait to report on the stock market?
If investors were confident about the deal going through, the price would match. A significant number of large-scale investors don't believe this is a sure thing.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
yeah. lots of large scale wall street investors are? if they werent, they'd have bought stock and it would match.
Zeroing
Banned
Bladed Thesis
Member
Jason's reading of the situation is definitely puzzling and inferring a lot.
There are MANY reasons that the stock price currently doesn't meet the buyout price and the most obvious one is pretty easy.
The uncertainty of WHEN the sale goes through means why tie up your money now for $20 in profit at some unknown time. Take into consideration the time value of money, inflation, current market trends with regards to the war in Ukraine, uncertainty of recession or market forces, a coming election (coming possibly BEFORE any acquisition was completed), even a 5% chance this doesn't go thorugh, tying up capital into this deal with an unknown completion timetable, etc. All these things tell investors there isn't much of a reason to buy for now at a $20 profit per share offering.
Sure, retail investors might throw some money into it but for an actual investment firm to put any amount of money into this at this moment and wait for possibly 12-14 months with that money tied up makes no sense. It has very little to do with the success chance of the acquisition being approved. Very little. There are other better things to invest it with money over the next 12-14 months than investing into this and waiting for a $20 per share profit while inflation and time value of money claws away at your profits during those months of waiting and sitting on your hands with capital tied up in a future deal.
There are MANY reasons that the stock price currently doesn't meet the buyout price and the most obvious one is pretty easy.
The uncertainty of WHEN the sale goes through means why tie up your money now for $20 in profit at some unknown time. Take into consideration the time value of money, inflation, current market trends with regards to the war in Ukraine, uncertainty of recession or market forces, a coming election (coming possibly BEFORE any acquisition was completed), even a 5% chance this doesn't go thorugh, tying up capital into this deal with an unknown completion timetable, etc. All these things tell investors there isn't much of a reason to buy for now at a $20 profit per share offering.
Sure, retail investors might throw some money into it but for an actual investment firm to put any amount of money into this at this moment and wait for possibly 12-14 months with that money tied up makes no sense. It has very little to do with the success chance of the acquisition being approved. Very little. There are other better things to invest it with money over the next 12-14 months than investing into this and waiting for a $20 per share profit while inflation and time value of money claws away at your profits during those months of waiting and sitting on your hands with capital tied up in a future deal.
Topher
Identifies as young
They did buy stock. That's why the price shot up after the acquisition was announced. Suggesting Wall Street is betting it will fail without a single source making such a statement is sheer click bait.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
They are not betting it will fail, they are hedging their bets. The upside if it does go through is known, the downside is unknown. If you predict that the stock price will drop to 30 if it doesn't go through, then valuing it at 75 per share means you are confident it will go through. Plus why lock up your capital for 8-24 months when the share price isn't moving?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Is it though?
We know Creier is an anti-capitalist (even though he works for one) slacktivist, who also has a hard-on for the ideological woke BS movement trying to undermine gaming companies from within, not unlike Hollywood went through with the #metoo hostile takeover. Until everything is consumed and conformed, comrade.
Topher
Identifies as young
Exactly. That's why the stock isn't making any big moves in either direction outside of the flow of the overall market. If Wall Street truly believes the deal will fail then the price will tank.
Rivet
Member
It all depends on when FTC decides on the acquisition. Usually stock price reflects acquisition price if the market believes it will go through AND it's not too far along the road. Here I read the deal is expected to close before July 2023. It's kinda far away so it certainly justifies in itself the stock doesn't reach the acquisition price. In that case, price will stay lower since people think their money would stay on the stock for too long and it could be invested elsewhere.
Still, share is worth $77 and MS offer is $95, which makes for 23 % difference. Such a big difference is a bit unusual for a deal you expect to go through. Maybe there are some doubts about the FTC review, on top of the later date.
Still, share is worth $77 and MS offer is $95, which makes for 23 % difference. Such a big difference is a bit unusual for a deal you expect to go through. Maybe there are some doubts about the FTC review, on top of the later date.
Last edited:
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
I just think that the idea that no one can be happy about the acquisition without being a "total douche" is just not true. I'd be happy about it because it adds value to Gamepass for me, for free. And I also think there is potential for positive effects among the studios as well: 1) Call of Duty possibly slowing release cycles, 2) teams in Activision maybe having a chance for more creative freedom, 3) Blizzard maybe focusing more on their traditional RTS games or at the very least, being freed from poor Activision management and restructuring.
Exclusives have always existed in gaming since the very beginning. If all you have is a PS, then sure that is a loss so that's a fair point. But the same could be said of almost any exclusive, whether its timed or not. And the whole game of being a platform owner is competing in exclusives, as we saw when Xbox tanked last gen.
And of all the systems to not own, Xbox is among the easiest to catch up on if you want. Series S is cheap. All the games are day one on PC. You could play them all with one month of GP and not even buy them. You can play them streaming in a browser even, and possibly a streaming stick soon.
Having any exclusives is going to exclude someone, but it's a pretty minimal issue at this point in my opinion. I think all 3 consoles have justified their existence. It's not really any different than blocking people on Xbox from playing FFXVI for who knows how long, or FFVII Remake.
Last edited:
nominedomine
Banned
No one is giving you anything for free, you'll pay for it one way or another. Why do you think they are willing to pay so much for it?
All this projections of how MS is going to fix Blizzard and make better use of IPs ignores the fact that MS is already having a hard time managing their own studios and making use of their own IPs, a problem they've had for decades now.
You make MS sound like a charity, like they are doing this out of kindness. They are doing this because Activision/Blizzard is down, due to some wild mismanagement and scandals. They had the money for it so they pounced but if they stop releasing CoDs or start using Blizzard to develop RTS they would be devaluing what they paid so much for.
Last edited:
Bladed Thesis
Member
True but he frames the article as "Wall Street is worried" but I don't know if that really works out.
We know why he's worried.
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It's a manipulation tactic.
ReBurn
Gold Member
We lose the other half if it does. 50/50 shot of alcoholism because video games are serious businessThis deal has to go through, we are going to lose half of this forum to the betty ford clinic if it does not.
The FTC hasn't had a chance to complete it's jobIf the FTC actually did their job/function it would have failed lol but we know why it didn't
Neofire
Member
Do you honestly think they are going to stop it? The job was done even before we heard about it. All that other mess is just formalities.
ReBurn
Gold Member
They may not have been able to read NeoGAF comments on it yet. They're waiting on their accounts to be verified so they can use the special dollar sign reactions EviLore added for them so we can monitor the progress of their investigation.
Bragr
Banned
This might be true right now, but Xbox is releasing their games across consoles and PC, most people will have a device you can play on as long as you get Game Pass.
Besides, this is about the future, after this generation, Xbox and Playstation are just gonna be an app on your TV where you can stream games, at that point, whoever got the best exclusives will win.
Just like Disney bought Star Wars and Marvel to build their platform and franchises, Xbox and Playstation are buying up stuff to build their future.
JLB
Banned
JLB
Banned
Argentinian here. If you think 8% ish is the roof, it is not. At 60% here.
Not the roof either, some venezuelan friends left the country with a 3000000% monthly inflation. Yeah, 3 million and monthly.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
JLB
Banned
i actually had my first console online experience with dreamcast, playing Q3 Arena connected to a 56k modem.Motherfucker, ever played Goldeneye? who needs online when you have cardboards.
LAN like was Command and Conquer using playstation 1 ha
on c&c case we used to put each tv against the other and fiercely apply the “if you cross to our side you get punched” rule.
Last edited:
JLB
Banned
Which makes sense since inflattion=unlegislated tax.
Its so ironic the venezuelan case than even a piece of white paper worth more than a considerable pile of bills.
Belthazar
Member
In a country where Disney bought basically the entire movie industry this has a very slim chance of not going through. The only way this goes through is if they decide to make it a publicity case for a new policy or IDK. But I still think it won't be the case, which is a shame as we're already bound to end up in a future where very few companies own everything.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
What do they do if the big guy wants to sit on the floor? lolMotherfucker, ever played Goldeneye? who needs online when you have cardboards.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked