Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

June 16, 2008 -

GamePolitics readers may recall that Electronic Arts' latest tender offer for outstanding Take-Two shares expires today.

Will EA extend its deadline? Raise its offer price? Drop out?

An extension seems likely, given that the Federal Trade Commission has not completed an evaluation of whether an EA takeover of T2 would have antitrust implications. As we've reported, Take-Two is dragging its heels on that process, and an annoyed FTC is dragging T2 into court over the matter next week. And, of course, EA has placed the acquisition on hold, pending the FTC's findings.

Over at Level Up, Newsweek's N'Gai Croal has insightful analysis from former FTC attorney Justin Blankenship on the government agency's current dust-up with Take-Two.

Meanwhile, Forbes speculates that EA wants to close the deal ASAP in order to lock down Rockstar's Sam and Dan Houser before their contract with T2 expires next February:

Once that contract expires in 2009, the Housers will hit the open market. Despite the high price their services will command (mostly in the form of extensive royalties), game publishers may well enter into a heated bidding war for the Houser brothers in the hopes of seizing the next Grand Theft Auto phenomenon.

If Electronic Arts wants the minds behind Grand Theft Auto, it's going to have to move quickly. To gain the upper hand, Electronic Arts may be forced to pull the trigger and raise its $25.74 per share bid to around $30 per share--a move most analysts believe essential if Electronic Arts is serious about the Take-Two acquisition. Control of Take-Two would grant EA the rights to the Grand Theft Auto series, which the Redwood City-based publisher could then use to sweeten negotiations with the Housers. Otherwise, there's nothing stopping the brothers from setting up a rival series at a new studio.

 

 


Comments

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

I'm all for freedom of ttnet vitamin speech and allowing rent a car game makers to put whatever they want in games, but there's one thing about this app that has me scratching my head.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but from araç kiralama the previous article araba kiralama on this I gathered that players can use Google maps in-game to find the other (real-life?) dealers in their area.  If this is the case, has travesti anyone considered what's stopping someone from using this app to actually move drugs between hands for reals?

But majority araba kiralama of their outrage araç kiralama stems from what it could DO TO children, not the content itself.  Talk to one of these people and you'll find they don't think any books kiralık araba should be banned from children.  Mention American Psycho and they talk about kiralık araç the redeeming value of using imagination to construct a story.  Reading, no matter what the content, is largely viewed as a consequenceless activity for people of any age.  The reason why I mention American Psycho is because of the content itself.  Gaming never has and likely never will have any scenes where someone has sex with a severed head.  Not gonna happen.  Yet despite this, they'll fight tooth and nail to protect their children from two boys kissing in Bully but whatever they read is harmless... yeah.

The entire arguement is kiralık oto based upon a social normality inflicted by luddites who can't figure out the controls for Halo so it's frightening and terrifying and obviously the cause of youth violence on the rise even though, in reality, it's in decline (which is actually a HUGE suprise given minibüs kiralama the economies status).  In  a perfect world, we would have parents that actually parent.  The idea of sales restrictions on media on oto kiralama any form to accomidate parental unwillingness to get involved with their child's life is the real problem to me.  Here I am, 32 years old, and being held up at a self-scan rent a car needing to show ID before I can buy a $10 M rated game all because Soccer Momthra can't be bothered to look at the crap Billy Genericallystupidson does in his free time.  It's too hard for her, so I have to suffer?

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

on one hand, if EA does accuire TT, then the System Shock franchise may be revived. And while Take-Two currently owns the X-Com franchise, they certainly aren't doing anything with it.

岩「…Ace beats Jack」

岩「…I can see why Hasselbeck's worried about fake guns killing fake people. afterall, she's a fake journalist on a fake news channel」

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

Who owns GTA? Take-Two or Rockstar? Does T2 also own Rockstar or is it the Housers and whomever else is higher up in the company? Is this contract with T2 just to be their publisher and that's it or is it just a contract to retain the services Dan and Sam Houser? If everything (especially GTA) stays with T2 when their contract is up are they really going to be worth that much?

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

Why is t he FTC being stupid as hell? they really need to stop EA not TT.

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

Read the Level Up link GP provided.  It explains the FTC's position.

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

I am certain that more is being made of Rockstar's position/role in this takeover than is warranted.  This take over is definitely about the TTWO/EA Sports competition (or lack thereof).  From what a little bird (an employee of one of the myriad Rockstar studios) tells me, the Rockstar folks are mostly sanguine about this possible takeover, thinking that it won't effect them much - being that Rockstar owns the majority of it's IP, and has met with it's success being left to it's own devices.  So EA will likely do much the same with them, or risk sending the Rockstar talent running for a new start-up.

The Housers will be a big issue for either company, after their contract is up, so how is that relevant for a take-over?  One could say having major talent at the end of a contract is a liability for EA as much as one could say that they are a bonus for them during the aquisition.

Let's keep our focus on the real issue here, and that is that EA wants absolutely NO competition on sports games, and the takeover would effectively kill what little competition TTWO can offer, what with the NFL deal.

EA will extend the deadline - at least until the FTC findings.  This tactic will render TTWO's stalling moot (except philosophically).  I doubt they will raise the share price, their current offer is considered fairly good, and they had to get fairly sizeable loans to deal with the intitial offer.

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

Any company who gets Rockstar after the contract ends better set aside some  money for fax machine replacement.

-kurisu7885

Re: Today is Deadline Day for EA's Latest Take-Two Offer

Yeah, that's very true.  Unless of course the Fax Machine Scourge gets disbarred in September.  Oh wait...

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician