you are referring to vivendi talking about firing kotick in 2013~ over his insistence on getting nearly half the vivendi stake for his investment group? I certainly found that interesting, but no one ever confuses business at this level with anything but mercenary. (I am still amazed that deal was found legal).
for whatever reason, vivendi found it best to just cash out and be gone rather than push the issue. For everyone who is not a blizzard fan, Kotick IS the face of activision-blizzard and for the street the association is very positive. Losing him would harm a/b's image with the folks who actually matter [I believe this was actually mentioned as a reason in some court case where this stuff came out]. Vivendi could have done themselves net harm, financially, by taking the approach of trying to remove kotick, even if they succeeded. at that point they still were majority owners of the company, they had more to lose than anyone.
The king issue is interesting, and I don't know a lot about it. Were they even offered stock vs. cash? cash, depending on where the corporation was domiciled, has all kinds of complicated issues attached, and that is an awful lot. Where there other interested bidders? Why not (EA for example)?