Agree.
Not expecting any major acquisition within the next year.
Studio acquisitions definitely.
I reckon studios like Ember Lab and Arrowhead studios will be acquired.
PlayStation Is Hiring For A Manager To Identify "Inorganic Growth Opportunities Through Acquisitions & Investments".
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
Agree.
Not expecting any major acquisition within the next year.
Studio acquisitions definitely.
I reckon studios like Ember Lab and Arrowhead studios will be acquired.
This is false. Regulators do not care about majority market shares when the company with that majority has earned it through competing in the market, and offering a superior product vs. competitors. Why do you think there haven't been investigations into Sony or Valve?
A market leader making a huge acquisition would only become monopolistic if that company has ALREADY engaged in monopolistic and anticompetitive actions to gain that majority market share beforehand. That is not the case with Sony.
There are many reasons Sony may not want to buy a massive games publisher, but it being inherently monopolistic due to being the market leader is NOT one of those reasons especially when Sony have earned that majority by making a product the majority of games customers willingly chose to buy with their wallets. Regulators don't punish successful competitors who operate within the bounds of the fair open, competitive market that way.
The reboots suffered from feature bloat. First game was largely flowing well, ROTR told me to fuck off until I had better explosives a few hours later to clear the cave debris, or get special poison darts or something.
Agree this argument the market share restricts growth possibilities, is a whole myth and fanboy fantasy. If Sony wants to acquire Japanese pubs they will do so. A corrupted EU or CMA can do shit about it. Only Nintendo and Xbox fanboys fear that Sony could respond and that’s why they keep spreading this false narratives in their huge denial.
It isn't false, it's true. I didn't say that they would stop it for being market leader. I said for having a huge, meaning almost the whole market.
Big enough to, in case of making certain acquisition, prevent others to being able to compete against them. Which is the definition of a monopolistic action.
As an example, in high end consoles Sony in EU has a 80% market share and MS 20%. So if Sony makes a big enough acquisition -let's say worth 5% of the market- regulators could consider it is monopolistic action because it could prevent MS competing against them.
But that same acquisition, when made by the one who has the 20% market share, they don't have enough market power to use that acquisition that would give them let's say 5% because wouldn't almost affect the other ones who have 80% market share.
In the relatively recent announcement where they said that Tencent got more Ubi stocks and gave a good chunk of money to the Guillemot family to help them take control of Ubi. These are their exact words:
"Tencent will not be able to sell its shares for five years, beyond which the Guillemot family will have a pre-emptive right to buy the shares, Ubisoft said. It also said Tencent pledged not to increase its direct stake in the French games maker beyond 9.99% in capital for a period of eight years."
Last edited:
Lol Sony 80% share in EU…
Nintendo doesn’t exists?
Btw: this High-End argument is nonsense. It either to consider all competitors or none.
Nintendo doesn’t exists?
Btw: this High-End argument is nonsense. It either to consider all competitors or none.
I think Nintendo would be fine. Their IPs are strongest in gaming space.
OP
OP
Nintendo is in their own vacuum, as long as they keep churning out sequels to their loved ips they'll be OK. The reality is that Sony would be too.
One thing I thought about is, imagine if MS complained about sony buying a Japanese publisher but then turned around and tried to do the same thing. It'd just be a bad look, not that MS would care of course. With that said, if i were Sony one of my stipulations for signing the COD deal wouldve been not to intervene in any of their acquisitions.
Good luck, we're not third world though.
Foreign owned firm is now getting more scrutinized. The consensus is, Japan should export FDI, not the other way around.
They should hire me:
Capcom + SE + FromSoftware + Konami IPs + CDPR
Capcom + SE + FromSoftware + Konami IPs + CDPR
OP
OP
Sony does not have "almost the whole market", what are you on? Did you forget Nintendo exists? Even if just comparing Xbox Series to PS5, it's barely 66% PS5. That is not "almost the whole market". This is peak mental gymnastics from you.
Microsoft is already doing that in purchasing COD, the biggest FPS shooter in the industry. Within that space, Sony have nothing that competes with them which generates similar revenue and profit margins for them. We can arguably say the same for WRPG titles with Microsoft now owning TES.
This market does not actually exist. Congratulations, you fell for the hoodwink. The rest of what you say is irrelevant, knowing what it was predicated upon.
You're literally slurping up every talking point the EC regulators and Judge Corley spewed out. Again, based on a false premise since you seem to buy into the "high-end market" definition which only the FTC tried to define.
Not if their console doesn’t attract casuals or isn’t revolutionary.
For every Nintendo hardware success there’s been a failure in between.
Less foreign investment, more FDI. SEA regions receives most FDI from Japan, more than even the US. Our economy has stagnated for 40 years now, so capital outflow is more important than ever.