BattleScar
Member
There's so much wrong with this post. Its very funny.
-
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.
Sony: The Unbuyable Company?
- Thread starter Mibu no ookami
- Start date
There's so much wrong with this post. Its very funny.
Clintizzle
Lord of Edge.
i'd buy Sony if I had the money.
Mibu no ookami
Member
No, to my knowledge there has never been a major M&A of a Japanese company by a foreign company.
Mibu no ookami
Member
It isn't though.
Ultimately these companies are absolutely for sale.
It's just a matter of how and how much.
Most of these companies are owned by banks/investment firms, so ultimately they don't care about being in the games business or whatnot. They care about the return on their investment.
Let's say you own 1000 dollars worth of stock in Company X and the growth in said company's stock is 3 percent per year.
After 10 years you would have $1,344. An Increase in 344 dollars, of which you'll pay capital gains on.
If I came to you and said, hey, I'll give you 1,350 dollars for your 1000 dollars worth of stock in Company X what would you say?
You're not really interested in selling, but if you can get your 10 years' worth of investment upfront in 1 day and after taxes reinvest that money today compared to 10 years from now, it's a no-brainer, you have to sell. You also remove the risk that the stock goes down in that 10 years and doesn't meet its average expectations. Ubi Soft stopped Vivendi from buying it with help from Tencent to stave off the purchase, but it still required the money coming from somewhere. And similarly, Vivendi's shares in Ubi Soft also had a price.
Mibu no ookami
Member
You're dead wrong on Activision's net income
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/ATVI/activision-blizzard/net-income
BattleScar
Member
Mergers and Acquisitions are not the same as a cash injection through investment.
Its very complicated, and no doubt there is a lot of regulation and legislation in place in dealing with M&As. Y'know, to prevent monopolies and the like.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
vivftp
Member
Dude! Are you using SIE's figures during a console launch year?
Here, take a look at this:
Do you notice the pattern for FY95/96, FY00/01, FY06/07 and FY13/14? Console launch years have always been years where SIE loses money due to the massive investment required. Now look at FY20/21 where the PS5 launched and where you're pulling your numbers from. Not only did SIE manage to finally break the cycle of losing money during a console launch year it was actually their most profitable year in history. The SIE figures you're using are heavily weighed down due to having to absorb the cost of launching the PS5.
I could see Sony add a sportscar to the line up with Polyphony Digital/Gran Turismo brand involvement, if they are serious about making cars.
Aenima
Member
Still amazes me how Sony managed to be 4 years in a row in the red during the PS3 gen, without trowing the towel. It paid off to keep pushing. They are more healthier than ever.Dude! Are you using SIE's figures during a console launch year?
Here, take a look at this:
Do you notice the pattern for FY95/96, FY00/01, FY06/07 and FY13/14? Console launch years have always been years where SIE loses money due to the massive investment required. Now look at FY20/21 where the PS5 launched and where you're pulling your numbers from. Not only did SIE manage to finally break the cycle of losing money during a console launch year it was actually their most profitable year in history. The SIE figures you're using are heavily weighed down due to having to absorb the cost of launching the PS5.
MasterCornholio
Member
They certainly learned a ton during that era. Amazes me how much they changed the hardware design to make it easy for developers.
You could say that the failures with the PS3 helped ensure the success of the PS4.
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
If they didn't they were dead essentially.
V4skunk
Banned
Everything has a price mate.
Aenima
Member
Is not that simple. Sony is the 2nd most valuable Japanese company, only behind Toyota. Japanese governament has a law protecting Sony and a bunch of other Japanese companies against hostile takeovers where foreign companies can only aquire 1% of Sony. To aquire more they have to go through the government, and as one of the most valuable Japanese companies, is definitly not for sale. Japan had to be in serious finantial throuble to even think about alowing Sony to be aquired by a foreign company.
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
You are not going to be able to afford Sony with $150 billion. They own about $200 billion worth of assets lets compare that to Activision which owns $23 billion in assets and they are being bought for $70 billion. Someone can merge with Sony that is if you can even get past the regulators and government approval.
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
Really? Because according to literally all financial books talking up the trillion dollar Era, with every Master Financial Analyst chiming in - any company worth 2.3 Trillion could offer up to nearly all the money they had aside from a few billion remaining and it would be instantly recouped when using "The economy of A Country in 2010 To Purchase A Measly Company"
But I've read I dunno, 5 of the top rated books on the purchasing power of Companies during the Trillion Dollar era and Microsoft never took the offer off the table explicitly, they merely said they should of offered more. Which is a calculated business move and in truth only serves to strengthen the possibility of negotiation in the future as Per Accounts And Financing Curriculum the world over!!
But I can see your Point "But they're based in Japan, which is a different Country and Nintendo is now such a big brand and they did already soooo reject Microsofts first offer... didn't you see it! They Laughed at Microsoft what more do you need! So Nintendo already Recanted that offer For Microsoft!"
Say whatever you will, this was still a long term calculated negotiation strategy. But I'm sure someone who's read literature about that kinda thing would disagree with the literature!! Because Obviously!!
Ghost of Caelid
Banned
They aren't for sale, but the cost to value isn't worth it. Sony is number one in gaming yes, but buying them comes with a plethora of their under performing divisions as well. A 100 billion + to 200 billion dollar transaction for just playstation isnt happening. And no one is buying sony for their music, movie and tv divisions on top of that.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
I can see a partnership or even a merger happening for Sony faster than an acquisition, especially if a non-Japanese company is involved.
Mibu no ookami
Member
I specifically said they were able to avoid an acquisition through a cash injection through investment. They were able to partner with Tencent to buy Vivendi's remaining shares at a price higher than they paid and enough for them to back out of their takeover plan.
Mibu no ookami
Member
It's crazy how good of a situation SIE is in right now and how much they have to invest in M&A in a strategic way.Dude! Are you using SIE's figures during a console launch year?
Here, take a look at this:
Do you notice the pattern for FY95/96, FY00/01, FY06/07 and FY13/14? Console launch years have always been years where SIE loses money due to the massive investment required. Now look at FY20/21 where the PS5 launched and where you're pulling your numbers from. Not only did SIE manage to finally break the cycle of losing money during a console launch year it was actually their most profitable year in history. The SIE figures you're using are heavily weighed down due to having to absorb the cost of launching the PS5.
Just like how I rank their purchase of Insomniac higher than Microsoft's purchase of Bethesda, as long as Sony makes careful and strategic acquisitions they're going to be better placed to get a significantly higher return on their investment than Microsoft has with their 70 billion dollars in Activision and Blizzard. The slew of developers there is certainly on the decline as are their IP. Could they do better under different management? But look at the difference in Bethesda and Insomniac games.
Insomniac
Spider-Man Miles Morales
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart
Spider-Man 2
Wolverine
Bethesda
Starfield (Bethesda)
Elder's Scroll VI (Bethesda)
Wolfenstein 3 (MachineGames)
Indiana Jones (MachineGames)
I have no doubt that Starfield and Elder's Scroll 6 will perform well. Wolfenstein 3 and Indiana Jones are kind of whatever, maybe they'll perform well, we'll see.
But on the total, does ANYONE expect Bethesda's slate of games to significantly outsell Insomniac's? Does anyone think they'll outsellf Insomniac's at all? First, you have to assume that ES6 performs as well as Skyrim despite no other entry in the franchises performing that well. Then you have to assume this without it being on Switch and PS5. That may cut half of its sales right there. Spider-Man sold 20 million on PS4 alone. And will sell even more when ported to PC. Wolverine will likely not perform AS well as Spider-Man 2, but it should still be a strong performer 10-15 million. Then account for the fact that ES6 isn't even in development yet, so it probably won't come out for another 5-6 years. Insomniac will still have more games out between Wolverine and ES6.
Now remind yourself that Insomniac was purchased for 229 million and Bethesda for 7 billion.
Sony can EASILY buy enough development studios and maybe publishers to equate to the sales of Call of Duty and any Activision Blizzard IP that it might miss out on due to exclusivity. And it won't cost them more than a fraction of what Microsoft just spent.
Let's assume for a second that EVERY call of duty does as well as Black Ops 2 (which they don't) and sells 30 million units.
Kadokawa - Dark Souls (though they wouldn't own the Dark Souls IP) - 10 million (have to remove xbox sales) - 3 billion dollars
Capcom - 6 billion dollars (Monster Hunter World - 17.5 million, RE7, 10 million, Street Fighter 5 - 6 million, DMC5 - 4.7 million
Sega - 4.47 billion (Persona 5 - 4.6 million)
Then you get into smaller purchases like Kojima Productions, Acquire, Remedy e.t.c.
Buying big publishers just isn't a wise investment. I would even say dropping so much coin on Kadokawa, Capcom, and Sega wouldn't make sense, when building organically is way cheaper.
vivftp
Member
njean777
Member
Steve Jobs respected and was a fan of Sony, so I wouldn't throw apple out. The other two who knows. I could see a future of apple buying playstation, but Idk if it will ever happen.
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
Sony won't sell the PlayStation division, name, brand, or the company to a non-Japanese entity. It will never happen. They have laws to prevent selling the company to foreigners. Why would they sell their breadwinner division either?
Last edited:
V4skunk
Banned
I'm not even saying Sony is for sale though and I doubt Sony would ever sell the PS brand because it is too profitable.
But trust me everything is for sale for the right price.
There’s a lot of factors involved that will complicate the acquisition. Some of you thinks that Sony will be easily bought are fooling themselves.
It’s not just about the law.
Japanese government will most likely intervene because it might not be on Japan’s national economy’s interest for a foreign company to own one of Japan’s premiere company.
Japanese will look after it’s national interest first before a foreign company can buy one.
If by some chance MS will be up for sale and Tencent is one of the bidders.
Do you think USA will allow it?
It’s not just about the law.
Japanese government will most likely intervene because it might not be on Japan’s national economy’s interest for a foreign company to own one of Japan’s premiere company.
Japanese will look after it’s national interest first before a foreign company can buy one.
If by some chance MS will be up for sale and Tencent is one of the bidders.
Do you think USA will allow it?
everything is on sale if you pay enough especially public companies
(this doesn't mean that it will ever happen)
Last edited:
RJMacready73
Simps for Amouranth
I've highlighted the important part.. Sony "sold off" nobody is buying Sony, it's one of Japan's premier companies ffs, there's national pride involved and no doubt government intervention if for some insane reason Sony's board decided to flog it to some American company..
SteelCurtain 59
Member
The issue is there's not a lot of devs that would have anywhere close to the ROI as Insomniac, they were clearly an exception. And also a lot of the reason to purchase the big studios is how valuable IP can be. Insomniac had no IP which is why they were so inexpensive, but owning the rights to Elder Scrolls or COD is worth more than just the sales of their games. Also if it were super easy to just acquire tons of small/mid size devs I feel like Sony and Microsoft would've bought way more of them at this point. Also there's the topic of buying consoles, if they buy a big of smaller/mid size studios to equal the sales of Bethesda/COD, how many of those are games/franchises that would get tons of people to switch to Playstation rather than Bethesda/COD. Also Sony has a few issues that make their potential ROI less than Xbox given that they don't have PC day 1 releases, and nothing like Game Pass which both offer Xbox more ways to make money from devs they purchase
Mibu no ookami
Member
I don't disagree with you. It will be difficult to find a dev with as much ROI as Insomniac, but it certainly isn't impossible.
Primarily it is going to come from organically growing studios and growing independent studios and purchasing them. You can see that across Sony's portfolio of studios. They bought Naughty Dog and Guerrilla Games probably for less than they bought Insomniac. They organically grew Sony Santa Monica.
The ROI on devs like Housemarque and Bluepoint will probably be QUITE high.
Buying IP can absolutely be valuable, but it is also extremely dangerous. No guarantee that an IP continues to perform to historic standards. For example, I wouldn't buy the Metal Gear license right now for maximum value. I haven't liked a MGS game since MGS2 and even that had some disappointment involved. Where does that franchise go from here? Would buying it allow you to bring Kojima back into it? David Hayer? What about that rocky divorce as well? IP is dicey. They come and go. Talent and assets are way more important to me.
There is also risk involved in buying smaller studios too. They have a track record of imploding as you can see both Sony and Microsoft have shuttered studios. That is why you see Sony doing partnerships usually before buying these studios. They want to ensure they know who they're dealing with and see how they fit with Sony. Now, they might not have the luxury of staying the course, but we're going to see how they respond. But cherry-picking studios is always going to have a higher success rate than buying a publisher.
Look at God of War which looks to be selling very well. You don't need to do day 1 release to have success on PC. You have no idea what the profit margins are on Game Pass, so its a bit moot to even bring it up.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
The best part about these deals is how all of us are business experts that know how these things play out.
DrAspirino
Banned
It doesn't work like that, and Japan's government would be willing to sell to a company they aprove, like Apple.
Heck, Sony would complement quite nicely the entire Apple ecosystem, consumer and pros at the same time.
porkchopexpress
Member
Japanese government will never let Sony be acquired by a non Japanese company. Full stop.
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there's never been an acquisition of a major Japanese company by a foreign company.
Japan is notoriously protective of its native corporations, even when you want to do business in Japan as a foreign company, they make you set up your local affiliate as what in effect is a completely separate entity to the parent corporation with walls an barriers and rules that just don't exist between a US-EU parent affiliate relationship.
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there's never been an acquisition of a major Japanese company by a foreign company.
Japan is notoriously protective of its native corporations, even when you want to do business in Japan as a foreign company, they make you set up your local affiliate as what in effect is a completely separate entity to the parent corporation with walls an barriers and rules that just don't exist between a US-EU parent affiliate relationship.
Last edited:
daffyduck
Member
It's a toss up as to which would be worse, Tencent or Facebook.
GymWolf
Member
Can't wait to buy an apple console where you have to buy the power card separately for 50 dollars.
This would really be the darkest timeline...
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
People talking about selling Sony in 2022 
Last 5 years for Sony:
Last 5 years for Sony:
iHaunter
Member
Not how it works. ANY publicly traded company is for sale. Japan LAWS prevent it.
assurdum
Banned
Last edited:
Abriael_GN
RSI Employee of the Year
Ubisoft is a publicly-traded company. Vivendi tried to buy it. Turned out Ubisoft was not for sale.
There are clear limits to how far you can go with hostile takeovers and there are clear and very effective ways to defend against it. The bigger the company, the more effective such ways are. Only people who are extremely naive or know absolutely nothing about trading believe that being publicly traded means that a company is automatically for sale (which is nothing more than a meaningless catchphrase that console warriors seem to love lately).
Public trading exists as a means to let the public take part in financing a company, not to put it for sale.
Last edited:
iHaunter
Member
I was a bit short-sided in my response; generally speaking it means it's for sale. It depends entirely on how many shares are public vs owned by a single entity. There are several things that can prevent companies from being purchased. Japanese companies are even more strict; however - Even if it's FULLY available for sale, they can still choose not to sell it due to Japanese monopoly laws.
Mozzarella
Member
I dont like big corporations buying everything, it a recipe for accelerating the world towards a dystopia.
ZywyPL
Banned
They certainly learned a ton during that era. Amazes me how much they changed the hardware design to make it easy for developers.
You could say that the failures with the PS3 helped ensure the success of the PS4.
I truly wish the pic was even remotely true and we didn't have to wait all those years for the games to launch... This really boggles my mind, we have a common x86 architecture in the consoles nowadays, common engines like UE and Unity, and still even a simple indie title can take anything between 2-6 years to be made. It's kind of sad really.
Even if Nintendo had the money, what would they gain by buying Playstation? Forspoken and FF16?
Insomniac and Naughty Dog would ragequit if they had to develop for Nintendo hardware.