By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Veknoid_Outcast on 11 July 2016
Edit Thread
Aquamarine said:

For reference:

 

Aquamarine said:

You're correct.

For those who are confused, it's like this:

 

Nintendo directly owns 32% of the Pokemon Company

Nintendo owns 35% of Creatures Inc. -> Creatures Inc. owns 32% of The Pokemon Company -> Nintendo indirectly owns 11% of The Pokemon Company

=

Nintendo owns 43% of The Pokemon Company directly and indirectly

 

 

30% of revenues from Pokemon Go go to The Pokemon Company, so Nintendo indirectly benefits from 13% of revenues of Pokemon Go (but they'll most likely just get reinvested into Pokemon)

In addition, an extra 10% of revenues go directly to Nintendo

=

Therefore, Nintendo benefits from 23% of revenues in total, excluding their small share in Niantic and the dividends they may accrue.

 

 

 

Veknoid_Outcast said:
This ownership structure of Pokemon is fascinating.

Could any of the parties involved split from the other? Could Gamefreak walk away from Nintendo?

Nintendo has significant influence over Creatures Inc. (35% direct ownership) and The Pokemon Company (43% direct and indirect ownership), so in the event Pokemon or Creatures Inc. tried to give the middle finger to Nintendo, then Nintendo would invoke a complex web of agreements and Japanese law to prevent Pokemon from going third-party even though Nintendo theoretically doesn't own a majority of Pokemon. Right now, Creatures Inc. can't do anything, so they just fall in line like good little peons.

If Nintendo decided to sell their share in Creatures Inc., then Game Freak and Creatures Inc. could technically gang up against Nintendo and put full-fledged Pokemon on iOS / Android / PlayStation 4 / Xbox / Steam. But that's not going to happen any time soon.

 

Game Freak is a third-party developer (Nintendo doesn't own a single share of Game Freak), so theoretically Game Freak could walk away any time they want from Nintendo and Nintendo would have to find a new Pokemon developer. That's why Sega just published a Game Freak game...nobody can tell Game Freak how to run their company.

But obviously Game Freak doesn't want to let go of its cash cow because that would be an incredibly risky venture with no guarantee of success. Pokemon works for them and it keeps them in business, so no need to rock the boat.

Thanks! This is so interesting to me. Is there anything Nintendo could do to achieve 51% ownership of the Pokemon Company? And would that translate to majority ownership of Pokemon the IP?