-
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.
[Bloomberg via Takashi Mochizuki] Sega has no intention to be acquired, for now. Feels Microsoft values Sega more than other platform owners.
- Thread starter Thick Thighs Save Lives
- Start date
- News
VAVA Mk2
Member
I thought Pachter was with another firm.
Last edited:
alphachino
Member
He is. He is pointing out that Bloomberg have their very own "Michael Packer" in the form of Mochisucki
Dick Jones
Gold Member
The Bloomberg journalist and Michael Pachter have the same success rate with predictions and insider knowledge. It was a jab at the journalist only.
Luigi Mario
Member
graywolf323
Member
Mochizuki acts like Sony ran over his dog and then paraded the corpse around him…
Gambit2483
Member
Patcher hasn't been relevant for over 5 years now...??
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
This myth is old and also not as broad as you imply.
Gojiira
Member
Are you all just naturally ignorant? Both myself and another posted links with the exact info on said law. It exists ergo not a myth.
It literally covers Software companies as they are a large part of the japanese economy which Sega is a part of…
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
Are you saying there are no recent examples in the last 15 years of a western company acquiring a Japanese company? If you aren't saying that you're admitting it's not as broad as you're implying.
You're confusing me saying that with "there is no law" which isn't what I said. Otherwise I wouldn't say it wasn't as BROAD as you imply.
Last I checked Sharp was a much bigger contributor to the Japanese economy than Sega when it was acquired. Tango isn't even the first video game acquisition from Japan by foreigners either like Grasshopper etc. It's that the law is misinterpreted to be seen as a broad obstacle and often the primary obstacle when it's not.
The Current Barriers to Corporate Takeovers in Japan: Do the UK Takeover Code and the EU Takeover Directive Offer a Solution? - European Business Organization Law Review
There is a common perception that the Japanese takeover market excludes foreign companies. However, this is not because Japanese takeover law has been designed to protect target companies. Comparing Japanese takeover law with the UK Takeover Code and the European Takeover Directive, considered...
link.springer.com
Gojiira
Member
Yawn…comparing Sega to Grasshopper? Come on.Are you saying there are no recent examples in the last 15 years of a western company acquiring a Japanese company? If you aren't saying that you're admitting it's not as broad as you're implying.
You're confusing me saying that with "there is no law" which isn't what I said. Otherwise I wouldn't say it wasn't as BROAD as you imply.
Last I checked Sharp was a much bigger contributor to the Japanese economy than Sega when it was acquired. Tango isn't even the first video game acquisition from Japan by foreigners either like Grasshopper etc. It's that the law is misinterpreted to be seen as a broad obstacle and often the primary obstacle when it's not.
The Current Barriers to Corporate Takeovers in Japan: Do the UK Takeover Code and the EU Takeover Directive Offer a Solution? - European Business Organization Law Review
There is a common perception that the Japanese takeover market excludes foreign companies. However, this is not because Japanese takeover law has been designed to protect target companies. Comparing Japanese takeover law with the UK Takeover Code and the European Takeover Directive, considered...
Im not debating foreign investors having success in recent years and have said repeatedly its not impossible just in the case of Sega, or Nintendo or Sony etc its highly unlikely. As someone else pointed out Japan has a list of protected companies and Sega is on that list.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
I don’t think an acquisition is happening anytime soon, but Microsoft owning Sega would lead to Sega’s demise imho. Not only is it not a good fit imo, but if their games end up being exclusive, the games would have limited exposure especially on the XBOX platform where Japanese and quirky games just aren’t popular.
Personally, I would like it if Microsoft built some Japanese studios from ground up instead of trying to acquire existing ones, but that’s another subject. Then again, Sony won’t even do that, so what do I expect from Microsoft?
Personally, I would like it if Microsoft built some Japanese studios from ground up instead of trying to acquire existing ones, but that’s another subject. Then again, Sony won’t even do that, so what do I expect from Microsoft?
VAVA Mk2
Member
He technically never was relevant...he either stated the obvious everyone else did or his "big" predictions never panned out.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
So when they’re ready, they know who to call. Very cool.
Sega and Nintendo are both categorized as level 2 because they have hardware and research businesses which may pose a risk to Japanese security if acquired by a hostile government. Other Japanese publishers which only make games like Square Enix and Capcom are categorized as level 1 and can be acquired without any oversight. Microsoft purchasing Sega would pass any national security review since the US already has more advanced technology and its a friendly nation.
The Pleasure
Member
Sega loves that Microsoft hand out. Would sega bother porting those fatlus games and Like a Weeb without that gamepass greasing?
DaGwaphics
Member
It doesn't even seem like they need to buy Sega at this point. It looks like they have an extensive GP deal with them already. They probably have more big day ones on the service than anyone else outside MS/Bethesda.
Sega needs to focus on the important things, like that Crazy Taxi BR game.
Sega needs to focus on the important things, like that Crazy Taxi BR game.
Last edited:
Ansphn
Member
Those games have been gaining popularity in the U.S so yes they still would. But I agree they love that Gamepass money.
Tams
Member
Are you saying there are no recent examples in the last 15 years of a western company acquiring a Japanese company? If you aren't saying that you're admitting it's not as broad as you're implying.
You're confusing me saying that with "there is no law" which isn't what I said. Otherwise I wouldn't say it wasn't as BROAD as you imply.
Last I checked Sharp was a much bigger contributor to the Japanese economy than Sega when it was acquired. Tango isn't even the first video game acquisition from Japan by foreigners either like Grasshopper etc. It's that the law is misinterpreted to be seen as a broad obstacle and often the primary obstacle when it's not.
The Current Barriers to Corporate Takeovers in Japan: Do the UK Takeover Code and the EU Takeover Directive Offer a Solution? - European Business Organization Law Review
There is a common perception that the Japanese takeover market excludes foreign companies. However, this is not because Japanese takeover law has been designed to protect target companies. Comparing Japanese takeover law with the UK Takeover Code and the European Takeover Directive, considered...
Sharp is a terrible comparison as it was bankrupt and no Japanese companies wanted to buy it and its liabilities.
SEGA aren't in financial trouble, and Sony and Nintendo, among other Japanese companies, would be very interested in buying it if it were to go on sale.
Last edited:
The Pleasure
Member
Are normal gamers buying fatlus games? Hell naw. Yakuza is the kpop and jpop crew. They're mainly all playstation and switch. It's thay gamepass check that brings sega to the yard.
Wulfer
Member
I still don't see how this rule applies because Sega is not a traditional Japanese company.
Japan to limit foreign ownership of firms in its tech and telecom sectors
The new rule, effective Aug. 1, comes amid heightening pressure from the United States in dealing with cyber-security risks and technological transfers involving China.www.cnbc.com
Sega is protected in Japan for holding IPs of interest (Sonic).
"David Rosen, an American officer in the United States Air Force stationed in Japan, started Rosen Enterprises Ltd. after the Korean War." "In 1965, Nihon Goraku Bussan acquired Rosen's company to form Sega Enterprises, Ltd.,[13] although Rosen has called it a "merger".[12] Rosen was installed as the CEO and managing director of the new company.[13] According to Rosen, "Sega" was the brand name that Nihon Goraku Bussan was using, and that the decision was made to name the company with the most recognized name upon the merger, while the word "Enterprises" came from Rosen Enterprises."
Sega History
I get it Sega is seen as a Japanese company but, it was formed from a Merger with an American company. Anyway Sega has always had a mystery around its company.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Gold Member
Sega's on the list? That's news to me, tho I may not be surprised given all the things they are involved in corporate-wise.
Sony and Nintendo are definitely on that list though and, yeah, that basically prevents foreign companies from buying them at all. Though they can buy shares in them, just look as Sazzy Group's Nintendo share purchases (that ResetERA pretends Nintendo's family board members know nothing about, when they would be required to know who's buying the shares and could block them from buying them if they wanted/could justify it with the rest of the board
).More advanced technology in what areas outside of military industrial complex and nuclear weapons?
Also while I agree the list of protected companies is based mainly on security concerns, I don't think MS acquiring Sega would be "easier" just because Japan & America are friendly nations. Even among friendly nations there are obvious security concerns, state secrets, technology patents etc. that would have to be considered.
In Microsoft's case, a Sega acquisition would be complicated simply because of some of the areas Sega are involved in corporate-wise and the added strain a Sega acquisition would be unto Microsoft Gaming, which already has faulty/questionable upper-level management that can barely get what they currently have operating smoothly.
Last edited:
SecretAgentHam
Member
Rebrand Xbox in Japan as Sega. Release a limited edition XSX in the west with skins that resemble legacy Sega hardware. Release an HD remaster bundle similar to Rare Replay with certified Sega bangers like Burning Rangers and Jet Set Radio Future. Dominate the gaming landscape with quirky Sega titles only available on Xbox.
Hear me out: Seaman HD Remaster. Any gaming headset is compatible. This is the future I want.
Hear me out: Seaman HD Remaster. Any gaming headset is compatible. This is the future I want.
The list of companies is purely based on security concerns. The regulation's goal is to prevent technology export to hostile countries and potential competitors like China. China could leapfrog its semiconductor industry by raiding Japanese IP through acquisitions. Intel, AMD, NVIDIA, and Apple are all bleeding edge hardware companies from the US. Sega doesn't have state secrets or critical patents which Microsoft's other partners lack. The deal would almost certainly pass this particular review if the acquirer were Microsoft or another American tech company since there is very little risk. Microsoft could also buy Square and/or Capcom without any review since they are the lowest category.
Sega is well managed and could provide Xbox with much needed structure and governance. Sega's collection of IP is broad and fills our Microsoft's portfolio nicely. I think Sega is a more interesting target because its profitable and has a pile of nostalgic IP that could be relaunched for less than the price of Activision. Microsoft would almost certainly divest Sega's non-gaming assets. Sega Sammy could also sell its gaming division alone which may avoid a review altogether.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Gold Member
\
And just because they theoretically can, doesn't mean they would be any more successful in an acquisition bid for either of those companies. You seem to want to ignore that the boards of both have to agree to those proposals, and at least in Square-Enix's case, they rejected any approaches. And it's not like Microsoft could do a hostile takeover of either (I've heard a rumor, tho not much evidence to it so far, that they attempted a hostile takeover of Sega a couple years ago and got shut down. But I'm treating that with a large grain of salt).
Again this is all speculative, even if among the Japanese publishers Sega are the only ones Microsoft has any realistic chance of acquiring when we factor that it's not just about what bags of cash they (or any company seeking to acquire, TBH) can flash in front of them. Although I think your arguments about their IP portfolio could equally apply to Sony or Nintendo in terms of complimenting current offerings (or near-equally), out of the Big 3 Microsoft would be the most in actual need of that to some notable extent, whereas both Sony and Nintendo have very strong partnerships with companies that can provide equivalents and prefer them over Microsoft for such working partnerships.
Theoretically Sega do have a lot of classic IP that could be relaunched and all but...I'm not necessarily seeing why Microsoft has to acquire them to make that happen. They got sequels to a lot of Sega IP on the OG Xbox through a partnership of sorts...when the strategic partnership was announced in early 2022 I actually thought that was going to be another form of what they did for the OG Xbox and was excited. There's an inherent value to the idea of platform holders who respect the strength and value of an independent 3P market where publishers can operate of their own accord, and freely choose what partnerships to pursue alongside competing with each other for customer attention and money.
That also IMO also helps with spurring of creative decisions in the gaming market when it comes to new IP, that we may not necessarily get (or get at as much frequency) if many things end up under the ownership of a platform holder, who has finite resources & money to provide, and finite manpower to manage all of those assets reasonably.
And just because they theoretically can, doesn't mean they would be any more successful in an acquisition bid for either of those companies. You seem to want to ignore that the boards of both have to agree to those proposals, and at least in Square-Enix's case, they rejected any approaches. And it's not like Microsoft could do a hostile takeover of either (I've heard a rumor, tho not much evidence to it so far, that they attempted a hostile takeover of Sega a couple years ago and got shut down. But I'm treating that with a large grain of salt).
Again this is all speculative, even if among the Japanese publishers Sega are the only ones Microsoft has any realistic chance of acquiring when we factor that it's not just about what bags of cash they (or any company seeking to acquire, TBH) can flash in front of them. Although I think your arguments about their IP portfolio could equally apply to Sony or Nintendo in terms of complimenting current offerings (or near-equally), out of the Big 3 Microsoft would be the most in actual need of that to some notable extent, whereas both Sony and Nintendo have very strong partnerships with companies that can provide equivalents and prefer them over Microsoft for such working partnerships.
Theoretically Sega do have a lot of classic IP that could be relaunched and all but...I'm not necessarily seeing why Microsoft has to acquire them to make that happen. They got sequels to a lot of Sega IP on the OG Xbox through a partnership of sorts...when the strategic partnership was announced in early 2022 I actually thought that was going to be another form of what they did for the OG Xbox and was excited. There's an inherent value to the idea of platform holders who respect the strength and value of an independent 3P market where publishers can operate of their own accord, and freely choose what partnerships to pursue alongside competing with each other for customer attention and money.
That also IMO also helps with spurring of creative decisions in the gaming market when it comes to new IP, that we may not necessarily get (or get at as much frequency) if many things end up under the ownership of a platform holder, who has finite resources & money to provide, and finite manpower to manage all of those assets reasonably.
As long as you understand that "the list" the thread obsesses over isn't a blanket prohibition of foreign investment we are fine. I'm not interested in the rest.
Tams
Member
Your on about this purely from a national (military even) defence standpoint, but this would be one of cultural and economic defence.
While a different country, Cadbury's takeover in the UK would be a more apt comparison.
You can guarantee that they would be opposition to any such takeover by Microsoft, and the opposition to it would used any law they could you try prevent it.
Tams
Member
Gojiira
Member
That is very true, no matter what happens there’s zero chance Sony or even Nintendo would just roll over if MS went after Sega or any of the big Japanese publishers.
