By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
CGI-Quality said:
BrokenBones646 said:
CGI-Quality said:

Humor me, how do you know it wasn't prudent? What makes that apparent?

They recently lost money, and instead of waiting to get out of the hole (which they will) they put themselves more in the hole by buying a studio which will take years to turn a profit (but again will) that was already making exclusive games for them and wasn't going anywhere. Here's an example, lets say you are in debt, but steadily making moeny and will get out of it, instead of waiting to get out of you it put yourself in more debt by buying an asset which you won't make your money off of for several years, sure if everything goes smoothly you should come out ahead but if something bad happens in the meantime you have less of a safety net.

But wouldn't you agree that much of what you're saying is more speculative than truth? I mean, it's never that simple; losing money in one faucet doesn't mean all faucets are down for the count. Besides, being a multi-billion dollar company that makes back much of what they lost on game sales, 191 million won't be very hard to deal with (especially compared to the billions lost between 2006 & 2009).

Therefore, nothing makes it apparent that the buyout wasn't prudent and since they haven't appeared to have much trouble acquiring companies and staying afloat, I think things will be fine in the future.

They already aquired several studios recently though, and they should be fine but they have less of a safety net then they did before and a prudent move is doing something that increases your margin for error not decreases it.