Microsoft to buy EA?

[MSUSteve]

Reuters is reporting (http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCNN2339589020090923?rpc=44) (via @InsideGaming (http://www.twitter.com/InsideGaming)) an uptick for EA stock amidst unsubstantiated rumors that Microsoft is looking to buy the company.

NEW YORK, Sept 23 (Reuters) - Shares of Electronic Arts Inc (ERTS.O (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=ERTS.O)) jumped more than 4 percent to $19.36 on Wednesday on unsubstantiated talk that Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=MSFT.O)) might be interested in buying the video game publisher, traders said.

I can't even fathom this actually happening. First, EA would be unbelievably expensive. I mean, look at what Bioware/Pandemic cost by themselves. Second, wouldn't there be some anti-trust implications there?

[Telefrog]

If they did buy EA, the first people to get the axe would be all the PC dev folks.

[Sarkus]

Reuters is reporting (http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCNN2339589020090923?rpc=44) an uptick for EA stock amidst unsubstantiated rumors that Microsoft is looking to buy the company.



I can't even fathom this actually happening. First, EA would be unbelievably expensive. I mean, look at what Bioware/Pandemic cost by themselves. Second, wouldn't there be some anti-trust implications there?

I doubt it's going to happen, but I don't see where it would be opposed on anti-trust grounds.

[caesarbear]

If they did buy EA, the first people to get the axe would be all the PC dev folks.
I think John Riccitiello is taking the axe to Fangorn Forest right now in order to build Bill Gates's army.

[Rob_Merritt]

If they did buy EA, the first people to get the axe would be all the PC dev folks.

True and that would completely suck.

[idrisz]

If they did buy EA, the first people to get the axe would be all the PC dev folks.

I can't think of any EA owned studios that makes PC Games only, same on Activision side.

[MSUSteve]

I doubt it's going to happen, but I don't see where it would be opposed on anti-trust grounds.
I don't know anything about antitrust, so my statement might be really stupid. I was just thinking that MS is already a huge software maker and if it secured EA and all its developers as 1st party exclusives for the Xbox, it would essentially leave Activision, 2k, and Ubisoft as the major third party developers.

[Lynxara]

It's not really antitrust until there are no more third-party developers.

Mainly if Microsoft buys EA then it's a major game-changer in the console wars. All of EA's franchises including Madden and Tiger Woods would go 360 exclusive. That would be a huge blow to PS3 and would do Wii no favors, either.

[MSUSteve]

1up (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3176152) has also picked up the story.

It would be very interesting to see how it went if MS owned EA. Would MS simply cut all development for PS3 and Wii or would it let that stuff go forward and make money off its competitors?

[Eightball]

First, EA would be unbelievably expensive.

Not unbelievably expensive in the grand scheme of things. After all, in the world of corporations, EA is relatively small (8k employees). You want expensive? When Pfizer bought Wyeth (50k employees) earlier this year, the purchase price was $68 billion (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/business/26drug.html). And Wyeth actually turned a nice 4 billion profit last year (and iirc EA turned a net loss...).

[Sarkus]

If MS did buy EA, they would be insane to make it a XB only publisher. Insane. And they aren't that insane in Redmond.

[Bill]

Not unbelievably expensive in the grand scheme of things. After all, in the world of corporations, EA is relatively small (8k employees). You want expensive? When Pfizer bought Wyeth (50k employees) earlier this year, the purchase price was $68 billion (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/business/26drug.html). And Wyeth actually turned a nice 4 billion profit last year (and iirc EA turned a net loss...).

Another way to put things in perspective is to note that MS has $6B in cash (and another $25B in short term investments) while EA's market cap is $6.5B...

[MSUSteve]

Not unbelievably expensive in the grand scheme of things. After all, in the world of corporations, EA is relatively small (8k employees). You want expensive? When Pfizer bought Wyeth (50k employees) earlier this year, the purchase price was $68 billion (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/business/26drug.html). And Wyeth actually turned a nice 4 billion profit last year (and iirc EA turned a net loss...).
That really puts it in perspective. I guess I got caught up in the scale of videogame companies. EA just happens to be about the biggest game company I can think of so anyone acquiring it seems like an impossibility to me. In my mind EA acquires. It doesn't get acquired. I appreciate the dose of reality.

[Balasarius]

If MS did buy EA, they would be insane to make it a XB only publisher. Insane. And they aren't that insane in Redmond.

MS to Sony - "You give us Blu-Ray, and maybe we'll still keep making games for the PS3."

[extarbags]

Mainly if Microsoft buys 360 then it's a major game-changer in the console wars. All of EA's franchises including Madden and Tiger Woods would go 360 exclusive. That would be a huge blow to PS3 and would do Wii no favors, either.

Er... what?

[Reed]

Er... what?
Well, you have to admit, it would be interesting if MS buys 360. Maybe they got the ex-CFO of Enron on board.

[Guido Jones]

I can't think of any EA owned studios that makes PC Games only, same on Activision side.

The studio formerly known as Mythic.

[idrisz]

The studio formerly known as Mythic.

12345

[CLWheeljack]

It's not really antitrust until there are no more third-party developers.

Mainly if Microsoft buys 360 then it's a major game-changer in the console wars. All of EA's franchises including Madden and Tiger Woods would go 360 exclusive. That would be a huge blow to PS3 and would do Wii no favors, either.

I'd think that the contracts for those franchises would say something to prevent them from going single platform, even if MS did buy EA. But even if so, there's probably nothing preventing them from making one experience significantly better than the other.

[Guido Jones]

12345

Still in a seperate building, still only working PC games. Still called Mythic by everyone.

[idrisz]

Still in a seperate building, still only working PC games. Still called Mythic by everyone.

not for long, consider they already announced that Mythic is getting absorb by Bioware.

[JD]

Personally, I think it's a bunch of BS based on some analyst(s) speculating the hell out of nothing. "There's talk." Huh.

[Alex Handy]

Great, now MS can fuck up another game company. FASA and Rare weren't enough?

[Royal Fool]

This is just crazy.

[Lynxara]

Yeah, uh, my typing failed in my first post, I fixed that. Sorry.

I seriously doubt there's anything in the contracts that mandates that EA's licensed sports games must go to every platform. My experience in reporting on league licensing has usually indicated that none of the sports organizations involved have any reason to give a damn. Their interests usually begin and end with making sure the licensed product reflects favorably on the league.

I doubt you'd see any projects killed overnight if Microsoft bought EA, but I seriously doubt there's enough money in selling Wii or PS3 software for Microsoft to permit anything new to be developed. I don't know the PS3 numbers well but I don't think EA's yet cracked a million copies with any Wii product.

What seems far more to the company's advantage is to make sure EA products are exclusive to 360, Zune, and PC. Apple has been quite cozy with EA when it comes to iPhone and Mac game support, so this would let Microsoft keep their only major competitor weak in an area where Microsoft is traditionally strong.

[Desslock]

I think John Riccitiello is taking the axe to Fangorn Forest right now in order to build Bill Gates's army.

Greatest line ever.

[MarchHare]

Great, now MS can fuck up another game company. FASA and Rare weren't enough?

You say that as if EA has a distinguished history of not fucking up game studios...lest we forget Bullfrog, Origin, Westwood, etc.

[Bahimiron]

Great, now MS can fuck up another game company. FASA and Rare weren't enough?

Yeah, it'd suck if Microsoft bought EA and made them all corporate and stuff.

[Rob_Merritt]

What seems far more to the company's advantage is to make sure EA products are exclusive to 360, Zune, and PC. Apple has been quite cozy with EA when it comes to iPhone and Mac game support, so this would let Microsoft keep their only major competitor weak in an area where Microsoft is traditionally strong.

Microsoft see's pc gaming as a threat so don't expect that either. EA Games: Challange Everything (only on the 360 and Zune)

[MattKeil]

I doubt you'd see any projects killed overnight if Microsoft bought EA, but I seriously doubt there's enough money in selling Wii or PS3 software for Microsoft to permit anything new to be developed. I don't know the PS3 numbers well but I don't think EA's yet cracked a million copies with any Wii product.

It's highly likely that a Microsoft-owned EA would continue its multiplatform development with a heavy tilt toward 360-exclusive content on those titles. Remember, this is Microsoft we're talking about, not Microsoft Game Studios specifically. Microsoft will do what makes the most financial sense, and considering 2/3 of Madden's sales are on Sony platforms, shutting down all non-360 development is probably not the financially sensible option.

Assuming this rumor is anything substantial, anyway.

[Murbella]

Great, now MS can fuck up another game company. FASA and Rare weren't enough?

I know microsoft isn't a saint and they are primarily responsible for destroying bungie, forcing them to make halo versions of everything under the sun instead of actual good games, but COME ON! This is fucking EA we're talking about... They are pretty much the most reviled publisher ever, EVER EVER EVER.

[Jason Cross]

If MS did buy EA, they would be insane to make it a XB only publisher. Insane. And they aren't that insane in Redmond.

They'd probably let EA finish making any reasonably late-term game also coming to PS3, but stuff that's a long ways out or just starting development would go 360-only.

I imagine EA under MS would still make Nintendo DS games (as Rare does), and maybe even iPhone games (at least until MS gets a real competitive Windows Mobile games and app business going, maybe with WinMo7).

At the very least, you'd see a lot more games with substantial periods of Xbox 360 exclusivity. It would definitely completely change the console wars.

Edit: as for EA PC Exclusives... there's The Sims, sort of. I mean there are Sims franchise games on other platforms, but Sims 3 is a PC affair, and doesn't show any signs of pulling a Spore and showing up all over the place. But even that is only tenuously PC exclusive, I'll admit.

[Kevin J Baird]

I wonder if this were to happen, what would come of EA's exclusive licenses with the NFL and other deals? It's probably written into the contracts, but sometimes if there is an ownership transfer these contracts can become null and void.

[Royal Fool]

I know microsoft isn't a saint and they are primarily responsible for destroying bungie, forcing them to make halo versions of everything under the sun instead of actual good games, but COME ON! This is fucking EA we're talking about... They are pretty much the most reviled publisher ever, EVER EVER EVER.

I don't know, Actizzard is a strong contender for that position now.

[Lynxara]

Microsoft see's pc gaming as a threat so don't expect that either. EA Games: Challange Everything (only on the 360 and Zune)

By PC I'm referring to EA's numerous casual and freemium games sectors, not traditional PC games development. That is pretty much over already for EA as far as I can tell, but free-to-play and casual are still rapidly-growing sectors. Microsoft would actually be fairly smart to try and slow Apple's progress there.

[BobJustBob]

I don't know, Actizzard is a strong contender for that position now.

Actard.

[Dave Long]

It's crazy talk to say that a Microsoft owned EA would continue to develop for Sony and Nintendo. Part of the benefit from that purchase is specifically pulling all those franchises onto your machine and taking them off the others, and that's doubly true of sports.

I don't think this rumor is any less likely to happen than any of the other bigger ones we've had come true over the last five to ten years. I can easily see Microsoft using this as a means of cornering the market for sports games, and I can also see it as EA shareholders looking to get as much as they can before the bottom falls out after this Holiday season.

Sure looks like they're not going to be happy with their sales this year, and that could easily play into thinking that Microsoft is offering more than enough money to make the sale worthwhile.

[BigWeather]

Let's pray somebody high up at Microsoft loves Ultima and feels up to putting out a new single-player party-based open-world (not like Fable's) turn-based RPG based on it.

[Kael]

I can't think of any EA owned studios that makes PC Games only, same on Activision side.

Blizzard only makes PC games. Though they port to Mac they havent made any console games in the past decade, and they dont have any on the schedule (since ghost was canceled).

If MS did buy EA, they would be insane to make it a XB only publisher. Insane.

Has a Microsoft studio ever released a game on a non-xbox console? Has a Sony studio ever release on a non-playstation? Has Nintendo ever released on xbox or playstation?

