Every publicly traded company is for sale at the right price. It's just a question of whether people are willing to offer Capcom that price. Today their market cap is approximately 5.3 billion USD - if you came along and offered a 50-60% premium on that (I think Zynga is close to the highest I've seen in the industry at 63%) it's hard to imagine they'd say no unless they had a very good reason to think their price would increase substantially in the near future. They may accept less than that, even.
Saudi Arabia investing $37b in gaming; $13b "for the acquisition and development of a leading game publisher", $18b "for minority investments".
- Thread starter Joseki
- Replies 124
- Views 9,897
- Start date
- Industry News
Every publicly traded company is for sale at the right price. It's just a question of whether people are willing to offer Capcom that price. Today their market cap is approximately 5.3 billion USD - if you came along and offered a 50-60% premium on that (I think Zynga is close to the highest I've seen in the industry at 63%) it's hard to imagine they'd say no unless they had a very good reason to think their price would increase substantially in the near future. They may accept less than that, even.
Sure, but since China is a dictatorship the ties are much more deeper.
The same way a killer from Saudi Arabia owning a game company isn't something that pleases me, companies from China don't either.
But I'm not naive, that's how things works in the world and is not like western companies are "clean".
To close the sub-topic, since we are derailing the thread, I would say that you would have a point if Tencent was an unofficial arm of the Chinese State power.
However, as we know, it is far from being the case, the two being very much at odds on various topics. China's gaming regulator has negatively impacted times and times again Tencent. You can see Zhuge takes on the topic or other more knowledgeable people.
To close of, I am bothering to make that point because the line with sinophobia can be pretty thin here (aka every Chinese company is a threat) and I am sure it was not your angle.
- Pronouns
- he/him
This sounds more like: don't mention that the murderous chinese government has full control of every chinese company or I will call you names.
In the end every chinese company will exactly do what the chinese government wants otherwise the companies leader would be in real trouble or just straight send to jail.
And its not derailing the thread when we mention that goverments like Saudi Arabia or China try to get even more influence in western media. And that is obviously no good thing.
See my post above, let's close the subtopic since the thread is not about China (you can always reach out via DM to elaborate further of course).
If the $13B will result in a single company Purchase
Logically My biggest bet is on Embracer , there has been lots of partnerships lately between Embracer and Savvy Gaming whether it be Savvy acquiring notable shares of Embracer or Embracer announcing opening a regional hub for MENA region in KSA , Also price fits after premium and the way Embracer has been aggressively acquiring Studios Big and Small in a very short span of time makes me suspicious they plan all along is to be acquired for a Massive Sum
But As Prince is a Big Weeb , I have my share of bets that he will do whatever it takes to acquire a Major Japanese Company at all costs
Logically My biggest bet is on Embracer , there has been lots of partnerships lately between Embracer and Savvy Gaming whether it be Savvy acquiring notable shares of Embracer or Embracer announcing opening a regional hub for MENA region in KSA , Also price fits after premium and the way Embracer has been aggressively acquiring Studios Big and Small in a very short span of time makes me suspicious they plan all along is to be acquired for a Massive Sum
But As Prince is a Big Weeb , I have my share of bets that he will do whatever it takes to acquire a Major Japanese Company at all costs
Here is another one of the Minority Investments
https://www.argaam.com/en/article/articledetail/id/1621938
https://www.argaam.com/en/article/articledetail/id/1621938
Just fantastic /s
Slowly creeping up to 10% and who knows where they'll go from there. Everyone has their own stuff that's morally important to them - this might become one for me where I cannot support Nintendo anymore if Saudi-ownership grows too high. Not sure yet up to what percentage I'm okay with buying Nintendo-games ... ugh.
This is a textbook of Edward Said´s Orientalism at its finest. Saudi Arabia has billions and billions of dollars in many companies in US and Europe. Saudi Arabia has been helped by the US in warfare (Yemen is the latest example), so you stop supporting US things too?
Well good luck with that because they have stock with just about every game company nowadays & they want to keep increasing it.
This is good.
This way, they can press for localization for more languages.
This way, they can press for localization for more languages.
They upped their stake in Capcom too (now 6.19% and the number 3 shareholder).
