alphachino
Member
Do you?Do you even have a clue on how much the Sonic IP alone is worth ?
My guess is that the Sonic IP alone is probably worth more than $5B USD
Do you?Do you even have a clue on how much the Sonic IP alone is worth ?
I thought Pachter was with another firm.If he said Sega doesn't want to be bought, it's probably in the works. Bloomberg's Michael Pachter strikes again.
He is. He is pointing out that Bloomberg have their very own "Michael Packer" in the form of MochisuckiI thought Pachter was with another firm.
The Bloomberg journalist and Michael Pachter have the same success rate with predictions and insider knowledge. It was a jab at the journalist only.I thought Pachter was with another firm.
Patcher hasn't been relevant for over 5 years now...??I thought Pachter was with another firm.
This myth is old and also not as broad as you imply.Japanese Government, there’s literally laws that prevent Japanese companies from being bought out by foreign investors.
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.This myth is old and also not as broad as you imply.
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…
The perceived low level of activity in the Japanese takeover market cannot be attributed to its takeover law, the Financial Instrument or the Exchange Law. Indeed, a careful examination of the content of the law reveals that this legislation operates in the offeror’s favour.
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...link.springer.com
He technically never was relevant...he either stated the obvious everyone else did or his "big" predictions never panned out.Patcher hasn't been relevant for over 5 years now...??
There are 3 levels of classifications for companies in Japan. Someone once posted a full list in a thread. Sega is protected not because of security reasons but for having IPs valuable to the country whose ownership needs to remain in the country.
Sega loves that Microsoft hand out. Would sega bother porting those fatlus games and Like a Weeb without that gamepass greasing?I rather Microsoft acquire Sega than Activision. I love the Yakuza franchise but I'll just play that on PC. Sega been kissing Xbox ass for years. Might as well go under them.
Those games have been gaining popularity in the U.S so yes they still would. But I agree they love that Gamepass money.Sega loves that Microsoft hand out. Would sega bother porting those fatlus games and Like a Weeb without that gamepass greasing?
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
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.Those games have been gaining popularity in the U.S so yes they still would. But I agree they love that Gamepass money.
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).
Yawn…comparing Sega to Grasshopper? Come on.
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.
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.
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.
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.
\
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.
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.
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.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.
You have no idea what you are talking about.Buying Sega is worth for Atlus, the rest not so much.
I doubt the whole of SEGA is worth $5 Billion. Microsoft could no doubt buy SEGA for $3 billion topsDo you?
My guess is that the Sonic IP alone is probably worth more than $5B USD
Do you mean Sega Corp or Sega Sammy?I doubt the whole of SEGA is worth $5 Billion. Microsoft could no doubt buy SEGA for $3 billion tops
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.isn’t that the Bloomberg reporter who has been caught making stuff up before?
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 nowDo 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.
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.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
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 ArcadesWell, 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
Sharp is a terrible comparison as it was bankrupt and no Japanese companies wanted to buy it and its liabilities.
Yawn…comparing Sega to Grasshopper? Come on.
and have said repeatedly its not impossible just in the case of Sega, or Nintendo or Sony etc its highly unlikely.
Japanese Government, there’s literally laws that prevent Japanese companies from being bought out by foreign investors.
The studio head of Football Manager developer Sports Interactive has said PlayStation's claim that Xbox Game Pass is "value destructive" is not true.
The United States' Federal Trade Commission spent the last week battling Microsoft in court over Xbox's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, during which PlayStation boss Jim Ryan said publishers do not like Game Pass.
Sports Interactive head Miles Jacobson refuted this to Eurogamer, however, saying Game Pass has been a positive experience for Football Manager.
Governments don’t care about Sega.Governments