As far as I can tell Microsoft is much better off making all their games exclusives. Yes, they could make some money selling on other platforms. But pulling an EA sized developer is a death blow to the playstation that it will be hard to recover from.

And they aren't that insane in Redmond.

Microsoft invented the game of tying consumers to their products and have gone to court for it many times. Not only are they crazy enough to do it, they know how to do it right.

I dont think Microsoft even wants EA, they just want to pull the games from Sony's lineup.

Microsoft's massive game studio downsizing makes more sense if this was their goal. Knowing that they would be bringing in a company like EA would mean the Microsoft would have to shred a lot of weight to make room for them and would save millions by cutting those studios at ideal times (after games releases, before starting new projects) rather than waiting for the merger and then going through and cleaning up.

[JD]

Was any of the the recent actual mergers or merger attempts actually telegraphed through the stockmarket? As far as I remember, no one had predicted Activision and Vivendi Games going at it, and EA trying to swallow Take-Two wasn't 'unsubstantiated chatter' either, no? Same for EA buying BioWare/Pandemic.

[Kael]

Was any of the the recent actual mergers or merger attempts actually telegraphed through the stockmarket? As far as I remember, no one had predicted Activision and Vivendi Games going at it, and EA trying to swallow Take-Two wasn't 'unsubstantiated chatter' either, no? Same for EA buying BioWare/Pandemic.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isnt. For example EA tried to buy Take2 (I think I got those names right) and even though it didn't end up happening it was definitly a real attempt and was very publically reported through a few rounds of bargining.

[Dave Long]

The Take Two thing was talked about before it fell apart, yes. The other two were kept quiet, but I don't think the market cared too much about Bioware/Pandemic and Activision merging with Blizzard was similarly under the radar.

Gamers know Blizzard... the stock market, not so much. That's even more true about Bioware/Pandemic.

With EA, Take Two, Microsoft and Activision, they're mainstream enough that market people are probably sniffing around them often looking for news like this.

[JD]

For example EA tried to buy Take2 (I think I got those names right) and even though it didn't end up happening it was definitly a real attempt and was very publically reported through a few rounds of bargining.
Yes, it was obviously a very public thing. Duh. What I mean: Ahead of EA announcing their intention to acquire Take-Two, there was no 'chatter' either. Despite both companies having been in talks. (And Take-Two's management turning down EA's offer, which resulted in EA going for a public offer.)

[RickH]

Great, now MS can fuck up another game company. FASA and Rare weren't enough?

Rare was broken at the time Nintendo ditched its half-interest in the company. It just hasn't gotten any better.

[dogbert]

Has a Microsoft studio ever released a game on a non-xbox console? Has a Sony studio ever release on a non-playstation? Has Nintendo ever released on xbox or playstation?

Rare has developed DS games.

[RickH]

Has a Microsoft studio ever released a game on a non-xbox console? Has a Sony studio ever release on a non-playstation?

There were some Psygnosis games like Wipeout 64 that were released for Nintendo (and I believe Sega) hardware back in the day.

[Lynxara]

I have to wonder if Microsoft's studios will continue DS development now that games are coming to Zune, though.

[Moore]

I would assume so. I *think* the DS has a pretty low dev cost and huge install base compared to fancy new 3d zune.

[Ben Sones]

I have to wonder if Microsoft's studios will continue DS development now that games are coming to Zune, though.

I'd love to see the looks on the faces of the developers after they have been informed that they have to stop making games for the DS and focus on the Zune. "Think of all the tens of people that will be able to play your games!"

Actually, that's probably being generous. It's like being told that your hit television show is being moved from HBO to Wichita public access.

[alexlitel]

"Hay guyz, this EA stockz I ownz is't doing well."

"Yaz."

"We needz to startz a rumorz boutz buyoutz."

The EA/Microsoft rumor has had to come about twenty-thirty times before, and like those instances, this seems to be absolute bullshit.

On an unrelated note, I'd expect one of these companies to try to acquire PopCap in the next two years.

[MattKeil]

I thought EA already owned PopCap.

It's crazy talk to say that a Microsoft owned EA would continue to develop for Sony and Nintendo.

No, it really isn't, but it's not worth arguing about anyway because this rumor certainly isn't true if no further info has surfaced at this point.

[dogbert]

I thought EA already owned PopCap.


EA owns Pogo.

[MattKeil]

EA owns Pogo.

Aha, thanks. In that case, my money would be on MS snapping up PopCap at some point.

[Matt Nahman]

This will not happen, simple as that. EA in its current state is operating at a loss as it is even though its a multiplatform company. If Microsoft were to buy EA it would make it exclusive to them (what other advantage does it have to absorb them) and cut EA revenue by a staggering amount. If MS were to buy EA it would have to downsize the company drastically to compensate for the lack of revenue. At that point the amount of EA games produced would be reduced and you in turn lose a big reason to even purchase them. If MS bought EA it would be for madden (which it could lose the exclusivity on the NFL if they are limited to one console), the sims, and....that's all I got. What other games would be worth making from EA? It just doesn't make sense from a business perspective even when taking into account the market share gain MS would get from it.

[Talisker]

I wonder if this were to happen, what would come of EA's exclusive licenses with the NFL and other deals? It's probably written into the contracts, but sometimes if there is an ownership transfer these contracts can become null and void.
As long as EA (or their new owners) keeps paying the licensing fees, why would the NFL care? They'll still get their bazillions for the exclusive agreement either way.

[idrisz]

As long as EA (or their new owners) keeps paying the licensing fees, why would the NFL care? They'll still get their bazillions for the exclusive agreement either way.

fairly sure they get a cut on the profit too, if their games sell less, they make less on the royalties.

[schleprock]

It's gotta be a tempting purchase, but I have no idea if it's really being considered.

Between EA Sports, The Sims, and Bioware, you've got a compelling case to take in the company.

I'd expect the "right-sizing" carnage to be extreme if it happens. Seems like Microsoft would be in it for the franchises only. Redundant B team studios would get nuked without a second thought.

[slantz]

Aha, thanks. In that case, my money would be on MS snapping up PopCap at some point.
Wow, you really want someone to buy PopCap, huh? Who says PopCap wants to be bought?

[alexlitel]

Who says PopCap wants to be bought?Which is probably why it won't happen, but I don't doubt someone would love to make that acquisition.

[Jason Cross]

Wow, you really want someone to buy PopCap, huh? Who says PopCap wants to be bought?

Also, PopCap is doing just fine the way they are, thank you very much. It's not like they need someone to take them over so they start making awesomer games, or cheaper games, or whatever. (though... more iPhone games, please)

I think EA's operating loss would be hugely reduced or eliminated if MS bought them. Simply axing all the developers necessary for PS3 and Wii development, and killing off projects that are essentially totally different on the Wii and PS2, would dramatically reduce costs. Presumably, the idea would be that popular franchise games, which make the most money anyway (Madden, Tiger Woods, FIFA, etc), wouldn't have their sales cut in half by dropping other platforms, since fans would simply buy the 360 version or get a 360 to play the next in their favorite series.

The NFL exclusivity is interesting. Regardless of whether or not the NFL would care, the fact is that the license may be non-transferable and void if EA gets bought. The NFL might seek the opportunity to start a new round of bidding for no other reason than to make MS end up paying the NFL a new chunk of money to reacquire the license. Or, the license may not go away.

[Jeff Green]

Hey, maybe this means I'll be able to bring back Games for Windows magazine!

[Coca Cola Zero]

I know microsoft isn't a saint and they are primarily responsible for destroying bungie, forcing them to make halo versions of everything under the sun instead of actual good games, but COME ON! This is fucking EA we're talking about... They are pretty much the most reviled publisher ever, EVER EVER EVER.


I for one was really glad that Bungie broke off from Microsoft so they could finally realize their dream of making original games again.

Like Halo 3: ODST.

And Halo: Reach.



--

Snark aside, Microsoft just spent the last couple of years more or less dismantling their internal game studios save for Rare and Lionhead... it would be pretty odd for them to cap that off by buying EA... but who knows, they've done stranger stuff in the past.

[pyjamarama]

I think this rumor is so unbelievable that a investigation about stock trading will probably happen once things calm down.

[idrisz]

wasn't halo just a remake of marathon?

[Huzurdaddi]

If MSFT did this it would be the best 10B they have spent in a long time.

So much better than the (6B!!!!) AQNT deal, man that made me mad when I was at MSFT, even though I made some coin off of it.

The last acquisition that made sense for MSFT was Great Planes and that was a long time ago.

I fear that if MSFT doesn't burn its cash on something soon (like EA) it will do something insanely stupid like acquire facebook for 20B or so. God.

[Rock8man]

Link (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/09/23/rumor-microsoft-looking-to-take-over-ea/)
Update 2: Microsoft has followed up on its earlier statement, telling Joystiq: "Microsoft has no plans to purchase Electronic Arts."

So can we now say "Nothing to see here. Move along"?

[scotthal]

Hey, maybe this means I'll be able to bring back Games for Windows magazine!

I now officially support this rumor.

As for PopCap being bought, my money is and has been on Apple. If Apple really wants to push the iPod Touch as a gaming console, they need a first party studio, and none fit the iPod/iPhone demographic better than PopCap. And Hiro, wanting to be bought generally comes into play shortly after the dump trucks full of money pull into your driveway.

[Rob_Merritt]

Hey, maybe this means I'll be able to bring back Games for Windows magazine!

Ah, this explains it. Microsoft wants to buy EA just to destory all of Jeff's hopes and dreams once again.

[slantz]

I fear that if MSFT doesn't burn its cash on something soon (like EA) it will do something insanely stupid like acquire facebook for 20B or so. God.
Facebook is now cashflow positive, and lots of companies (EA, UbiSoft, PopCap) are making games for it. Zylom and Playfish (the two biggest Facebook game developers) are each expected to have made 9 figures in revenue this year.

Facebook wouldn't be a bad move, though of course the question would be the price...

[Jose Liz]

The odds of this happening are between 0-1%.

1) EA has been in a negative earnings trend for five years now (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=ERTS). The company lost a $726MM over the past five year period. Their core franchises aren't generating the profits they used to.

2) Given 1), Microsoft's primary reason for acquiring the company would be to screw over Sony. I'm not sure if it would actually work but given that EED is barely profitable, acquiring another money-losing company would definitely draw SEC scrutiny. They're essentially using profits from their monopolies (Office, Windows) to subsidize another division. The government isn't a huge fan of that.

[Kael]

Facebook is now cashflow positive, and lots of companies (EA, UbiSoft, PopCap) are making games for it. Zylom and Playfish (the two biggest Facebook game developers) are each expected to have made 9 figures in revenue this year.

Facebook wouldn't be a bad move, though of course the question would be the price...

Facebook wouldn't be a good deal because neither party would gain any significant advantage from being linked to the other.

Microsoft is happy to speculate on future trends and position itself in many markets hoping to profit from them. But it isn't likely to buy a market leader unless it believes that the market is critical to Microsoft's future survival, which Facebook isn't.

[Midnight Son]

Anti trust out the ass.

[red guy]

Facebook wouldn't be a good deal because neither party would gain any significant advantage from being linked to the other.
I don't know about that; Microsofts acquisition of hotmail and subsequent rollout of MSN seems to have worked out OK for them. I think they'd like to have a major online networking site under their belt, although I'm not sure why; maybe it's the "when people see computers, they should think Microsoft" strategy.

Re: "Nothing to see here. Move along" suggestion: Trusting PR statements about secret preparations for company buyouts, console price drops and/or Beatles Singstar, is a foolish thing to do. The public statement by Microsoft says exactly zilch about what's going on in secret.

[alexlitel]

I think this rumor is so unbelievable that a investigation about stock trading will probably happen once things calm down.I don't know if an investigation will ever happen, but I can't imagine this came out anywhere else other than investors engaging in dubious practices.

Re: "Nothing to see here. Move along" suggestion: Trusting PR statements about secret preparations for company buyouts, console price drops and/or Beatles Singstar, is a foolish thing to do. The public statement by Microsoft says exactly zilch about what's going on in secret.Uh, Beatles Singstar still does not exist. Given the number of times this has popped up before, it's far more foolish to believe there is any truth to this inane rumor than to believe the PR statement.

[Rock8man]

Plus the PR statement isn't a standard "we don't comment on rumors", it's a flat out denial.

And yes, Beatles Singstar doesn't exist, so that doesn't support your case. It's just the Beatles game packed in with a couple of Singstar branded microphones. Just a hardware bundle.

[red guy]

Plus the PR statement isn't a standard "we don't comment on rumors", it's a flat out denial.

And yes, Beatles Singstar doesn't exist, so that doesn't support your case. It's just the Beatles game packed in with a couple of Singstar branded microphones. Just a hardware bundle.
Let's agree that Beatles Singstar is a hardware bundle.

And "no comment" is a useful comment when you don't want to be portrayed as a lying sack of shit at a later date (for example: crime suspects, politicians). If you're Microsoft PR, however, that isn't your primary concern.

[Kunikos]

You say that as if EA has a distinguished history of not fucking up game studios...lest we forget Bullfrog, Origin, Westwood, etc.

True but that's ancient history in video game dog-years (not that it still doesn't hurt that those studios were wrecked). EA's label partnership stuff with the big development studios like Valve have apparently been quite different. Anyone at Mythic who complained about stuff with EA is probably very defensive because they made a game that learned just about nothing from the real reasons of the success of WoW (or smaller games like LOTRO) and the failures of other MMOs. The folks at Bioware seem to be pretty happy with their role in the "new" EA as well, and it's crazy to think that we are getting a LucasArts co-published title with the SW:TOR MMO. I don't think that would EVER have happened with the "old" EA.

[Kunikos]

I don't know about that; Microsofts acquisition of hotmail and subsequent rollout of MSN seems to have worked out OK for them. I think they'd like to have a major online networking site under their belt, although I'm not sure why; maybe it's the "when people see computers, they should think Microsoft" strategy.

That seems like Google's strategy lately-- "when think the internet, you will think Google products." They've got their systems prominently placed on the newer smart phones (iPhone, Android), they've got free software bundles with their customizations built in (Google Pack), etc.

The only thing that would suck about Microsoft acquiring EA is that they would shove the Games for Windows Live into every product that comes out, regardless of whether it makes sense or that it sucks hard.

[Chris Nahr]

It's not going to happen, folks. There's no way this would get past the monopoly watchdogs in America and Europe.

[Kraaze]

It's not going to happen, folks. There's no way this would get past the monopoly watchdogs in America and Europe.

I agree it's not going to happen, but I think in America it could certainly pass antitrust scrutiny. There may be some token concessions made in terms of spinning off this studio or that one as independent entities but the whole deal could be made to work.

[Dave Long]

I'm not sure why anti-trust comes into it at all. There are thousands of competing game development studios. All this does is give Microsoft another one in-house.

If the NFL exclusivity thing passed muster, having the NFL on one console probably will too.

[pyjamarama]

What monopoly? Microsoft and EA combined are smaller than Nintendo. There are many reasons for this not to happen monopoly doesn't seam to be one of them.

[Jose Liz]

They are using profits from their monopolies to strong-arm themselves in another market.

[Bob Violence]

Very few modern antitrust cases involve out-and-out monopolies. The "it's not antitrust if there are still competitors" line didn't help MS too much with the Intuit deal.

[Ben Sones]

What monopoly? Microsoft and EA combined are smaller than Nintendo.

Er, EA is the second-largest game publisher in the world, after Blizzavision. And Microsoft has cash reserves that are larger than Nintendo's net worth. In fact, I'm pretty sure they have cash reserves that exceed Nintendo's market cap. Nintendo is larger than MS's games division, and they are definitely a larger company than EA, but they are primarily a hardware company. EA publishes a lot more games than Nintendo, and Microsoft would very much come under anti-trust scrutiny if they wanted to acquire EA.

Not that it's going to happen. This is a silly rumor, people.