Some more PIF investments to ruminate on:
EA: 5.8%, #2 shareholder
Activison: 5.84%, #3
Take-Two: 6.8%, #3
Square Enix: 4.32%, #6
Koei Tecmo: 5.3%, #5
Embracer: 8.1%, #2
Nexon: 9.49%, #2
NCSoft: 9.6%, #2
Some more PIF investments to ruminate on:
EA: 5.8%, #2 shareholder
Activison: 5.84%, #3
Take-Two: 6.8%, #3
Square Enix: 4.32%, #6
Koei Tecmo: 5.3%, #5
Embracer: 8.1%, #2
Nexon: 9.49%, #2
NCSoft: 9.6%, #2
Last edited:
If people become much strict with their moral standards involving companies, they would have to boycott basically everything. The clothes and the phones we use for example are made at the expense of really bad conditions for workers.
Saudi Arabia governement sucks, but american, european and japanese companies aren't saints.
Saudi Arabia governement sucks, but american, european and japanese companies aren't saints.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Ugh...
Folks, we're talking about an entertainment product. Not clothes, not the phones many of us rely on for modern communication, a glorified distraction. We choose not to buy certain entertainment products every day, for reasons no better than "I didn't like that trailer I saw". If they feel uneasy buying an entertainment product because of Prince Bonesaw, even if you disagree with the rationale, let them. It's not up to you or anyone else to adjudicate how someone spends their money on wholly-elective consumer goods, nor should it be your position to adjudicate what makes such a person feel more at ease just because the whole world under capitalism is repugnant for everyone but capitalists and their friends (including those at the reigns of nations).
Folks, we're talking about an entertainment product. Not clothes, not the phones many of us rely on for modern communication, a glorified distraction. We choose not to buy certain entertainment products every day, for reasons no better than "I didn't like that trailer I saw". If they feel uneasy buying an entertainment product because of Prince Bonesaw, even if you disagree with the rationale, let them. It's not up to you or anyone else to adjudicate how someone spends their money on wholly-elective consumer goods, nor should it be your position to adjudicate what makes such a person feel more at ease just because the whole world under capitalism is repugnant for everyone but capitalists and their friends (including those at the reigns of nations).
- Pronouns
- He/him
I hope whatever their controlling stake ends up being doesn't give them any power to alter Nintendo games or impose any moral standards on them. As a gay guy, the moment I find out the SA government is censoring LGBT content in Nintendo games I will stop supporting them immediately.
And that's why I wrote 'everyone has their own stuff that's morally important to them'. If you don't care about Saudi-Arabia getting more involved with Nintendo, that's your choice. If you think doing nothing no matter what happens because you're using the 'there is no moral consumption' excuse, feel free to think so, too.
I have my own moral red lines and the day I read news about Saudi-Arabia owning 30% of Nintendo might be one of them. Until then I continue not to buy PlayStation because of their censorship, not fly via airplane because of climate change and not buy the cheapest eggs, but those that guarantee that the chicken are allowed to ro run around outside. I know I can't be 100% moral, but I can do a little bit. Everyone can, I believe
I respect your choice, but it's funny that several prominent climate change activists fly in jets all around the world despite the alarmism they preach.
the world is full of fakers, especially famous people
Oh god, I'm getting worried.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
... about what specifically?
I'm sure there's a reason, but clarity is helpful.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Worried that a rich government is buying legally available stock that has no power or controlling interest? Okay
They're going at very fast pace with that. I would like to direct you to the discussion about morals in this thread. This just makes me very uncomfortable. I'm worried they may end up with like 20% or so.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Okay... and? That would still be a minority shareholder. SA has made it clear they're trying to invest into a lot of companies in many avenues to diversify their revenue away from oil. They've shown little interest in trying to actually own and run companies, even SNK a company they own 96% of shares, has just been allowed to do it's own thing.
Fuck the SA government, but you can't sneeze without accidentally giving them money in 2023. Stressing and worrying about things outside of your control that have no impact on the games being made by your favorite companies isn't healthy.
Why are you saying all of this? It's nothing new and I never mentioned being worried about them controlling anything.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
A country's sovereign wealth fund owning a growing stake in a media company should be cause for concern. Even if it was Norway, Israel, or the American governments pension fund, you'll have wonders on what sway that government would have on the companies output, if any. Especially if they are on track to own more shares than Nintendo themselves.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
There is no concern about control of output. I already wrote on this on another forum, I'll borrow it and tweak it a bit:
Shareholders do not vote directly on creative output, even board members don't really have such a finite say in it unless they're actively employed in a creative role or in the unelected executive branch outside the boardroom, because the BoD and the corporate executive branch are separate things (but usually with overlap, because many board members are also employees of the corporation sometimes, like in Nintendo's case). And last I checked, the Board was full and has only one outside director, Chris Mellidandri, who had to be nominated and win his seat through shareholder election and meet Tokyo Stock Exchange criteria to be considered.
