| Ka-pi96 said: Interesting, I never knew they were called Ape before. Although considering they're listed as an associate rather than a subsidiary on their annual financial report that should mean they own less than 50% of them, in which case they still don't have a controlling interest in the Pokemon franchise. |
Not entirely true as seen with WarpStar where Nintendo own 50% of them and they're still associates. It comes down to how they structure some of these companies for their own business for example it's possible Nintendo could fully own Creatures but has set up the situation so stock is own possibly by proxy on top of their own direct ownership in order to safe guard them as an asset to prevent investors and such from prying into the asset and claiming returns from them. Business has a high flexibility to approach after all and the fact that stock details are kept under wraps in some financial smoke screen means some kind of control is being green lit and for everyone who has stake to be fine with it suggests some kind of loop hole of such maybe in play here.
