By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - What happend to the "Sony is going to buy Rockstar" rumor?

Solid_Snake4RD on 06 April 2010
Grimes said:
jarrod said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

Actually, they don't.  Sony Corp overall has more total assets (and they could definitely leverage enough to buy T2) but Nintendo actually has more in liquid assets and cash reserves (ie: money).  When you consider that Sony is many, many times larger than Nintendo (180,000 employees to 4,000 employees) that's pretty staggering actually.

GM is a huge company too, that don't mean squat if expenses are high and there is a lot of debt and expenses.

Assets can carry debt and expenses, they aren't money in the bank. An unprofitable asset may be worse than owning no asset, because the asset carries debt which may be greater than the money that could obtain by selling that asset. The expenses for that asset could be greater than revenue generated as well.

wtf r u talking abt?

GM sells cars which are expensive and people don't buy expensive cars in recession but people can buy a $500 product in recessions.The product of both the companies appeal to different people.

GM faced this situation because they overloaded with subsidary which didn't make profit and you are comparing it to an electronics company

 

I am an Acoountancy and Finance student.I know how assets and revenue work



Around the Network
Linkasf on 06 April 2010
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Grimes said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

 

but they wudn't do it cause they only want Rockstar

Sony does not have more money than Nintendo. Sony has more assets but has much higher debt and expenses. Nintendo has built a huge cash reserve over the past few years and has little debt and low expenses.

u really think a company like Sony with $250B ASSESTS has less money than a company with $19 assets.

 

sony didn't just survive their huge losses with PS3 just like that.they have a big big pocket full of cash.and they are gonna make alot now

Some people forgot about the financial crisis? They slashed thousands of workers so I don't think they'd be able to afford buying a game studio as big as R*.



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
Showertea said:
Grimes said:
jarrod said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

Actually, they don't.  Sony Corp overall has more total assets (and they could definitely leverage enough to buy T2) but Nintendo actually has more in liquid assets and cash reserves (ie: money).  When you consider that Sony is many, many times larger than Nintendo (180,000 employees to 4,000 employees) that's pretty staggering actually.

GM is a huge company too, that don't mean squat if expenses are high and there is a lot of debt and expenses.

Assets can carry debt and expenses, they aren't money in the bank. An unprofitable asset may be worse than owning no asset, because the asset carries debt which may be greater than the money that could obtain by selling that asset. The expenses for that asset could be greater than revenue generated as well.

Nintendo has more liquid assets than Sony. Literally more money sitting in the bank doing nothing. Nintendo is a ridiculously conservative company, and has also been ridiculously profitable over the last 20 years.

 

Sony didn't buy Rockstar because they don't have the money. I doubt anyone has the money, or incentive, to buy them. Buying Rockstar would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

Nintendo has alot of Liquid assets but only around $10-20b at max.

 

And you say Sony didn't buy Rockstar cause they didn't have the money and rockstar would cost hunreds of millions of Dollars.

 

1)Rockstars not worth milllions,its worth billions.If it would be worth millions,Paris Hilton would be able to buy it.She inherited over $500m from her GRANDPA.

2)Sony who has been one of those most innovating with TV,CD,DVD,BLU-RAY,PS,WALKMAN,RADIO,ETC doesn't have the money to buy it.A company who survived a PS3's huge loses doesn't have the money...............LOL

 

do some research and come back



jesus kung fu magic on 07 April 2010
Solid_Snake4RD said:
jarrod said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

Actually, they don't.  Sony Corp overall has more total assets (and they could definitely leverage enough to buy T2) but Nintendo actually has more in liquid assets and cash reserves (ie: money).  When you consider that Sony is many, many times larger than Nintendo (180,000 employees to 4,000 employees) that's pretty staggering actually.

u really think they would tell us how much cash reserves they have.they keep that a secret.a company that invented portable music,tv,radio,and every succesfull disc format wouldn't have good cash reserves.they didn't survive PS3's big loses for nothing.

I know Nintendo has alot of liquid assets but not more that around $10-20b maximum.Sony would definately dwarf them.

So wait let me get this straight. Sony allegedly LIE in their Financial/Fiscal reports about their cash reserves to their own shareholders....and in doing so are breaking the law?

 

Do you want me to report it to the authorities or are you going to do it?



N64 is the ONLY console of the fifth generation!!!

Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
Grimes said:
Showertea said:
Grimes said:

GM is a huge company too, that don't mean squat if expenses are high and there is a lot of debt and expenses.

Assets can carry debt and expenses, they aren't money in the bank. An unprofitable asset may be worse than owning no asset, because the asset carries debt which may be greater than the money that could obtain by selling that asset. The expenses for that asset could be greater than revenue generated as well.

Nintendo has more liquid assets than Sony. Literally more money sitting in the bank doing nothing. Nintendo is a ridiculously conservative company, and has also been ridiculously profitable over the last 20 years.

 

Sony didn't buy Rockstar because they don't have the money. I doubt anyone has the money, or incentive, to buy them. Buying Rockstar would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

If you look at their balance sheets they have about $6 billion more debt than cash.

Contrast that to a company like Microsoft which has about $27.5 more cash than debt.

It's pretty clear that if MS wanted to buy it they easily could. Whether it makes business sense is a different question.

Some people think that a company like Rockstar is a gold mine, but even gold mines can lose money in the real world.

you really looked at their balance sheet,could you please provide the link.

I agree that MS has alot more assets but they won't buy Rockstar cause its not worth and where did MS come in btw here.

And MS can't just go buying companies worth billions in which field they they have not been so succesful,they have shareholders to worry about.



Around the Network
Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
Linkasf said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Grimes said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

 

but they wudn't do it cause they only want Rockstar

Sony does not have more money than Nintendo. Sony has more assets but has much higher debt and expenses. Nintendo has built a huge cash reserve over the past few years and has little debt and low expenses.

u really think a company like Sony with $250B ASSESTS has less money than a company with $19 assets.

 

sony didn't just survive their huge losses with PS3 just like that.they have a big big pocket full of cash.and they are gonna make alot now

Some people forgot about the financial crisis? They slashed thousands of workers so I don't think they'd be able to afford buying a game studio as big as R*.

they slashed workers cause they were restructuring,this has nothing to do with their ability to buy a company.it depends on the fact on whether it is good for the business or not



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
flowjo said:
nobody could afford rockstar, im sure they have had offers but when they slap you with a number like 800 mill to 1 billion what company is going to do that , you are not guarenteed anything only the possibilities that your investment will pay off.

look what happened with the timed exclusives , microsoft payed rockstar 50 mill i really dont believe that investment was worth the money im sure they regret it, eventually everyone grows tired of the same ol.

wtf r u talking about.Rockstars worth much more than 800M-1B $.heck Bioware was worth 800m$.

if that was the valuation all three Ninty,Sony and MS could buy RSTAR.

YOU are mixing the ability to buy with the and idea of investment paying off.

 

 



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
jesus kung fu magic said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
jarrod said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
Globox said:
Maybe it was pure rumour = BS or maybe there was something to it, maybe there were discusions behind closed doors but it was probably too expensive for Sony. Sony doesn't need rest of 2K they probably wanted Rockstar north (GTA makers). Let's not forget EA was offering 2.1 billion usd to take over 2K, they refused. I don't see Sony spending 2 billion of 2K, not somethingSony does, especialy now when they have been losing money on PS3 for such a long time.
MS could do it, so could Nintendo since they roll in money.
Probably just a rumour.

Sony has alot of money.alot more than Nintendo.

Actually, they don't.  Sony Corp overall has more total assets (and they could definitely leverage enough to buy T2) but Nintendo actually has more in liquid assets and cash reserves (ie: money).  When you consider that Sony is many, many times larger than Nintendo (180,000 employees to 4,000 employees) that's pretty staggering actually.

u really think they would tell us how much cash reserves they have.they keep that a secret.a company that invented portable music,tv,radio,and every succesfull disc format wouldn't have good cash reserves.they didn't survive PS3's big loses for nothing.

I know Nintendo has alot of liquid assets but not more that around $10-20b maximum.Sony would definately dwarf them.

So wait let me get this straight. Sony allegedly LIE in their Financial/Fiscal reports about their cash reserves to their own shareholders....and in doing so are breaking the law?

 

Do you want me to report it to the authorities or are you going to do it?

i didn't mean to say Sony lie about it.they just have alot of assets but most people arguing don't remember what they made in the past and just keep arguing on the basis what their current years sinancial situation is.

 

Sony like Ninto has made alot of profit in the past



Rpruett on 07 April 2010

Sony has a lot more money than Nintendo and it's not even close. Nintendo might have more active cash at a given moment but that really means virtually nothing on an overall sense.

Every asset that Sony has could be liquidated for a ridiculous amount of money and trump anything Nintendo could ever want. Game Studios, Movie studios, Music Studios, Technology, Buildings, Product lines, etc, etc ,etc.



Solid_Snake4RD on 07 April 2010
Rpruett said:
Sony has a lot more money than Nintendo and it's not even close. Nintendo might have more active cash at a given moment but that really means virtually nothing on an overall sense.

Every asset that Sony has could be liquidated for a ridiculous amount of money and trump anything Nintendo could ever want. Game Studios, Movie studios, Music Studios, Technology, Buildings, Product lines, etc, etc ,etc.

thankyou.atleast somebody understands