So the only means to direct ANY of Nintendo's creative output just by owning shares is the fraction-of-a-fraction of a percent possibility of putting forward a candidate for the BoD that would be able to win a shareholder vote (when a space becomes available, whenever that will be, and assuming the selection committee even takes shareholder suggestions into account), and that's unlikely if they are there solely to push a regional mandate on their content creation, especially because no one outside the corporate entity itself can hold more than 33.3% of a Japanese company by law anyways, as more than that amount demands a tender offer to engage in a hostile takeover and achieve majority ownership, which Nintendo absolutely has the means to fend off. So the Saudis would be unlikely to ever hold enough shares to put forward a candidate and get them elected to the position where such a thing is possible.
You can be mad that buying Nintendo products more directly enriches Prince Bonesaw now and dislike how that enrichment keeps growing larger, and you'd have every right to feel that way, but there's no creative mandates or direct corporate governance control that can come of this.
Last edited:
Based on what? The big media company was funded/supported by their own state around the world, and capitalism used state money for funding for centuries now. 2/3 of covid vaccines have state funding. Mariana Mazzucato in The Entrepreneurial State demonstrates the importance public sector in the development of new technologic. Yeah, I know Sovereign funds are not investments primarily in early technology in Japan, but this ideological mentality is not rational at all. Japan was protective of big Japanese companies (minority stakes are one thing, a hostile takeover is not possible in companies like Toyota, Nintendo, etc without Japanese government permission).
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Edit: OK, I don't want to derail the discussion.
Last edited:
Except just a few posts earlier you accused anyone who didn't like Chinese companies buying up companies of being bigots. It's incredibly hypocritical to demand that others accept and allow everyone to be against companies/products they choose to be against, and then call someone a bigot for being against other companies for their reasons. If you demand that we tolerate people being against a company for any reason, then you should be tolerant of the same.
This was posted ~16 hours ago (before the jump to 8.3% for Nintendo)
www.axios.com
Saudi Arabia increases stake in EA, Take-Two as it pours money into gaming
Plus it put another quarter billion dollars in esports.
www.axios.com
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Honestly, with the kind of money they're able to put down, they could create a AAA publisher to rival Ubisoft from whole damn cloth and restrict its output as they saw fit to. If that were the goal, that'd frankly be the easier way to go about it. But even when looking at SNK, who they wholly own, it doesn't seem to be their MO.
For this to be hypocritical, we'd have to equate Chinese corporations with a direct government entity. They are not. I would have the same opinion if this were a Saudi corporation, because one cannot claim that it directly enriches the Saudi government or that the people in charge of that corporation endorse MBS. It certainly indirectly enriches the governments in which they reside, but I've been forced by capitalism to make peace that literally everything I buy enriches murderers like MBS, among several others.
But a corporation is not the same as a sovereign wealth fund, a direct arm of said governments.
Yes, they've said that they're prepared to take measures to prevent such a hostile takeover, but they're not taking enough action right now.
They are at risk, and SA have clearly shown intent to attempt such a takeover. They should be taking preventitive action now, not in a year or two's time. While they're still in a position of strength.
This was posted ~16 hours ago (before the jump to 8.3% for Nintendo)
Saudi Arabia increases stake in EA, Take-Two as it pours money into gaming
Plus it put another quarter billion dollars in esports.
Yea so to Summarize what happened in the last 24 Hours
- KSA PIF Stake in EA : 5.1% to 5.8%
- KSA PIF Stake in Take Two : 5.3% to 6.8%
- KSA PIF Stake in Nintendo : 7.1% to 8.26%
With all due respect, you’re not making any sense. The actions they’ve taken are already preventive. Nintendo and its trusted private inventors own a controlling number of their own shares.
SA is just buying up publicly traded stocks to emulate Tencent’s strategy of diversifying their cash flow.
Nintendo is not SNK. Japan doesn´t allow this. Agreed with you, it exaggeration of the minority, not a hostile takeover.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I chose Israel as an example specifically because of it's controversial status, on how any government's sovereign fund, not just Saudi Arabia, owning a large share of a foreign media company is problematic and shouldn't be brushed off.
The only thing I'm worried about is that period in Hollywood where all movies were made with the Chinese market in mind, and the creative output would make changes to reflect that. Such as when Tencent reportedly didn't want any black people in movies they were funding.
Tencent Allegedly Wanted Bigger Breasts And No Black People In A Movie That It Was Funding
Alanah Pearce reveals the inner workings of the games industry giant.
www.thegamer.com
If Nintendo doesn't start looking at defensive actions there's no telling if Saudi Arabia won't turn around and do the same.
Governments have no business owning stocks in private companies period, that just screams conflict of interest in any number of ways.
That's not what I was referring to as hypocritical. Everything you are mentioning is why you don't agree with some people having concerns with Chinese business investing in companies. What I was pointing out as hypocritical was you taking issue with people taking issue with others disliking businesses for their reasons while you yourself are taking issue with others disliking businesses for their reasons.
Saudi Arabia is well-documented as a nation built on slavery (the kafala system, specifically). Here's a blurb from the U.S. State Department about it:
Seeing this kind of a country redistribute its wealth under a sovereign wealth fund into discretionary leisure products like gaming for return diversification is disheartening. It's an inconvenient truth that blood money is at the heart of many capitalist enterprises and this only serves to highlight it.
Seeing this kind of a country redistribute its wealth under a sovereign wealth fund into discretionary leisure products like gaming for return diversification is disheartening. It's an inconvenient truth that blood money is at the heart of many capitalist enterprises and this only serves to highlight it.
Last edited:
Probably not the place/time for that topic but I find it funny to see the US pointing the finger to the Saudi government when they were the ones to put the Saudi family at the helm of the state.
They pledged to protect them, as part of the pact signed on the USS Quincy in February 14th 1945.
Saudi Arabia to invest $37 billion in gaming
The kingdom has "earmarked" $13 billion to buy a "leading" publisher.
What publisher do you think accepted to take a trip in the very friendly Saudi Arabian embassies, where nothing bad ever happened to journalists?
I wonder if any of that money will be earmarked for the development of domestic game studios? For example, let's say they acquire a publisher, do they plan to have that publisher establish a development office in Saudi?
No they do not...
IR Information : Stock Information - Status of Shares
www.nintendo.co.jp
The majority of Nintendo is owned by foreign institutions and Japanese financial institutions. It's quite possible for SA to buy up enough shares to force a controlling stake in Nintendo.
They need to start significant share buybacks... NOW! They are in very real danger of a hostile takeover, and SA have not only expressed a specific desire to buy a major video game publisher, they have already achieved a hostile takeover of SNK!!
The US is also responsible for millions of death abroad in the last 2 decades. But this isn't really the topic to discuss that and other crimes that countries have committed. I don't think Nintendo is at risk for a hostile takeover. I imagine they have board-level provisions for a poison pill, similar to what Twitter had in place. Saudi can negotiate directly to discuss a buy-out of Nintendo but I don't know how the Japanese government will feel about having one of their most prized and biggest domestic companies being wholly owned by a foreign country.
No they do not...
IR Information : Stock Information - Status of Shares
www.nintendo.co.jp
The majority of Nintendo is owned by foreign institutions and Japanese financial institutions. It's quite possible for SA to buy up enough shares to force a controlling stake in Nintendo.
They need to start significant share buybacks... NOW! They are in very real danger of a hostile takeover, and SA have not only expressed a specific desire to buy a major video game publisher, they have already achieved a hostile takeover of SNK!!
I don't think it's a risk. Nintendo however should make sure to adopt some board-level provisions that will force a potential buyer to negotiate directly with the board.
Okay I went looking, trying to figure out how many shares Nintendo owns of itself. I am a bit confused by this chart since I see reports from WiiU and also later Switch era, that Nintendo bought back sizable shares over multiple percent each on order of billions of dollars.
Are we sure that chart doesn't just show non-Nintendo owned shares (and one instant of Nintendo owned shares (10%) in a treasury).
Feel free to correct me or my misunderstandings.
Are we sure that chart doesn't just show non-Nintendo owned shares (and one instant of Nintendo owned shares (10%) in a treasury).
Feel free to correct me or my misunderstandings.