Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

My inside information: Funcom being bought out

2»

Comments

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by Eilif
    Originally posted by dancingstar
    Originally posted by erictlewis

    I can see ea buying out funcom. After all they produced TSW and host it on their servers.

    Nope. EA distributed the game (box copies & some digital sales through Origin iirc).

    Funcom host and run their own games. Anarchy Online is currently planned for migration to the same systems as TSW are hosted on, and Age of Conan was already migrated (I think).

    Not sure if all of you all played AO back in the days, but it's still active and is not only being migrated tpo their new servers but it is also being migrated to Funcoms newer engine Dreamworld and will be re-released (in beta) with a fresh new look in Q1 2013. I'll then play som AO again - 12 years after it was first launched - that is pretty awesome :)

    Yeah, that new engine was supposed to be here back in 2008 ( a year after it was announced in 2007 ), 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and now again 2013.

    Let me know how that works out.

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by jpnz

    Don't think EA is in a position to make a move like this.

    Acti-Blizz on the other hand is loaded with cash.

    It is hilarious to see some people think 'being on the board' = buyout.

    Kotick (Acti-Blizz CEO) is on the board for Coca-Cola. I am pretty sure Coca-Cola isn't buying Acti-Blizz. XD

     

     

    It's only hilarious to people who have absolutely no clue about business, particularly "hostile takeovers". Funcom's recent little insider trading issue along with other screw-ups and less than stellar performance the past few years makes Funcom a ripe target for such. 

    Funcom is a publically traded company. Funcom is beholden to one thing: its investors. Do you think for one second Funcom's investors will say no to EA?

    Investors want only one thing: a return on their money. Funcom isn't providing that. In fact, investors have LOST money time and again the last few years due to Funcom's performance and issues. And having a board filled with people who will most definitely vote on the side of the sale, added to the investors who will lap EA up like thirsty dogs will lap water from a creek, if EA wants Funcom they will have it.

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • DrolkinDrolkin Palio, NBPosts: 242Member

    I play TOR oh and btw the economy is going down in 4 years, I developed that forsight with my years of playing a star wars game.

     

    lmfao

     

    mmorpg forums ftw

  • tawesstawess LkpgPosts: 2,536Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan

    Regardless, it still gives EA a strong foothold in a foreign market.

    apart from the fact that EA have had european offices for ages now and have several euro companies in it's stable already.

     

    To be honest i see no real point for any of them to buy FunCom unless FunCom is working on something we the public is not aware of yet.

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by tawess
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan

    Regardless, it still gives EA a strong foothold in a foreign market.

    apart from the fact that EA have had european offices for ages now and have several euro companies in it's stable already.

    To be honest i see no real point for any of them to buy FunCom unless FunCom is working on something we the public is not aware of yet.

    As far as business' go, acquiring FunCom would be a fairly cheap acquisition, it would knock out yet another piece of the competition, and it would strengthen their foothold in the europian market.

    While I don't like EA's policy of buying up studios and dissolving them, it would make sense in this case. If anyone is to buy out FunCom atm, it would be EA.

  • defector1968defector1968 Nar ShaddaaPosts: 393Member Common
    Originally posted by DrunkWolf
    doesnt seem right, EAs track record shows them buying good companys and destroying them. what will they do with funcom? that place is already a mess.

    arent any good left so they drop their standards :)

  • DrunkWolfDrunkWolf Posts: 1,180Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by defector1968
    Originally posted by DrunkWolf
    doesnt seem right, EAs track record shows them buying good companys and destroying them. what will they do with funcom? that place is already a mess.

    arent any good left so they drop their standards :)

     ah finally a real answer.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by jpnz

    Don't think EA is in a position to make a move like this.

    Acti-Blizz on the other hand is loaded with cash.

    It is hilarious to see some people think 'being on the board' = buyout.

    Kotick (Acti-Blizz CEO) is on the board for Coca-Cola. I am pretty sure Coca-Cola isn't buying Acti-Blizz. XD

    It's only hilarious to people who have absolutely no clue about business, particularly "hostile takeovers". Funcom's recent little insider trading issue along with other screw-ups and less than stellar performance the past few years makes Funcom a ripe target for such. 

    Funcom is a publically traded company. Funcom is beholden to one thing: its investors. Do you think for one second Funcom's investors will say no to EA?

    Investors want only one thing: a return on their money. Funcom isn't providing that. In fact, investors have LOST money time and again the last few years due to Funcom's performance and issues. And having a board filled with people who will most definitely vote on the side of the sale, added to the investors who will lap EA up like thirsty dogs will lap water from a creek, if EA wants Funcom they will have it.

    It's not that EA couldn't buy them, but why and are they in a position to do so?

    It's not just Funcom that has to report to investors.  EA must do so also and they would need to justify the purchase or face the wrath.  Does EA have assets to burn on a Funcom acquisition and can they justify it?  Doesn't EA already have a European presence?  In short, why would EA buy Funcom?  Why would anyone?  None of their games or IP are that compelling on a business level.  They're cheap though.  Funcom is trading at about 30 cents today.

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by Sevenstar61

    I am hesitant about it. Unless it's a real bargain. Economy is going to go downhill in next 4 years, companies are wary.

    But who knows.

    Well first off, nobody knows what the economy is going to do in the next 4 years.  

    Secondly, there is absolutely no reason to expect a poor economy hurts MMOs.  In fact, there is probably more reason to think it helps MMOs.

    Cheap, escapist entertainment does well in bad times.  And that is *exactly* what MMORPGs are.  And that includes P2P, 15 for a month's entertainment is a steal.  Hell, movie theaters do well in down times and thats 15 per 2 hours if you get popcorn.

  • JaedorJaedor Denver, COPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by jpnz Don't think EA is in a position to make a move like this. Acti-Blizz on the other hand is loaded with cash. It is hilarious to see some people think 'being on the board' = buyout. Kotick (Acti-Blizz CEO) is on the board for Coca-Cola. I am pretty sure Coca-Cola isn't buying Acti-Blizz. XD    
    It's only hilarious to people who have absolutely no clue about business, particularly "hostile takeovers". Funcom's recent little insider trading issue along with other screw-ups and less than stellar performance the past few years makes Funcom a ripe target for such. 

    Funcom is a publically traded company. Funcom is beholden to one thing: its investors. Do you think for one second Funcom's investors will say no to EA?

    Investors want only one thing: a return on their money. Funcom isn't providing that. In fact, investors have LOST money time and again the last few years due to Funcom's performance and issues. And having a board filled with people who will most definitely vote on the side of the sale, added to the investors who will lap EA up like thirsty dogs will lap water from a creek, if EA wants Funcom they will have it.


    I was afraid of this and hope your info is wrong, OP. But as has already been posted, Funcom's investors are looking for a return on their money and a sale (even if via a hostile takeover) generally produces a good return.

    If true, one can only hope it's not EA. =/

  • Ren128Ren128 BrisbanePosts: 68Member Uncommon

     

    I was afraid of this and hope your info is wrong, OP. But as has already been posted, Funcom's investors are looking for a return on their money and a sale (even if via a hostile takeover) generally produces a good return.

    If true, one can only hope it's not EA. =/

     

    I also hope its not NCsoft given their track record of shuting down MMOs (not that EA is much better in that regard).

     

    I really want to see the new engine in AO.

  • odinsrathodinsrath louisville, KYPosts: 814Member Uncommon

    why would EA buy funcom ...they have their own problems...sounds more like a EA / funcom fan boie to me..even if they did why would this be a big deal anyways..they both suck lol

    image

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Manchester, NHPosts: 2,931Member Uncommon

    What a compelte waste of money that would be.  I believe they are in big trouble financially after the bomb that was TSW.

     

    I would maybe buy their properties, but not the company or employees.  If some employees want to come over after you buy the properties that's fine.

  • Laughing-manLaughing-man Dublin, OHPosts: 3,415Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Sevenstar61

    I am hesitant about it. Unless it's a real bargain. Economy is going to go downhill in next 4 years, companies are wary.

    But who knows.

    Oh?  Really?  That's funny, everything I've seen on the economy has it globally going "uphill"  but I guess you are free to believe whatever brainwashing you like.

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    What a compelte waste of money that would be.  I believe they are in big trouble financially after the bomb that was TSW.

     

    I would maybe buy their properties, but not the company or employees.  If some employees want to come over after you buy the properties that's fine.

    Not really a waste.

    *IF* they were to go the hostile takeover route, for example, they'd get the company for a bare minimum expense.

    They would again strengthen their european presence and remove yet another competitor in the process.

    They would then do some "reorganization" and "cleanup" which would most likely include laying off many of the current FC devs and replacing them with their own, possibly keeping AO ( as this gives them a new unique IP to exploit), and keeping AoC ( again, this gives them direct access to the Conan IP holders, as well as additional leverage to craft a better deal for future Conan games  ) and TSW ( another unique IP for the larder ) alive as F2P cash shop milking cows.

    There really is no downside for either EA nor the FC shareholders. Everyone wins. Except FC.

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Manchester, NHPosts: 2,931Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    What a compelte waste of money that would be.  I believe they are in big trouble financially after the bomb that was TSW.

     

    I would maybe buy their properties, but not the company or employees.  If some employees want to come over after you buy the properties that's fine.

    Not really a waste.

    *IF* they were to go the hostile takeover route, for example, they'd get the company for a bare minimum expense.

    They would again strengthen their european presence and remove yet another competitor in the process.

    They would then do some "reorganization" and "cleanup" which would most likely include laying off many of the current FC devs and replacing them with their own, possibly keeping AO ( as this gives them a new unique IP to exploit), and keeping AoC ( again, this gives them direct access to the Conan IP holders, as well as additional leverage to craft a better deal for future Conan games  ) and TSW ( another unique IP for the larder ) alive as F2P cash shop milking cows.

    There really is no downside for either EA nor the FC shareholders. Everyone wins. Except FC.

    Unless they get Funcom for cents on the dollar, it isn't a good purchase.  They are utter failures at developing MMOs and aren't really a competitor to anyone.  TSW IP is worthless.  Conan isn't the most marketable IP these days either.  Maybe the next film with Arnie can change that, but in that case just make an MMO based on the film franchise.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    What a compelte waste of money that would be.  I believe they are in big trouble financially after the bomb that was TSW.

    I would maybe buy their properties, but not the company or employees.  If some employees want to come over after you buy the properties that's fine.

    Not really a waste.

    *IF* they were to go the hostile takeover route, for example, they'd get the company for a bare minimum expense.

    They would again strengthen their european presence and remove yet another competitor in the process.

    They would then do some "reorganization" and "cleanup" which would most likely include laying off many of the current FC devs and replacing them with their own, possibly keeping AO ( as this gives them a new unique IP to exploit), and keeping AoC ( again, this gives them direct access to the Conan IP holders, as well as additional leverage to craft a better deal for future Conan games  ) and TSW ( another unique IP for the larder ) alive as F2P cash shop milking cows.

    There really is no downside for either EA nor the FC shareholders. Everyone wins. Except FC.

    You're looking at the prospect like a gamer, not a business.  Funcom doesn't have a lot to offer as a business right now.  If anything their Longest Journey IP is as valuable if not more so than anythng else they have.

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    What a compelte waste of money that would be.  I believe they are in big trouble financially after the bomb that was TSW.

    I would maybe buy their properties, but not the company or employees.  If some employees want to come over after you buy the properties that's fine.

    Not really a waste.

    *IF* they were to go the hostile takeover route, for example, they'd get the company for a bare minimum expense.

    They would again strengthen their european presence and remove yet another competitor in the process.

    They would then do some "reorganization" and "cleanup" which would most likely include laying off many of the current FC devs and replacing them with their own, possibly keeping AO ( as this gives them a new unique IP to exploit), and keeping AoC ( again, this gives them direct access to the Conan IP holders, as well as additional leverage to craft a better deal for future Conan games  ) and TSW ( another unique IP for the larder ) alive as F2P cash shop milking cows.

    There really is no downside for either EA nor the FC shareholders. Everyone wins. Except FC.

    You're looking at the prospect like a gamer, not a business.  Funcom doesn't have a lot to offer as a business right now.  If anything their Longest Journey IP is as valuable if not more so than anythng else they have.

    Funcom also has a LEGO mmo license as well as a few other IP's that haven't been shown yet. So without knowing the entirety of their portfolio, it's impossible to say definitively how "valuable" Funcom is in respect to bankable IPs.

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • LoLifeLoLife LA, CAPosts: 174Member
    Well if EA or Activision buys Funcom it might as well be renamed to "Defcom"
  • ChtugaChtuga OsloPosts: 113Member
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins
      Conan isn't the most marketable IP these days either.  Maybe the next film with Arnie can change that, but in that case just make an MMO based on the film franchise.

     

    Funcom has the rights for mmo's on Conan so nobody but Funcom can make a mmo with Conan brand...

2»
Sign In or Register to comment.