EA Deadline on Take Two Passes

Roar

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7406946.stm

A deadline set by US video game giant Electronic Arts for shareholders in Take-Two Interactive Software to accept a $1.9bn(£968m) offer has passed.

EA revealed its unsolicited $25.74 a share move for Take-Two, the owner of Grand Theft Auto, back in February.

EA took the offer directly to Take-Two shareholders after its board rejected the bid as undervaluing the company.

Neither firm commented after Friday's midnight deadline, set by EA as the expiration for acceptance of its offer.

'Few more dollars'

Take-Two's board had refused to discuss a takeover with EA before the 29 April launch of "Grand Theft Auto IV."

Take-Two saw its stock close at $27.10 on the Nasdaq, down 0.8% but 5.2% above the $25.74 per share offered by EA.

"The market's probably suggesting that EA should come up with a few more dollars and that may be a likely a scenario," said Colin Sebastian, an analyst with Lazard Capital Markets.

"It doesn't seem like shareholders would tender at $25.74 if the stock is trading at $27."

dunno if this is the right forum, but it seems relevant

So EA won't be buying Take Two after all.

This is a good thing for Rock* and Grand Theft Auto in general, right?

AIR-AUSSIE

For sure, EA only ruin games and roll similiar games out every year with only incremental improvements.

Rockstar push the boundaries on each GTA game they hav realised till now, from huge environments to immense detail.

I'm glad they never thought of selling out, of course they never would, thats not rockstar's sytle.

Pacifico

Let the EA bashing commence!

Stephen

^^ I for one support this motion

No to GTA 2009/2010/2011 type trash.

Kinetic^

Great news.

Roar

the offer deadline has been extended until June 16th now

Ciaran500

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gta4
Distributor(s) Take-Two Interactive

The buy out wouldn't of effected GTA. Take Two don't have any creative control over the game in the same way EA doesn't have any control over Valve games.

Nailz

Well I for one don't want to see their logo on a Grand Theft Auto case anyway, even if R* are still making it! They don't deserve such a presious asset, it's a shame the deadline was extended, but let just hope TT's stock doesn't fall anymore and we'll be grand. We'll all buy in on it to keep it up!

L31mr0d

I don't necessarily think EA would of changed the way R* makes game but I do think they would of put more pressure on them to release more games and develop them faster, also they would of cut back on testing time to try and get the game to release faster.

EA doesn't kill game developing companies, instead it makes them kill themselves by pushing them to release games long before the company would of where it not for being owned by EA.

This is why EA is bad. They care more about the bottom line than the content of the games

Holsten

Huzzah! EA trying to monopolise the video game market is in no way good.

Take Two don't really need the money anyway, thankfully this is one company that will say **** off to EA.

Ciaran500

L31mr0d wrote: »

I don't necessarily think EA would of changed the way R* makes game but I do think they would of put more pressure on them to release more games and develop them faster, also they would of cut back on testing time to try and get the game to release faster.

EA doesn't kill game developing companies, instead it makes them kill themselves by pushing them to release games long before the company would of where it not for being owned by EA.

This is why EA is bad. They care more about the bottom line than the content of the games

Like I mentioned earlier this doesn't happen with Valve, I can't see it happening with R*, they're not exactly a small studio that would be relying on money from EA.

Holsten wrote: »

Take Two don't really need the money anyway, thankfully this is one company that will say **** off to EA.

Not so sure about that, they haven't exactly been telling EA to **** off. They turned down the $2bn offer because they were waiting for GTA to release before they enter into discussion.

KdjaCL

Rockstars deal with take two runs out next year.

EA could yet get R* but reckoned they wanted Gta4 release figures in their fiscal year more than anything else.


kdjac

steviec

L31mr0d wrote: »

I don't necessarily think EA would of changed the way R* makes game but I do think they would of put more pressure on them to release more games and develop them faster, also they would of cut back on testing time to try and get the game to release faster.

EA doesn't kill game developing companies, instead it makes them kill themselves by pushing them to release games long before the company would of where it not for being owned by EA.

This is why EA is bad. They care more about the bottom line than the content of the games

The same is true of all publishers.

EA have been pretty smart in recent years though, and it is obvious that Rockstar's current methods work well and EA would have the sense not to change that. See Maxis for example.

minidazzler

I am so happy, I was dreading the thought of EA owning anything to do with GTA and R* in general!!!!

Feckin fantastic!!!!

And EA's bid was much too low considering the franchise could be worth almost €2billion by its self!!!!

And The EA Scum would just add in Advertising for Real world products!!!

Single Malt

minidazzler wrote: »

And The EA Scum would just add in Advertising for Real world products!!!

Highly unlikely, if they ever got their hands on the franchise. Any tie with reality, and GTA will head for banville in most territories.

Markvtos

Single Malt wrote: »

Highly unlikely, if they ever got their hands on the franchise. Any tie with reality, and GTA will head for banville in most territories.

It hasn't stopped them putting ads in Burnout, Fifa, Tiger Woods...

Single Malt

Markvtos wrote: »

It hasn't stopped them putting ads in Burnout, Fifa, Tiger Woods...

Maybe not, but not one of those games has courted the controversy that GTA has. What I said is that you put anything from the real world in (to GTA), ie advertisements, the game will get banned in various territories worldwide - as the defence of a virtual world (the world is not real, but "just" an entertainment product) is nullified by ties to the real world (the ads). The reason a controversial game like GTA escapes the ban hammer is that there are no real ties to the world we live in, but the perceived ones. Adverts are too tangibile a link to reality, to avoid classification issues.

Aside, even if EA got their hands on the publishing rights, they will still have no say in the games content, as R* own the IP. If Take Two owned the IP, R* would now be a subsidiary of 2k studios (Take Two's in house developer team)

Nailz

Still, if EA got their way and won publishing rights, they'll still be making money on something they shouldn't be credited for! It would pain me to see that happening, along with their dirty logo on the artwork. They don't deserve the money for something that wasn't theirs, TT & R* are what made it what it is (literally).