EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

June 5, 2008 -

According to Reuters, Electronic Arts has reached an agreement with the Federal Trade Commission to delay its attempt to acquire Take-Two Interactive while FTC investigators address regulatory [i.e. - monopoly] issues.

What might the FTC be looking into? Newsweek's N'Gai Croal covered this in great detail recently, including mention of my fears that consumers will suffer if EA is successful.

Cnet's Daniel Terdiman wrote yesterday "that [EA is] losing its credibility with each new extension." Frankly, however, I can't see Terdiman's point. Credibility is a non-issue here. The dollars - and government regulatory clearance - will ultimately dictate whether this deal gets done.

Meanwhile, on his Anti-Tust Commentary blog, attorney Matthew Wild offers some legal insight into the EA's strategy:

Under the agreement, EA must give the FTC 45 days’ notice of its intention to close.  Parties often grant the Antitrust Division and FTC more time to review their transactions with the hope of convincing the agencies not to challenge the merger or to allow them to negotiate a remedy.

The most important take-away here is that EA is obviously worried that the FTC may have some concerns about the deal. As a game consumer, it's reassuring to know that regulators are taking a good look at the proposed merger.

As I've pointed out before, EA's track record with the Madden franchise demonstrates that the game publisher is willing to lower prices when faced with serious competition. The Madden case also shows that EA will take agressive steps to eliminate its competition and, if successful, will raise prices in a non-competitive landscape.


Comments

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

I'm glad to see some people are relising that with this takeover EA will be killing a brilliant company and will run it dry then toss the EA-molested left overs aside. EA have had names on some games such as Crysis and Hellgate: London, but unlike some uncivilised people (not refering to anyone here) I see past the big 'EA' logo that you can never skip and look at the REAL designers of the games such as 'Flagship Studios' and 'Crytek'. Admittedly, I do enjoy C&C series, but I have a bad feeling that is going to go downhill soon. The sooner this deal is chucked into a hole and hid away from the world the better.

--------------------------------------

SAY NO TO THE EA TAKEOVER!

Cafalump

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

Ugh.... After the whole DRM mess with Spore and Mass Effect (which I am still pissed off about to this day) EA can take a flying leap into a pit of rabid badgers. I'm just so bloody sick of EA destroying so many good companys. In otherwords, keep your dung stained hands off of Take-Two!

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

They killed Need 4 Speed. You Bastards!!!

 

As far as I care, Take-Two are gods.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

EA bought Hell and then closed it down after interfering with its work which resulted in a sudden drop in quality and sales.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

EA can go to hell.

 

Thats pretty much all I need to say.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

"Cnet's Daniel Terdiman wrote yesterday "that [EA is] losing its credibility with each new extension." Frankly, however, I can't see Terdiman's point. Credibility is a non-issue here. The dollars - and government regulatory clearance - will ultimately dictate whether this deal gets done."

I do, every time EA extends it's offer after a deadline, it makes the next deadline much less credible. Thus shareholders won't be in a rush to decide to sell, and are even more likely to hold out for a better offer.

Basically EA said "Here's our offer, take it or leave it, but it expires while you wait." They've keep showing that the "expires" part is false. Now people will be expecting the "take it or leave it" part to be false as well.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

First, EA ends up buying every video game company, then they flop and go out of business, now we will have another video game crash of 1983.

 

If EA buys T2, I will eat my hat.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

It's entirely possible that this may be the end of EA sports domination. They gotten to the point where very real damage to the consumer is occurring and competition is not steep enough between the two parties for them to pull a Coke-Pepsi deal.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

EA, you tried to take them over and they don't want it.  By continuing to find excuses to extend a bid they don't want, you're looking foolish.  You lost, deal with it.

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

"Indeed, we've been down this road before with EA, and it was a train wreck for gamers. Some Joystiq readers will recall the NFL 2K series from Visual Concepts. It was a very good pro football game franchise that originated on the Dreamcast but later migrated over to the PS2 and Xbox. Some reviewers actually came to prefer NFL 2K to EA's Madden series. What's more, Take Two, in a competitive effort to win market share in later years, priced it very aggressively ($19.99). Declining to go that low in price, EA was forced to reduce Madden to $29.99 just to stay competitive (there's that word again).

So what happened next? EA secured an exclusive license with the NFL and NFL Players Association. Quicker than a LaDainian Tomlinson sprint to the end zone, the NFL 2K series ceased to exist. The next edition of Madden, no longer facing competitive pressure from NFL 2K, jumped up in price to $49.99. EA's revenues, of course, shot up. Gamers, however, had to plunk down twenty bucks more than the previous year and lost the opportunity to choose their pro football game based on a competitive comparison of features and price. You either played Madden – at EA's price - or you went home."

