Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[Jay]

Activision will be under xbox game studios which is under Phil. Sure they might put a main person in to over see activision under phil but like I said it wont be much of an issue. Anything that comes out from pre microsoft purchase will be dismissed in the court of public opinion since MS didn't own them at the time. Lawsuits can still work their way through but that is pennies on the dollar for microsoft at this point.

I said this a couple times, I don't see it being a problem. As I said it's the only negative thing to the purchase for MS that they will need to sort out. That doesn't make it as big a deal as your talking about.

MS made the metaverse a big deal as did every other company. Who do you think is closest to the metaverse ? Meta has its own vr headsets and ecosystem with a baby metaverse in the making. Sony is working on the same deal with vr. Even with Hololens microsoft has some competition. Then you have large content platforms like Twitch which is backed up by amazon which has their own gaming streaming service . Then you have google with youtube and stadia. Even apple is making moves with their own music and tv content as well as owning one of the worlds largest platforms.

Doesn't really matter, matters how the FTC wants to approach it. And their reluctance to big tech mergers at the moment.
Although personally I don't see it being blocked, and it's probably the only reason MS threw out the COD everywhere so early to try help head that off at the pass.

MS has competitive market share in some metrics against these companies and almost zero in other metrics. Heck even netflix with over 200m subs or something crazy like that is pushing for their own game content and metaverse.

And when they try make a big merger they may get a rough time.

I also don't really see anyone who has the power to block this to be like hey what about the metaverse ? You know that thing that really doesn't exist but is just a buzz word. Yea Just don't see it happening.

Honestly if any one tries to stop it , it will be the EU and they will only do that for money. Once ms pays the bribe amount it will be business as usual

We see it as a buzz word but companies are all in, so it's how regulators view what it may mean etc.
I don't see EU blocking it either, although they in the past been more harder on such things than the US.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Maybe he meant what it was worth to him and what he would have paid!

Seriously though, value is subjective. Something worth X to one person is worth nothing to another. I think it's clear that Microsoft could have got it cheaper but I feel like they wanted a quick sale so made a good offer. The longer the fuckupery by Activision-Blizzard's existing management was allowed to continue, the greater the risk that company would be worth even less by the time the purchases completes.

Sure, and I addressed that.

Sure, your opinion might be that Activision is worth less than that, but MS and Wallstreet don't really care about that.

Obviously if MS offered 47.50 USD a share as Zed believes Activision-Blizzard is worth, then everyone other than Zed would have thought MS were idiots and no shareholder would have approved the acquisition. Likewise, MS stock would drop as shareholders lost faith in the competency of MS executives and board of directors.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Sure, and I addressed that.

It was a joke. Hence, the "But seriously"!

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It was a joke. Hence, the "But seriously"!

OMG, you got me good you rapscallion. I should have been paying more attention.

Regards,
SB

 

[zed]

Eitherway your probably one of the very very few people that thinks it's bad,

huh you misunderstand I dont think its bad, I think the opposite, for activision this is a real good deal. i.e. If I had shares I would be voting with the 98%, i.e. I agree with the majority who can see MS overvalued the company by a lot.
Like DSoup saiz, MS were in a hurry to get this company so they made them an offer Activision couldnt refuse, Sure financially it doesnt make the greatest sense for MS but MS has plenty of cash so they can afford to overpay.
Im not 100% sure it will go through though, What happens next year before the takeover if Activision stock is worth sub $50, Surely the MS board will go wait the Activision stock is currently at $45 per share yet we want to pay $95 per share, how is this a good deal? Sorry heres $5 billion quitting fee, we changed our mind, now do you want $60 per share (OK this has a large chance of being refused after all if you were a shareholder and first thought you were getting $95 and they turn around and say $60 even though its still a good deal, you're prolly not gonna go sure)

 

[eastmen]

huh you misunderstand I dont think its bad, I think the opposite, for activision this is a real good deal. i.e. If I had shares I would be voting with the 98%, i.e. I agree with the majority who can see MS overvalued the company by a lot.
Like DSoup saiz, MS were in a hurry to get this company so they made them an offer Activision couldnt refuse, Sure financially it doesnt make the greatest sense for MS but MS has plenty of cash so they can afford to overpay.
Im not 100% sure it will go through though, What happens next year before the takeover if Activision stock is worth sub $50, Surely the MS board will go wait the Activision stock is currently at $45 per share yet we want to pay $95 per share, how is this a good deal? Sorry heres $5 billion quitting fee, we changed our mind, now do you want $60 per share (OK this has a large chance of being refused after all if you were a shareholder and first thought you were getting $95 and they turn around and say $60 even though its still a good deal, you're prolly not gonna go sure)

I disagree, I think we can already start to see the future of activision with COD no longer being yearly. That a lone frees up dev teams to work on other activision/blizzard IP. The ip is worth a lot. I also still believe that after a time MS will pull back on COD everywhere and that would free up even more teams to work on more content. I figure once it's on xcloud and xcloud is on a ton of devices ms can simply say to sony and nintendo hey if you want it put xcloud on your device and sunset support.

