Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Super Moderator Darsithis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    31,514
    Quote Originally Posted by HeatherRae View Post
    If Blizzard actually has 4 billion cash in hand, as implied by another poster, 400 million is just a drop in the barrel for them. They'll be fine.
    That's 10%. Not quite a "drop in the bucket". 40m? Sure. 4m? Definitely. But 10% is a nice chunk of change.



  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchor View Post
    I've seen this happening before several times. It's usually followed with EA swooping in and childing yet another quality company.

    Either way they're going to have to tighten their belts a few notches, because whatever apologist arguments people might bring to a biased fan forum that always sees everything with pink goggles, this is definately not good news for Activision-Blizzard. And with Activision being Blizzard's "boss", they're going to do most of the cuts in the Blizzard company instead of in their Call of Duty teams.
    i don't think it works like "Activision is Blizzard's boss so they can do whatever they want".

  3. #43
    Sorry you guys, I didn't mean to turn this into a tangent about Rift VS. WoW, but I do feel like Blizzard slacks a bit. I feel like better management of the Development team due to lower funds might actually be a good thing. Currently Ghostcrawler will come out and acknowledge that something about the game is bad, but players still have to wait for four months for it to get fixed (dailies, warriors in pvp, wintrading in RBGs etc. come to mind).

    Take Skirmishes for example. Blizzard acknowledges that players all want these reiterated into the game. Now that you no longer have Arena teams, it makes more sense than ever to implement skirmishes so that players can play with friends without destroying their personal rating. Blizzard's response? Yeah, it would be awesome but we have no way of implementing that at this time. My own theory? They'll introduce it as a "new feature" in the next expansion pack, alongside with new character models that were probably finished six months ago.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by achromatickang View Post
    Not really. They even stole most of their major ideas directly from Trion. Transmog? Yeah, Rift idea. PVP power and baseline resilience? Both Trion concepts. Those Kor'Kron dailies are basically a copy/paste from Rift Instant Adventures. Challenge Modes that scale item level back? Yeah, also a Rift feature. I could go on and on, but it's already getting redundant. Honestly I can't think of anything Warcraft has come up with in recent times that wasn't directly taken from Trion. Even a majority of the raid mechanics in MoP were copy/pasted from Rift.
    most of this shit rift did were taken from other MMORPGs such as DCUO, WAR, and even WoW.

    there isn't an original bone in either of their bodies, and thats ok cause if it works, use it.
    games are an iterative medium, it doesn't really matter who did it first, it matters who did it better.

    back to point, with as much as ACTI-BLZ has in pocket why is the siphoned amt 400mil?
    Last edited by maldias; 2013-07-08 at 09:33 PM.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchor View Post
    I've seen this happening before several times. It's usually followed with EA swooping in and childing yet another quality company.

    Either way they're going to have to tighten their belts a few notches, because whatever apologist arguments people might bring to a biased fan forum that always sees everything with pink goggles, this is definately not good news for Activision-Blizzard. And with Activision being Blizzard's "boss", they're going to do most of the cuts in the Blizzard company instead of in their Call of Duty teams.
    Your arguments seem colored more by Blizz-hate than an understanding of how corporate debt markets work.

  6. #46
    Scarab Lord Shampro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Crucible
    Posts
    4,680
    Quote Originally Posted by achromatickang View Post
    Sorry you guys, I didn't mean to turn this into a tangent about Rift VS. WoW, but I do feel like Blizzard slacks a bit. I feel like better management of the Development team due to lower funds might actually be a good thing. Currently Ghostcrawler will come out and acknowledge that something about the game is bad, but players still have to wait for four months for it to get fixed (dailies, warriors in pvp, wintrading in RBGs etc. come to mind).

    Take Skirmishes for example. Blizzard acknowledges that players all want these reiterated into the game. Now that you no longer have Arena teams, it makes more sense than ever to implement skirmishes so that players can play with friends without destroying their personal rating. Blizzard's response? Yeah, it would be awesome but we have no way of implementing that at this time. My own theory? They'll introduce it as a "new feature" in the next expansion pack, alongside with new character models that were probably finished six months ago.
    Why are you talking about features and Ghostcrawler when it has nothing to do with the topic at hand?

  7. #47
    Herald of the Titans SL1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois.
    Posts
    2,824
    Quick everyone go buy a name change we have to save wow.

  8. #48
    Brewmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,292
    If anything, we may start to see an increase in urgency from the WoW devs. There may be more things popping up on the cash shop, including transmog sets. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, so we will have to wait and see.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by spinachsandwich View Post
    quick everyone go buy a name change we have to save wow.
    buy pets!!!!.

  10. #50
    The linked article and the articles it in turn links to really don't seem to contain a lot of useful information.

    It kind of sounds like Vivendi may be trying to force Activision-Blizzard to do a share repurchase/buyback in an effort to reduce the number of shares in circulation and effectively bump the earnings per share. From my understanding a share buyback is essentially the issuing company spending their free cash flow to buy back shares from the public which then get taken off the market. However, I'm still not sure how this helps Vivendi financially unless they assume that the Activision-Blizzard share price will be falling quite a bit in the coming months (share buybacks seem a weird way around insider trading laws too). I also don't know how they could force a share buyback as only the issuing company can do that. I really am not great on finance though and maybe part of owning the controlling portion of the shares gives them authority to force a repurchase? Other than this I'm not aware of how they could 'siphon cash' from Activision-Blizzard.

    It would be awesome if someone on these forums who actually knows about corporate finance could chime in and shed some light on what the possibilities here are!

  11. #51
    Moderator Gehco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FEEL THE WRATH OF MY SPANNER!!
    Posts
    5,692
    Quote Originally Posted by Descense View Post
    I am 100% sure that you cant just take that much money out of company over night. (at least by some law)

    Some other stuff:
    US$ 11.49 billion (2012)
    Vivendi (61% stocks)
    You can't, you have to process the papers through the legal acts as well as tax system and the board for approval and major share-holders.
    If you disapprove of moderation, seek an Admin or Global Moderator.
    Stuff can be fixed, just get enough glue or duct tape!

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchor View Post
    I've seen this happening before several times. It's usually followed with EA swooping in and childing yet another quality company.

    Either way they're going to have to tighten their belts a few notches, because whatever apologist arguments people might bring to a biased fan forum that always sees everything with pink goggles, this is definately not good news for Activision-Blizzard. And with Activision being Blizzard's "boss", they're going to do most of the cuts in the Blizzard company instead of in their Call of Duty teams.
    ummmm you do know that blizzard is worth more money than ea right? ea couldnt afford to buy blizzard

  13. #53
    The Lightbringer UnifiedDivide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    3,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchor View Post
    I've seen this happening before several times. It's usually followed with EA swooping in and childing yet another quality company.

    Either way they're going to have to tighten their belts a few notches, because whatever apologist arguments people might bring to a biased fan forum that always sees everything with pink goggles, this is definately not good news for Activision-Blizzard. And with Activision being Blizzard's "boss", they're going to do most of the cuts in the Blizzard company instead of in their Call of Duty teams.
    When you call Activision the boss of Blizzard, I know you're not entirely sure what you're talking about.

    Sure, this will likely have some form of effect. But I don't see it as being something major in the long term.

    Rarely updated...

  14. #54
    Considering blizzard makes about 80,000,000 a month I'm pretty sure they will be fine. They can practically print money from naive gamers by selling useless mounts etc. Also expect a cash shop.

  15. #55
    Mechagnome Zaelkath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    In your dreams.
    Posts
    644
    The only reason I could see this not happening is because of the crazed hot pocket fueled fans out there that would form a real-life raid to kill Vivendi.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    Your arguments seem colored more by Blizz-hate than an understanding of how corporate debt markets work.
    I only present facts.

    Fact: Activision-Blizzard share holders are pissing their pants right now. Not even a company like Activision-Blizzard likes to hear that they're suddenly going to be 400m in debt. Do you even realize how greedy and nitpickery they already are with their funds? Blizzard constantly already has to do more with less and less resources because the share-holders want to earn more and more..
    ♦ Scepticist ♦ Critic ♦ INTJ

  17. #57
    Pit Lord HeatherRae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    2,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Darsithis View Post
    That's 10%. Not quite a "drop in the bucket". 40m? Sure. 4m? Definitely. But 10% is a nice chunk of change.
    Yes, but it comes in stock shares. I mean, they'll own the stock. It would give them greater control, from what I'm understanding. I think we should see how this plays out, too.
    Tiriel <Demise> of US-Kel'Thuzad

    Thank you to Yoni for this AMAZING signature!

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Shampro View Post
    Why are you talking about features and Ghostcrawler when it has nothing to do with the topic at hand?
    The entire thread is based on the idea that the Quality of WoW may take a massive hit if Vivendi draws funds from the Blizzard branch. I'm simply disagreeing with that as many players, not just myself, feel that the development team is poorly managed. A re-structuring that forced said development team to work more efficiently due to reduced funding may not be such a bad thing. That is all.

    Edit: of course I could be dead wrong too. We could see a dramatic decrease in quality, but that's not guaranteed to be the case either.

  19. #59
    Immortal Destil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kanda's House
    Posts
    7,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchor View Post
    I only present facts.

    Fact: Activision-Blizzard share holders are pissing their pants right now. Not even a company like Activision-Blizzard likes to hear that they're suddenly going to be 400m in debt. Do you even realize how greedy and nitpickery they already are with their funds? Blizzard constantly already has to do more with less and less resources because the share-holders want to earn more and more..
    Just like your other post was filled with facts like Activision is Blizzard's boss, right?

    What actually is a fact is warped by your opinion, which in this case is the opinion that Blizzard is awful. That goes for anyone.

    THAT is a fact.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    When you call Activision the boss of Blizzard, I know you're not entirely sure what you're talking about.
    Financially Blizzard is Activision's little bitch, yes. People can deny it all they want because it doesn't fit in their "Blizzard are the Gods of the Universe"-view. But Activision has been having Blizzard by the balls ever since the merge. It's Activision who controls nearly all financing in the company.
    ♦ Scepticist ♦ Critic ♦ INTJ

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •