Why cant Blizzard leave Activision ?

[Amorac]

I think it's the phrasing, while technically correct saying "Activision-Blizzard bought out Vivendi" makes it sound like A-B became owners of Vivendi. "Acti-Blizz bought themselves out from Vivendi" is clearer.

Ah, ok, got your point then. But in the context it was correct

[Beuargh]

it's like asking Hulk to leave David Banner (or the other way around)

[Xilurm]

He has already been proven wrong as Vivendi was never purchased nor was Blizzard.

- - - Updated - - -

NO it is noto the exact same thing. Everyone is claiming Activision is in control of Blizzard. They are not. They are a separate company with their own CEO. The holding company is of people from Activision and Blizzard combined. Both companies still make their own decisions and make their own decisions on their own games. Activision-Blizzard does not make any game development decisions. As long as the game makes money, they are happy. IF they are not happy, they will change leaders, not make game development decisions.

You really think they weren't forced to add a levelling boost to TBC Classic? Or the mount? Or sell it as a deluxe edition? You think those same people who were saying 2 years before that, that classic shouldn't be changed and it should remain classic made those decisions?

[Pann]

Now you move the goalposts. It has been explained to you how this merger works. ACtivisions shares were put into the new holding company. The holding company became the owner of both Blizzard and Activision. Activision ceased trading when the holding company was created because they and Blizzard both became subsidiaries to the new holding company.

Again, what I say is accurate and is publicly available information as required by law. Activision does not own Blizzard Period.

I am not, I am highlighting to you that a share in ATVI prior to the merger is the same as a share in ATVI today because they are the same company but with a different name.

What you explained and what actually happened are not the same thing. From Activision's 2nd Dec 2007 press release "On closing of the transaction, Activision will be renamed Activision Blizzard and will continue to operate as a public company traded on NASDAQ under the ticker ATVI." - https://investor.activision.com/stat...4-165f388591d5 - but what do they know, huh?

I think the kindest thing I say, based on the fact that you appear to believe that a multi billion publicly traded company - Activision - can have its ownership transferred to a new company - Activision Blizzard - and then be wound up without so much as a whisper from its shareholders, is that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

[Edge-]

You really think they weren't forced to add a levelling boost to TBC Classic? Or the mount? Or sell it as a deluxe edition? You think those same people who were saying 2 years before that, that classic shouldn't be changed and it should remain classic made those decisions?

No, because that's not how meddling like that usually works. The revenue from the boosts/mount is likely fairly inconsequential to Activision overall, they don't care about that. They don't care about small, nitty-gritty changes and MTX like a new mount of a level boost. They look at overall strategy, they look at monetization trends in the longterm, those are things where they have more control (see the IGN reporting on how Activision tightening budgets caused Blizzard to make a ton of bad choices, including how it resulted in the awful WC3R release) and have a bigger/broader impact within the company.

Kotick and Activision folks aren't sitting through design or monetization meetings, they're likely giving directives and altering budgets for the team leads and then letting Blizzard figure out how to deliver on those things however they can.

[exsanguinate]

Activision came in, blizz execs (and possibly old guard) got rich.
Well deserved btw, if the people behind d2, d3 and first couple expansions of wow dont deserve a golden handshake, who in the gaming industry does.

Could they potentially pool all the money they made doing the merger, and buy back blizzard? maybe, but would it be worth it?

Mike and co have left Blizzard to start a new game studio, supposedly based on their old values. That's alot cheaper than refunding a billion dollar merge deal with activision, and despite the drop in player retention, blizzard as a company (stocks) is way more expensive today, than when they merged. Increasing the cost of a potential buyback today.

There's no logical way they buy back the blizzard IP's before actiblizz has run them into the ground. (Probably wont be too many years yet.)

But isnt it Mikes fault they merged? Why leaving then for a new studio with old values if he sold his soul before. Kinda strange.

[Crillam]

Im not sure how that works,but since they merged long time ago,why they cant just split ? i really cant stand bobby kotick,nor his name nor his face and company leadership.

Either they have to agree to split or blizzard has to be bought buy another company. But for that to happen Blizzard has to be up for sale.

[Amorac]

No, they really aren't. Activision purchased Blizzard and Vivendi Games from Vivendi, the company was then renamed Activision Blizzard and even if what you said was true it would be nothing more than semantics as Blizzard could still not leave Activision Blizzard because it is owned by them.

No, Vivendi Games owned Blizzard. Vivendi Games was itself a division of Vivendi (or Vivendi Universal Publishing, not sure how Vivendi called itself back then).

Activision Blizzard was a jointly owned by Vivendi (52%) and private investors. The board was comprised of members of Vindendi Games and Activision. If anything Vivendi owned Activision Blizzard.

Activision Blizzard owns Activision Publishing, Blizzard Entertainment and King

Vivendi Games doesn't exist anymore and in a way neither does the original Activision.

[Pann]

But in the end the controlling share was owned by Vivendi SA.

And? It is well documented that as payment for Blizzard, Vivendi would receive equity in the form of shares. In Activision's own words "Vivendi to Contribute Vivendi Games Valued at $8.1 Billion, Plus $1.7 Billion in Cash in Exchange for Approximately 52% Stake in Activision Blizzard at Closing; Total Transaction Valued at $18.9 Billion"

In short Vivendi gave Activision Vivendi games and some cash in return for shares.

https://investor.activision.com/stat...4-165f388591d5

[Crillam]

You do know that Blizzard is not "owned" by Activision, right? They're not a subsidiary, or "just another studio under the Activision umbrella", etc. They merged.

Blizzard is owned buy Activison. In 2009 Activision and Vivendi Games (Owner of Blizzard Entertainment) merged. Then in 2013 Activision bought the majority of Vivendi games shares. So yes, activison then owns Vivendi which means they own Blizzard Entertainment.

[Xilurm]

No, because that's not how meddling like that usually works. The revenue from the boosts/mount is likely fairly inconsequential to Activision overall, they don't care about that. They don't care about small, nitty-gritty changes and MTX like a new mount of a level boost. They look at overall strategy, they look at monetization trends in the longterm, those are things where they have more control (see the IGN reporting on how Activision tightening budgets caused Blizzard to make a ton of bad choices, including how it resulted in the awful WC3R release) and have a bigger/broader impact within the company.

Kotick and Activision folks aren't sitting through design or monetization meetings, they're likely giving directives and altering budgets for the team leads and then letting Blizzard figure out how to deliver on those things however they can.

Well then I hope these two new leads know exactly how to deliver with said budgets.

[Mendzia]

This thread is like Twitch chat:
"LOOOOLL, Blizzard just leave Activision looool 4Head"
It really looks that way OP... but it is not that simple.

[Osmeric]

Blizzard operates completely independently from Activision.

Except for that thing where everything they own is owned by the parent corporation, all their budgets are set by the parent corporation, and where any exec at Blizzard serves at the whim of the CEO of the parent corporation -- Kotick can fire any of them at any time without prior approval of the board.

This is an exciting new definition of the word "independently".

[Xilurm]

What about what Jason Schreier is saying in his tweets though?

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/st...73178820386817

2013: Bobby Kotick buys out Vivendi and seizes total control of Activision Blizzard. Soon begins installing his own lieutenants at Blizzard

2017-2018: With Blizzard revenues tanking, Activision starts pushing the company to cut costs, produce more games at a faster pace

2018: Morhaime, sick of Kotick, resigns. Brack takes over

2019-present: Activision begins eliminating and consolidating many of Blizzard's non-game-dev roles, closing offices in France and The Netherlands

Today: Kotick ousts Brack, which both shows that he's taken action and gives him an opportunity to exert even *more* control over Blizzard's operations.

[nnelson54]

Yes, they really are and mergers don't work that way. Activision didn't purchase anything. Activision Merged with Vivendi and a holding company was created called Activision-Blizzard. Activision-Blizzard then then bought Vivendi's stake in ATVI out. At no time has Activision ever owned Blizzard and both have been subsidiaries under the Activision-Blizzard holding company the entire time. No semantics. Activision does not own Blizzard. Never has.

According to the multiverse theory somewhere there is a universe where all the Activision fans are crying about Blizzard ruining Activision after the company merged into Blizzard-Activision.

I sincerely think people only get this misguided idea because Activision's name is first in the new holding company name.

- - - Updated - - -

Except for that thing where everything they own is owned by the parent corporation, all their budgets are set by the parent corporation, and where any exec at Blizzard serves at the whim of the CEO of the parent corporation -- Kotick can fire any of them at any time without prior approval of the board.

This is an exciting new definition of the word "independently".

Sweet, now do Activision.

Activision-Blizzard is not the same thing as Activision. I said they operate completely independently from Activision.

[Demeisen]

Yes, they really are and mergers don't work that way. Activision didn't purchase anything. Activision Merged with Vivendi and a holding company was created called Activision-Blizzard. Activision-Blizzard then then bought Vivendi's stake in ATVI out. At no time has Activision ever owned Blizzard and both have been subsidiaries under the Activision-Blizzard holding company the entire time. No semantics. Activision does not own Blizzard. Never has.

This is incorrect. Activision, Inc. formed a wholly owned subsidiary, Sego Merger Corporation, which merged with Vivendi Games. Activision Inc. was subsequently renamed Activision-Blizzard, Inc. Wikipedia is misleading in this regard.

You do know that Blizzard is not "owned" by Activision, right? They're not a subsidiary, or "just another studio under the Activision umbrella", etc. They merged.

Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. is a subsidiary of Activision-Blizzard, Inc.

[Ianus]

You do know that Blizzard is not "owned" by Activision, right? They're not a subsidiary, or "just another studio under the Activision umbrella", etc. They merged.

yeah like guilds merge and gm is one of the merged guilds gms yes and he calls the shots

[bloodykiller86]

Im not sure how that works,but since they merged long time ago,why they cant just split ? i really cant stand bobby kotick,nor his name nor his face and company leadership.

they cant ever leave themselves. an external company would have to offer the parent company enough money to actually buy up the entire blizzard asset which is going to be very costly with the IPs they have. Also people should really stop freaking out over activision blizzard. The same people everyone idiolized are the same ones who made bad decisions for the game and company. the parent company doesnt get involved in the day to day goings at blizzard. at most they complain that they arent meeting targets due to (enter reason here)

[Itori]

Blizzard is ran by stockholders, accountants, and money hungry board members, they are not ran by the gamers we idolized 15 years ago. If blizzard is making profits they’re going to keep doing what they’re doing.

Heres to hoping the die hard fans or people too scared to leave because this is all they know wake up and realize they’re getting hammered raw with no lube. I wouldn’t even criticize for going to a private server at this point.

[Kallisto]

But isnt it Mikes fault they merged? Why leaving then for a new studio with old values if he sold his soul before. Kinda strange.

Mike was hardly involved as blizzard was already owned by another mega corp at the time. Mike leaving timing is very suspect, could easily be he knew about the situation and instead of facing the music wanted to keep himself somewhat clean image from the people saying "I didn't know" but is now being called out by other former (and current) bliz employees.