I think the important thing for MS is that they get about another 10 studios to work on content for game pass which continues to grow and be a priority for them

Also lets not forget. In 2021 activision was above $90 a share. The shares tumbled after California announced they were sueing in July of 2021. So eevn at $95 a share Activision is a bargin.

 

[Jay]

i.e. I agree with the majority who can see MS overvalued the company by a lot.

I don't believe they did though.
It's normal to add around that percentage over the value when your buying a company.
MS bought them at the very best time for MS on the cheap.

I bet even the board was closer to getting rid of Cocheck (whatever his name is) and if they showed their plan for improvement, that probably would have easily raised share prices a lot.

Anyway, definitely good for MS, Activition shareholders can get out without having to wait for things to improve.

I'm just hoping everything finalises sooner rather than later so it can get pulled into 2023 E3. That would make next year's show crazy.

 

[Jay]

I figure once it's on xcloud and xcloud is on a ton of devices ms can simply say to sony and nintendo hey if you want it put xcloud on your device and sunset support.

MS could actually use xcloud servers to stream it to switch and PS without having to get gamepass on there.
Simular to how some games are currently already streamed to switch.

In fact when they say they want to bring it to switch it's exactly what I'm expecting, and not a native version.
To be honest I still expect native PS versions though (for few years anyway )

 

[BRiT]

Warren Buffet invests in Activision as easy means to make a profit.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/market...way-stock-microsoft-acquisition-95-2022-4?amp

Warren Buffett has boosted Berkshire Hathaway's stake in Activision Blizzard to 9.5% — a position worth nearly $6 billion

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway has boosted its stake in Activision Blizzard from 2% to 9.5%, the investor revealed during his company's annual shareholder meeting on Saturday.

Buffett explained that while one of his portfolio managers established the stake in the video-games maker last year, months before Microsoft agreed to acquire the company, he had since decided the stock was too far below the deal price, and decided to boost Berkshire's position.

The Berkshire chief said he wanted to make some news, and head off any incorrect news stories if Berkshire raises its position to over 10%, and has to disclose the position with the SEC.

"Every now and then I see something that I want to do in that field," Buffett said, referring to "work-outs" or arbitrage opportunities. The investor is betting the deal will be approved by regulators, and Activision Blizzard stock will rise to the deal price, generating a profit for Berkshire.

 

[zed]

I don't believe they did though.

hmmm So you are one of the 2%? i.e. the minority, and you said to me previously "Eitherway your probably one of the very very few people that thinks it's bad"
Im part of the 98%, i.e. the majority, I just dont understand your reasoning, this is some trumpian logic, how can I be one of the very very few people if Im agreeing with 98% of the voters, cheers mate I havent had tears of laughter for a while.

One thing I dont understand, Warren Buffett brought some activision shares at $76 (now $75.60 as they dropped 1.43% today) but is he guaranteed to get $95 for each share the middle of next year when it becomes property of MS, i.e. he makes ~$20 a share. Surely this is easy money, why are not more ppl doing this ~25% return in a year is a great investment, obviously if a lot of ppl do this the price will rise, but still hmmm. OK The downside I can see is if the deal doesnt complete then you are left holding the shares, which btw are not worthless, i.e. you dont lose everything, but I think odds on the deal will go through. Whats the catch, why are not more ppl getting this easy money?
Or does this $95 only apply to the ppl that had shares before MS made the deal?
Obviously theres something Im not understanding

 

[pcchen]

hmmm So you are one of the 2%? i.e. the minority, and you said to me previously "Eitherway your probably one of the very very few people that thinks it's bad"
Im part of the 98%, i.e. the majority, I just dont understand your reasoning, this is some trumpian logic, how can I be one of the very very few people if Im agreeing with 98% of the voters, cheers mate I havent had tears of laughter for a while.

One thing I dont understand, Warren Buffett brought some activision shares at $76 (now $75.60 as they dropped 1.43% today) but is he guaranteed to get $95 for each share the middle of next year when it becomes property of MS, i.e. he makes ~$20 a share. Surely this is easy money, why are not more ppl doing this ~25% return in a year is a great investment, obviously if a lot of ppl do this the price will rise, but still hmmm. OK The downside I can see is if the deal doesnt complete then you are left holding the shares, which btw are not worthless, i.e. you dont lose everything, but I think odds on the deal will go through. Whats the catch, why are not more ppl getting this easy money?
Or does this $95 only apply to the ppl that had shares before MS made the deal?
Obviously theres something Im not understanding

As you mentioned, one of the "catch" is the possibility of the deal not going through, or delayed.
Another is from the point of opportunity cost: 25% for one year looks nice, but if you compare it with, let's say, 50% for one year with less certainty (e.g. buying some other undervalued stocks), it's not that clear cut anymore.
Note that since the deal is set, it's very unlikely that ATVI will go over $95 in the near future, so that's another consideration.

 

[zed]

Hmmm thanks, I might have to look at getting some activision stock, Sure another stock could return more (and some will) but that requires having luck with what you pick.
This seems a much higher chance of it happening.

 

[Jay]

hmmm So you are one of the 2%? i.e. the minority, and you said to me previously "Eitherway your probably one of the very very few people that thinks it's bad"
Im part of the 98%, i.e. the majority, I just dont understand your reasoning, this is some trumpian logic, how can I be one of the very very few people if Im agreeing with 98% of the voters, cheers mate I havent had tears of laughter for a while.

Not sure you're trying to be argumentative, or truly don't get what it's being said.

You was saying they overpaid, I'm saying they didn't and the price they paid is the normal mark up when you are doing an acquisition.
The share price was very low at the time.
You don't just pay the current share price, doesn't work like that.

Therefore it was a good deal cost wise and also good deal for what MS is getting in IP and studios etc.

Your initial post sounded like you didn't think it was a good purchase. But it seems you just think they heavily overpaid which is why I specifically spoke about cost, and why its not the case.

 

[zed]

Therefore it was a good deal cost wise and also good deal for what MS is getting in IP and studios etc.

Your initial post sounded like you didn't think it was a good purchase. But it seems you just think they heavily overpaid which is why I specifically spoke about cost, and why its not the case.

Its not just me who thinks this, Obvious 98% of shareholders think they got a good deal (i.e. MS overpaid)

Did you see the news today? For a tiny fraction of the money Embracer got 3 studios plus the IPs Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, Thief and Legacy of Kain franchises, as well as more than 50 back catalogue titles.
Of these 2 deals who got the better value for money, MS or Embracer?
I wonder what they could of got out of MS, $3 billion?
No question Embracer, Actually I wouldnt be surprised if down the line they sell eg the Tomb Raider Franchise alone to MS or Sony for $500 million

EDIT: Yes MS overpaid, but like I said, I don't think MS minds too much, they have enuf cash sitting in the bank, better to use it than just lying around, esp since inflation is so high

 

[iroboto]

Its not just me who thinks this, Obvious 98% of shareholders think they got a good deal (i.e. MS overpaid)

Did you see the news today? For a tiny fraction of the money Embracer got 3 studios plus the IPs Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, Thief and Legacy of Kain franchises, as well as more than 50 back catalogue titles.
Of these 2 deals who got the better value for money, MS or Embracer?
I wonder what they could of got out of MS, $3 billion?
No question Embracer, Actually I wouldnt be surprised if down the line they sell eg the Tomb Raider Franchise alone to MS or Sony for $500 million

EDIT: Yes MS overpaid, but like I said, I don't think MS minds too much, they have enuf cash sitting in the bank, better to use it than just lying around, esp since inflation is so high

Revenue amounts aren’t even close. All of embracer group makes 300M in revenue per year.
Warzone makes 5.2M per day. Or 1.851 billion per year. WoW makes a billion per year. and candy crush is 500M.

Software revenue alone is worth 3B per year. Not counting leveraging those IPS for other things or profits or for more future titles etc.

if you are looking strictly at personnel, sure eidos is a way better deal. But it’s clearly a lot more at stake here.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Its not just me who thinks this, Obvious 98% of shareholders think they got a good deal (i.e. MS overpaid)

Did you see the news today? For a tiny fraction of the money Embracer got 3 studios plus the IPs Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, Thief and Legacy of Kain franchises, as well as more than 50 back catalogue titles.
Of these 2 deals who got the better value for money, MS or Embracer?
I wonder what they could of got out of MS, $3 billion?
No question Embracer, Actually I wouldnt be surprised if down the line they sell eg the Tomb Raider Franchise alone to MS or Sony for $500 million

EDIT: Yes MS overpaid, but like I said, I don't think MS minds too much, they have enuf cash sitting in the bank, better to use it than just lying around, esp since inflation is so high

Eh? No-one that actually works in finance believes that they overpaid. Stockholders voting to approve the acquisition could be for a variety of reasons, not least of which is a vote of non-confidence in the Activision board of directors and the direction they think the company is going.

MS needed to offer a good price for a variety of reasons.

• If the offered price is too low then they risked someone else coming in and making a better offer.
  • We have no idea what other companies were talking to Activision-Blizzard or how much they were willing to offer.
• The higher share price also discourages an opportunistic entity from attempting a hostile takeover while this was happening.
  • A very real possibility due to how much Activision share prices had fallen.
• To send a message to Activision-Blizzard employees, most importantly the developers that are employed by them.
  • Activision-Blizzard was bleeding talent, MS needed to make a serious offer FAST.
    • The talent is just as important if not more important to MS than the IP that Activision-Blizzard holds.
  • They could not wait for the share price to fall even further before making a move or they risked most of the really good talent leaving.
  • Their offer of 95 USD per share sent a message to the employees that not only were they serious but they valued the company AND the developers that worked for that company highly enough that they were willing to commit to such a large purchase rather than wait for the share price to fall further so that they could get a better "deal".
    • Basically it sends a message to the most important part of Activision-Blizzard, the developers, that MS valued them more than they valued the IP.

Regards,
SB

 

[zed]

Revenue amounts aren’t even close.

Huh, sure they arent close but the amounts paid are no where close as well.

Using your own figures, Revenue values per $ spent on the acquisition greatly favours the Embracer deal.
Mate your own numbers literally show the activision deal was a much worse deal, revenue wise

WRT IPs, well if you think that warzone, wow, candy crush etc are 50x more valuable IPs than tomb raider, thief, deus ex etc
sure I think the activision IPs are more valuable overall, but not relative to what they spent to acquire each company. I just looked up the tomb raider series have sold 88 million copies

 

[iroboto]

Huh, sure they arent close but the amounts paid are no where close as well.

Using your own figures, Revenue values per $ spent on the acquisition greatly favours the Embracer deal.
Mate your own numbers literally show the activision deal was a much worse deal, revenue wise

WRT IPs, well if you think that warzone, wow, candy crush etc are 50x more valuable IPs than tomb raider, thief, deus ex etc
sure I think the activision IPs are more valuable overall, but not relative to what they spent to acquire each company. I just looked up the tomb raider series have sold 88 million copies

Technically yes if you're doing a straight conversion of cost to revenue.

Because the return on investment is the metric for profitability and hte number you want to look at when you're going to make a purchase. The studios sold had nearly 0% ROI after expenses.
These 3 titles are definitely positive, the only issue is time to pay back. But a corporation's lifespan is significantly longer than a person's patience, they see growth where they may not with these studios.
The challenge here is that MS wants to expand their business outside of traditional gaming, mobile marketplace is where they want their games to go. There are no stronger IPs out there that can make that bridge than the ones with Blizzard Activision.
Warzone and Candy Crush are mobile, Blizzard titles are making their way across as well.

The thing is, company evaluations often include goodwill. MS has a huge team of lawyers and strategists who know what the companies are worth. They didn't evaluate things at 95 per share for fun. This is like saying Minecraft was not worth 2B when they bought it. It certainly was, and MS converted fears of over-commercialization of Minecraft into something significantly better than when Notch was running things.

If MS can turn AB IPs around they have a lot more to gain than turning around the IPs that Eidos and CD bring.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Not to mention the fact that AB actually has hard assets as well

Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk

 

[zed]

f MS can turn AB IPs around they have a lot more to gain than turning around the IPs that Eidos and CD bring.

Noone is denying this, Im saying per dollar spent this is not the case with most/all measures.
are you literally not reading what I'm writing

WRT IPs, well if you think that warzone, wow, candy crush etc are 50x more valuable IPs than tomb raider, thief, deus ex etc
sure I think the activision IPs are more valuable overall, but not relative to what they spent to acquire each company.

This is like the 2nd or 3rd recent thread I see here where I'm going hmmm, ...... I dont know what it is, social media perhaps, over exposure to too much junk. Or is it just me shouting at the cloud

MS overpaid, just like sony did with Bungie.