Personally I hope the ActiBlizz buyout goes through just so Sony can have free reign to purchase Kadokawa or Capcom. Kadokawa makes a ton of sense for Playstation since PS already have a special relationship with From Software and gaining a successful RPG studio is something they definitely need, plus Kadokawa I think is the next biggest Anime licensor and with Sonys acquisition of Funimation/Crunchyroll that too makes sense given Animes huge popularity.
Capcom makes a ton of sense for Sony, huge IP library and genres which Sony themselves dont make.
I dont think any of this is likely with the exception of Kadokawa but yeah.
PanzerCute
Member
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Team Andromeda
Member
I doubt the whole of SEGA is worth $5 Billion. Microsoft could no doubt buy SEGA for $3 billion tops
PanzerCute
Member
Do you mean Sega Corp or Sega Sammy?
The latter is valued at 5.7 billion and I cant see them being sold below 10 billions. (Bethesda was valued at 3b and ended up being bought for 7.5)
If you mean Sega Corp, I dont see any reason for Sega Sammy to sell it. And lets not forget they just spent almost 1b to acquire Rovio.
But I am no expert on the matter obviously, just educated guesses.
yurinka
Member
Yes, many times. Regarting Nintendo he made up stuff about the Switch Pro and regarding Sony he made up stuff multiple FUD and lies about supposed production issues, bad PSVR2 sales etc. All of them ended being debunked oficially.
Jason Shredder algo got caught making stuff up multiple times, specially mading up FUD and lies about supposed bad Sony news that later got also officially debunked or publicly called out by them, but at least Jason sometimes is right, or mixes his lies with real stuff.
Team Andromeda
Member
The SEGA corp, not SAMMY. I think way back in SEGA's heyday it was valued at no more than £2.5 billion. I can't see SEGA being worth much more than TBH even now
StealthGoblin
Banned
I’d replace values with ‘needs’.
The honest truth is that while Sega are important, Sony and Nintendo don’t ‘need’ them as much, whereas Microsoft do.
The honest truth is that while Sega are important, Sony and Nintendo don’t ‘need’ them as much, whereas Microsoft do.
PanzerCute
Member
Well, they have quite a few very succesful IPs now (Sonic, Yakuza, Persona and SMT games, Total War, Football Manager, just to name the most obvious ones), some great assets with all the worldwide studios they have and with Rovio acquired I think they could be valued a bit more.
And I couldnt see any reason for Sega Sammy to sell them at the moment tbh.
But once again, thats just educated guesses. And I really dont want Sega to be acquired :d
Team Andromeda
Member
I'm on about the time when SEGA was selling over 30 million copies of Sonic taking it to Nintendo in the USA, dominating Europe with Hardware and doing wonders in the Arcades
I don't think the current SEGA will come close in value to those days
Everyone has a price I would rather see SEGA go to SONY or Microsoft rather than to the Chinese or Saudi
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
Christ these acquisition threads are becoming old. Why don't just Blackrock buy all gaming companies at once and consolidate them into one single entity? Will be good for competition.
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
SEGA was in financial trouble for some time not too long ago excluding pachinko, and Sharp still had more viable assets than Sega overall and had contracts and connections to companies that would fall under Japans "national security" clause, it wasn't only about profits.
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
Which isn't what i did, but when you are caught with your pants down deception is the best escape.
Actually you said this:
You're already changing your story.
Kenshin775
Member
Clarification Utsumi did in fact say MS values Sega more than other platform holders
Also Sega studio manager for Sports Interactive has commented on Jim Ryan's belief that publishers do not like Game Pass. He does not agree based on his experience.
www.ign.com
Sega talking about how much MS values them, then a Sega studio head coming out to defend Game Pass, and also Sarah Bond trolling everyone with that Sega office building photo in London leads me to believe the Sega/MS relationship is stronger than ever. I think MS is still going after them which is why they kept pushing that Sony has 98% of the console market in japan narrative. They are positioning themselves to convince regulators on why they need to acquire talent in japan.
Also Sega studio manager for Sports Interactive has commented on Jim Ryan's belief that publishers do not like Game Pass. He does not agree based on his experience.
Xbox Game Pass Not 'Value Destructive' Like PlayStation Claims, Football Manager Boss Says - IGN
The studio head of Football Manager developer Sports Interactive has said PlayStation's claim that Xbox Game Pass is "value destructive" is not true.
Sega talking about how much MS values them, then a Sega studio head coming out to defend Game Pass, and also Sarah Bond trolling everyone with that Sega office building photo in London leads me to believe the Sega/MS relationship is stronger than ever. I think MS is still going after them which is why they kept pushing that Sony has 98% of the console market in japan narrative. They are positioning themselves to convince regulators on why they need to acquire talent in japan.
Edgelord79
Gold Member
Governments don’t care about Sega.
Similar threads
- x2