'nuff said.
----
Papa Midnight
http://www.otakutimes.com
http://www.thesupersoldiers.com

 

----
Papa Midnight

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

I know I'm old but I'm sure I can't be the only person here who remembers when EA used to be THE company when it came to top class creative boundary pushing games (Filled polygons on a C64? Barely anyone else used polygons at all and none of them were FILLED!). Nowdays they're still determined to be THE company but only beccause there's no alternative.

It's especially sad given their recent drop in quality output. They got where they are by making stuff that was so good everyone bought it (and this was in the days when piracy only needed a double tape deck) but now they seem to have turned their backs on creativity entirely. It's a sad reversal, like a jedi turning to the dark side or the shop no longer stocking those biscuits you like

Re: EA's Take-Two Takeover Bid on Hold Pending Government Review

Compeition is good for consumers as it encourages lower prices and better products.

It speaks volumes that instead of improving it's product to make it more appealing they're trying to eliminate competition so they can price their half assed product how they see fit. Someone doesn't like it, they can say "You have no choice, haha!!!" which would likely actually hurt EA in the end.

And honestly ,giving all this, if I were a Take Two stock holder, I'd have decided not ot sell long ago.

-kurisu7885

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will we ever get Half-Life 3?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Papa MidnightThe term "lovers" might be pushing it given the apparent time frame, but I understand what you're saying. Even if they were friends at the time, then that may present impropiety. However, that calls for a Magic-8-Ball level of speculation.10/02/2014 - 10:26am
Krono@Midnight She was a guest on an RPS show he cohosted here: http://goo.gl/QxljSG10/02/2014 - 10:24am
prh99Personally I'd say her original piece on Bronies was far more ethically questionable. Though for different reasons.10/02/2014 - 10:20am
Krono@Midnight On the Grayson relationship? For starters it depends on how long they were friends before they were lovers. Nathan gave Depression Quest top billing back in this article: http://goo.gl/tqGsnW10/02/2014 - 10:20am
Papa MidnightIf said journalist, however, is placed into a position where they have to write about matters dealing with DICE, then yes, a COI is present and should be declared.10/02/2014 - 10:18am
Papa MidnightHypothetically, if a developer from DICE starts dating a tech journalist from CNN tomorrow, so long as said CNN journalist is not (in)directly involved in any editorial process regarding matters dealing with DICE, there's no need to declare a COI.10/02/2014 - 10:18am
Papa MidnightThere's no need for it. A declaration of a Conflict of Interest is only necessary in the event that the parties may be placed into a situation where the conflict may become a factor.10/02/2014 - 10:16am
Krono@prh99 It was after #gamergate. There was a post on r/games that called out the lack of disclosure.10/02/2014 - 10:12am
Papa MidnightKrono: If the purpose of such was to expose some conflict of interest, I am not sure what the purpose or end objective was. Specifically, said relationship had not produced any works positive or otherwise. Where's the beef?10/02/2014 - 10:09am
prh99I don't know, the update isn't dated. Also, actual attempt at deception or absent mindedness? "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"10/02/2014 - 10:06am
Krono@prh99 disclosed in an update after #gamergate noticed and called it out.10/02/2014 - 10:04am
Papa MidnightDriving people from their homes. e-Letter bombing (for all practical intents and purposes) advertisers like they're the FCC after a certain Superbowl half-time show to pull advertising from a media outlet for the crime of having an opinion?10/02/2014 - 10:00am
Papa MidnightIt's hard to drape yourself in the glory of your righteous campaign when you're exposing the personal information of a person, and following up with a campaign of harassment (organised or ortherwise). 12 year olds calling your personal cell for Five Guys?10/02/2014 - 9:58am
prh99http://kotaku.com/anna-anthropy-designer-behind-dys4ia-and-triad-and-au-1448084641 <--relationship disclosed10/02/2014 - 9:57am
Papa MidnightEven to this day, that remains the primary citation of those embarking in it. That said, the whole "it's not about harrassment" thing is comparable to making an extremely racist statement, then following up by saying "but I'm not a racist."10/02/2014 - 9:56am
Papa MidnightI think EZK is more spot-on. This may have carried on far beyond it's genesis, but the true driving force of this whole astroturfing campaign was the angst of an ex-boyfriend of Zoe Quinn's.10/02/2014 - 9:54am
KronoAnd that's off the top of my head, specific to Kotaku.10/02/2014 - 9:54am
E. Zachary KnightKrono, yet no one can actually point at any "positive reviews" or otehr press given Quinn by Grayson.10/02/2014 - 9:53am
KronoBeyond that you have Patricia Hernandez writing reviews for, and plugging Anna Anthropy's work. Anna being Patricia's friend and former roomate.10/02/2014 - 9:52am
Sleaker@EZK - I believe there were a few more related to Patreon, and IGF. But regardless of the disclosure thing, that was only half of my statement, and I'm simply trying to speak on the reasons why GG got popular. But you sidestepped my last question there...10/02/2014 - 9:50am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician