• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next Xbox Reveal Set For May 21, 10:00 A.M. PST, Livestreamed

Status
Not open for further replies.

FordGTGuy

Banned
What I'm getting tired of is this crap that just because a few websites said so we're no longer allowed to speculate because they can't be wrong... give me a break.

That's not how it works.


(Or rather it's not as simple as that)

I didn't say that's how it works I'm just giving perspective and Microsoft does indeed have enough to buyout Sony if they wanted.(If Sony was even willing to sell in the first place.)
 

Izick

Member
Oh shit, Paul Thurrott is "on assignment" and not on Windows Weekly this week. I'm guessing it's Xbox related, unless there's some sort of Blue event/scoop going on.

It's very boring, isn't there a specs thread for this?

I don't think so, especially since we don't even have concrete specs for the Nextbox. Hopefully once the console is a thing and we see some games, there will be one.

That's not how it works.


(Or rather it's not as simple as that)

You should at least explain your reasoning why.
 

jaosobno

Member


Cutting through hype, one post at a time.

Fuck, now that's an avatar! I'll wear this one with pride. Well done!

On a more serious note, I would be quite happy if Durango matched or exceeded PS4. However, this isn't likely. But what's most interesting is that Durango's specs aren't my biggest issue with the next Xbox. Is the Live availability in my country. See, I'm in a unsupported country which means I have to create fake (UK) account. However since Microsoft check your IP address against your reported location, I still get shafted by country locked content (to my knowledge this is M rated content).

Now if Microsoft, like Sony already does, supported my country officially, I probably wouldn't give two shits about specs and I would simply go with the console which offered better overall experience. Most of my games are multiplatform ones so I really don't care much about exclusives.
 

saladine1

Junior Member
Does anyone have that MS E3 gif of the guy with the glasses doing the chicken dance?

Don't know why but I'm dying to see it again...
 

Mario007

Member
I didn't say that's how it works I'm just giving perspective and Microsoft does indeed have enough to buyout Sony if they wanted.(If Sony was even willing to sell in the first place.)
The part in the bracket is the important part here.
You should at least explain your reasoning why.

Bill gates could buy Sony and Nintendo.
You can't just come in and 'buy the company'. First off we need to figure out what is actually meant by buying the company? Do you want 50%? maybe 75% just to get special resolutions passed as well? Or do you go with a complete hostile takeover for a 100% ownership of the company?

Then you need to start buying up the shares. You're not buying them from Sony. You're buying them from other shareholders. Do they want to sell them to you? Many might, but many might not. With the current trend of Sony shares I think many will want to retain the shares for a bit longer unless a really good deal came up.

There is your third uncertainty. You most likely won't be buying the shares in bulk for the market price. As I've said the current trajectory of Sony's shares is going up so many would want you to pay a higher price for the share if they were to part with them. As soon as you'd start hoarding shares though, and by this I mean having 5% of the company, the other shareholders will quickly realise that you're wanting to buy up the property. In fact with MS buying Sony's shares this would be all over the news. So the shareholders will hike-up the price simply because they know you want to buy up the company.

The fourth uncertainty lies with the management. As soon as they'd get the wind of MS buying up they would no doubt try to either buy up a considerable shareholding themselves so that MS would not have a controlling majority or try to dilute the shares. Now that isn't strictly legal but it could be easily believable that Sony issued new shares to raise capital given their situation.

Fifth hurdle to overcome in this case would be the Japanese governnment that is incredibly protective of its tech giants. Should the news of MS trying to buy up Sony become public knowledge you'd no doubt see the Japanese Central Bank buying up Sony's shares to prevent MS's to achieve a controlling majority in the company.

The shareholders might not be too happy about allowing MS in either. They can only alter their Articles of Association to give a first right to buy to existing shareholders should any other shareholder decide to sell its share, effectively being in control of who's buying up the shareholdings. In fact Sony might already have this clause (I don't know). Another effective way of protecting the company's interest would be to give the directors the right to decide whether or not to register the shareholder as he would become a member of the company. Usually the ground given for not doing so would be the fear for the company's best interests.

This is not even mentioning the Japanese government not agreeing to this during it's anti-competition investigation.
 
Insomniac was always a B developer. They were a B developer even when PS3 fans were trying to compare Resistance to Gears of War. They were a B developer when they cranked out a by-the-number HD sequel of Ratchet & Clank and people were touting them as graphical wizards. They were B developers when the GAF voted them "Developer of the Year" for pumping out 2 games back-to-back. And they were B developers when they churned out 2 more sequels to Resistance and 3 more sequels to Ratchet & Clank.

Although it's amusing to see the how the Sony fans that used to prop them up as top tier devs are now turning their back on them, rewriting history to claim that they were never an integral part of Sony's lineup, and generally being apathetic to them now that they're creating a new multiplatform IP.

Lets see how they survive now on their own merit.
 

i-Lo

Member
The part in the bracket is the important part here.



You can't just come in and 'buy the company'. First off we need to figure out what is actually meant by buying the company? Do you want 50%? maybe 75% just to get special resolutions passed as well? Or do you go with a complete hostile takeover for a 100% ownership of the company?

Then you need to start buying up the shares. You're not buying them from Sony. You're buying them from other shareholders. Do they want to sell them to you? Many might, but many might not. With the current trend of Sony shares I think many will want to retain the shares for a bit longer unless a really good deal came up.

There is your third uncertainty. You most likely won't be buying the shares in bulk for the market price. As I've said the current trajectory of Sony's shares is going up so many would want you to pay a higher price for the share if they were to part with them. As soon as you'd start hoarding shares though, and by this I mean having 5% of the company, the other shareholders will quickly realise that you're wanting to buy up the property. In fact with MS buying Sony's shares this would be all over the news. So the shareholders will hike-up the price simply because they know you want to buy up the company.

The fourth uncertainty lies with the management. As soon as they'd get the wind of MS buying up they would no doubt try to either buy up a considerable shareholding themselves so that MS would not have a controlling majority or try to dilute the shares. Now that isn't strictly legal but it could be easily believable that Sony issued new shares to raise capital given their situation.

Fifth hurdle to overcome in this case would be the Japanese governnment that is incredibly protective of its tech giants. Should the news of MS trying to buy up Sony become public knowledge you'd no doubt see the Japanese Central Bank buying up Sony's shares to prevent MS's to achieve a controlling majority in the company.

The shareholders might not be too happy about allowing MS in either. They can only alter their Articles of Association to give a first right to buy to existing shareholders should any other shareholder decide to sell its share, effectively being in control of who's buying up the shareholdings. In fact Sony might already have this clause (I don't know). Another effective way of protecting the company's interest would be to give the directors the right to decide whether or not to register the shareholder as he would become a member of the company. Usually the ground given for not doing so would be the fear for the company's best interests.

This is not even mentioning the Japanese government not agreeing to this during it's anti-competition investigation.

You have put in too much thought and time to retort to adolescent simple minded power fantasies that is on its way toward downward spiral as May 21st approaches. Still, it is a good read.
 

Ushae

Banned
Insomniac was always a B developer. They were a B developer even when PS3 fans were trying to compare Resistance to Gears of War. They were a B developer when they cranked out a by-the-number HD sequel of Ratchet & Clank and people were touting them as graphical wizards. They were B developers when the GAF voted them "Developer of the Year" for pumping out 2 games back-to-back. And they were B developers when they churned out 2 more sequels to Resistance and 3 more sequels to Ratchet & Clank.

Although it's amusing to see the how the Sony fans that used to prop them up as top tier devs are now turning their back on them, rewriting history to claim that they were never an integral part of Sony's lineup, and generally being apathetic to them now that they're creating a new multiplatform IP.

Lets see how they survive now on their own merit.

Is it pretty much confirmed they will be making an appearance?
 
The part in the bracket is the important part here.



You can't just come in and 'buy the company'. First off we need to figure out what is actually meant by buying the company? Do you want 50%? maybe 75% just to get special resolutions passed as well? Or do you go with a complete hostile takeover for a 100% ownership of the company?

Then you need to start buying up the shares. You're not buying them from Sony. You're buying them from other shareholders. Do they want to sell them to you? Many might, but many might not. With the current trend of Sony shares I think many will want to retain the shares for a bit longer unless a really good deal came up.

There is your third uncertainty. You most likely won't be buying the shares in bulk for the market price. As I've said the current trajectory of Sony's shares is going up so many would want you to pay a higher price for the share if they were to part with them. As soon as you'd start hoarding shares though, and by this I mean having 5% of the company, the other shareholders will quickly realise that you're wanting to buy up the property. In fact with MS buying Sony's shares this would be all over the news. So the shareholders will hike-up the price simply because they know you want to buy up the company.

The fourth uncertainty lies with the management. As soon as they'd get the wind of MS buying up they would no doubt try to either buy up a considerable shareholding themselves so that MS would not have a controlling majority or try to dilute the shares. Now that isn't strictly legal but it could be easily believable that Sony issued new shares to raise capital given their situation.

Fifth hurdle to overcome in this case would be the Japanese governnment that is incredibly protective of its tech giants. Should the news of MS trying to buy up Sony become public knowledge you'd no doubt see the Japanese Central Bank buying up Sony's shares to prevent MS's to achieve a controlling majority in the company.

The shareholders might not be too happy about allowing MS in either. They can only alter their Articles of Association to give a first right to buy to existing shareholders should any other shareholder decide to sell its share, effectively being in control of who's buying up the shareholdings. In fact Sony might already have this clause (I don't know). Another effective way of protecting the company's interest would be to give the directors the right to decide whether or not to register the shareholder as he would become a member of the company. Usually the ground given for not doing so would be the fear for the company's best interests.

This is not even mentioning the Japanese government not agreeing to this during it's anti-competition investigation.

IS this your thesis topic or something ??
 

Mario007

Member
Nobody cares Mario.
People asked for explanation, so I might as well give one.

You have put in too much thought and time to retort to adolescent simple minded power fantasies that is on its way toward downward spiral as May 21st approaches. Still, it is a good read.
Haha, cheers. It's not like I've got much else to be doing tonight anyway.
IS this your thesis topic or something ??
It's pretty simple economics + company law + current affairs. I thought it would be interesting to go through the motions of trying to see what would happen if MS wanted to buy Sony (or Nintendo for that matter).
 
Insomniac was always a B developer. They were a B developer even when PS3 fans were trying to compare Resistance to Gears of War. They were a B developer when they cranked out a by-the-number HD sequel of Ratchet & Clank and people were touting them as graphical wizards. They were B developers when the GAF voted them "Developer of the Year" for pumping out 2 games back-to-back. And they were B developers when they churned out 2 more sequels to Resistance and 3 more sequels to Ratchet & Clank.

Although it's amusing to see the how the Sony fans that used to prop them up as top tier devs are now turning their back on them, rewriting history to claim that they were never an integral part of Sony's lineup, and generally being apathetic to them now that they're creating a new multiplatform IP.

Lets see how they survive now on their own merit.

Damn. Ice cold. Can't disagree, though.
 

Izick

Member
You have put in too much thought and time to retort to adolescent simple minded power fantasies that is on its way toward downward spiral as May 21st approaches. Still, it is a good read.

You're misusing that armchair-psychology term.

Also, all I asked was for him to explain further for people who didn't know how it works.

"@Espio1: Heard about some interesting third-party Durango exclusives today. Three days to go..."

"@Espio1: @NaughtyGods games."

https://twitter.com/Espio1/status/335839382818942976

And here we go.
 
Insomniac was always a B developer. They were a B developer even when PS3 fans were trying to compare Resistance to Gears of War. They were a B developer when they cranked out a by-the-number HD sequel of Ratchet & Clank and people were touting them as graphical wizards. They were B developers when the GAF voted them "Developer of the Year" for pumping out 2 games back-to-back. And they were B developers when they churned out 2 more sequels to Resistance and 3 more sequels to Ratchet & Clank.

Although it's amusing to see the how the Sony fans that used to prop them up as top tier devs are now turning their back on them, rewriting history to claim that they were never an integral part of Sony's lineup, and generally being apathetic to them now that they're creating a new multiplatform IP.

Lets see how they survive now on their own merit.

That fuse demo, very c game quality
 

Nibel

Member
"@Espio1: Heard about some interesting third-party Durango exclusives today. Three days to go..."

"@Espio1: @NaughtyGods games."

https://twitter.com/Espio1/status/335839382818942976

i6iv4c8XFbIzQ.gif
 
You have put in too much thought and time to retort to adolescent simple minded power fantasies that is on its way toward downward spiral as May 21st approaches. Still, it is a good read.

It's always nice when the lurkers pop-in to tell everyone how to act.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom