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

Forums - Gaming - Capcom now for Sale?

Mr Khan on 16 June 2014

Folks, shareholders want to increase the company's value. Going exclusive is not going to increase Capcom's value, unless the company who buys them has a very clear plan for how to implement them in their strategic lineup (that means more than just having Capcom IPs on their side). Thus shareholders would be hesitant to accept a takeover from one of the big three. Optioning for a buyoff is a good way to run up short-term share value, but leveraging that into long-term value means going with a company that will be able to play Capcom exactly as she is currently, which is a third party

As much as Nintendo's stewardship would likely help Megaman (and get me more Monster Hunter!), it's very unlikely.

This explains that other thread, and my somewhat ill-informed comment therein...



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
NobleTeam360 on 16 June 2014
Zero999 said:
NobleTeam360 said:
Zero999 said:
NobleTeam360 said:
Nintendo never buys anyone out. Sony doesn't have the money to afford Capcom, MS has the money, but they seem more focused on building up internally than buying people externally. So I'm not sure if anyone will really make a bid for them, maybe Amazon?

bolded: WRONG, nintendo even BOUGHT namco bandai back in 2008. the only reason the transaction wasn't completed was because the stupid japanese government didn't let them. that's how nintendo ended up with monolith soft.

Ok, so they didn't buy them correct? Reason doesn't matter.  But I'm sure as hell glad Japan blocked it.

what do you mean  by "reason doesn't matter? you clearly said that nintendo NEVER buys anyone. I just proved they totaly tried to buy namco. and they do buy smaller studios every now and then. and don't forget nintendo recently announced interest in buying other companies.

Did they? That's cool, Nintendo needs new games and if they get them by buying other companies them good on them.



justiceiro on 16 June 2014
Mr Khan said:
Folks, shareholders want to increase the company's value. Going exclusive is not going to increase Capcom's value, unless the company who buys them has a very clear plan for how to implement them in their strategic lineup (that means more than just having Capcom IPs on their side). Thus shareholders would be hesitant to accept a takeover from one of the big three. Optioning for a buyoff is a good way to run up short-term share value, but leveraging that into long-term value means going with a company that will be able to play Capcom exactly as she is currently, which is a third party

As much as Nintendo's stewardship would likely help Megaman (and get me more Monster Hunter!), it's very unlikely.

This explains that other thread, and my somewhat ill-informed comment therein...


Yes, this is pretty accurate. Besides, would not be a transaction that the japanese governement would accept that easily, after what happened with Bamco.

But, nintendo don't need to buy all the shares, just the ones that gets them enough power inside the house. Rare was 49% nintendo. Bamco is 1,78%, monolith soft is 70%(i think). This much on bamco was enough to garantee a port of one piece and kamem rider(but not enough to Dark souls 2).

Nitnendo buys 30% of shares and will have enough to garantee MH exclusivity, and some resident evil titles here and there, without stoping capcom of investing on mobile games.



"Hardware design isn’t about making the most powerful thing you can.
Today most hardware design is left to other companies, but when you make hardware without taking into account the needs of the eventual software developers, you end up with bloated hardware full of pointless excess. From the outset one must consider design from both a hardware and software perspective."

Gunpei Yoko

Mr Khan on 16 June 2014
justiceiro said:
Mr Khan said:
Folks, shareholders want to increase the company's value. Going exclusive is not going to increase Capcom's value, unless the company who buys them has a very clear plan for how to implement them in their strategic lineup (that means more than just having Capcom IPs on their side). Thus shareholders would be hesitant to accept a takeover from one of the big three. Optioning for a buyoff is a good way to run up short-term share value, but leveraging that into long-term value means going with a company that will be able to play Capcom exactly as she is currently, which is a third party

As much as Nintendo's stewardship would likely help Megaman (and get me more Monster Hunter!), it's very unlikely.

This explains that other thread, and my somewhat ill-informed comment therein...


Yes, this is pretty accurate. Besides, would not be a transaction that the japanese governement would accept that easily, after what happened with Bamco.

But, nintendo don't need to buy all the shares, just the ones that gets them enough power inside the house. Rare was 49% nintendo. Bamco is 1,78%, monolith soft is 70%(i think). This much on bamco was enough to garantee a port of one piece and kamem rider(but not enough to Dark souls 2).

Nitnendo buys 30% of shares and will have enough to garantee MH exclusivity, and some resident evil titles here and there, without stoping capcom of investing on mobile games.

What happened with Bandai-Namco? I'm curious as to what you mean.

(your signature is too tall, by the way. Also the yoda GIF is too large in file size. Please correct, i'm going to bed...)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Pavolink on 16 June 2014

Nintendo you must buy Resident Evil and develop beautiful games like Remake and Re4. You have to do it, now.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network
FATALITY on 16 June 2014
Clyde32 said:
You know what to do nintendo!!!!!


please not this shit(atlus) again



”The environment where PlayStation wins is best for this industry” (Jack Tretton, 2009)

Maraccuda on 16 June 2014
Game_God said:

I just want to add that additionally to the benefits of ownership over Capcom IPs & the skilled manpower. it would be a paradigm shifting acquisition in Japan for other game companies.
Think about it, with PS4 dev costs & lackluster sales, Japanese game companies like SE, Namco, Konami, who have been turning their back on Nintendo for a few years now, would have almost no choice than aknowledge Nintendo prevalence in the Japanese Market, resulting in the possible coming back of IPs like Winning Eleven, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Tales of, Tekken...
There's more in it for Nintendo than just buying/owning Capcom.


I am glad someone thought about this as well. Ever since the new gen of consoles came out it pretty much ripped the gap between indie and AAA titles wide open. So a company with little money could not invest heavily in AAA development and resort to... mobile games... *shudder*

With saying that, developing on the Wii U and 3DS will cut the production costs for Capcom and other struggling Japanese developers.

I am not saying to develop exclusively for Nintendo but why make 1 AAA game when you could make 3 A or AA games? Just makes more sense to me.



Australian Gamer (add me if you like)               
NNID: Maraccuda              
PS Network: Maraccuda           

 

justiceiro on 17 June 2014
Mr Khan said:
justiceiro said:
Mr Khan said:
Folks, shareholders want to increase the company's value. Going exclusive is not going to increase Capcom's value, unless the company who buys them has a very clear plan for how to implement them in their strategic lineup (that means more than just having Capcom IPs on their side). Thus shareholders would be hesitant to accept a takeover from one of the big three. Optioning for a buyoff is a good way to run up short-term share value, but leveraging that into long-term value means going with a company that will be able to play Capcom exactly as she is currently, which is a third party

As much as Nintendo's stewardship would likely help Megaman (and get me more Monster Hunter!), it's very unlikely.

This explains that other thread, and my somewhat ill-informed comment therein...


Yes, this is pretty accurate. Besides, would not be a transaction that the japanese governement would accept that easily, after what happened with Bamco.

But, nintendo don't need to buy all the shares, just the ones that gets them enough power inside the house. Rare was 49% nintendo. Bamco is 1,78%, monolith soft is 70%(i think). This much on bamco was enough to garantee a port of one piece and kamem rider(but not enough to Dark souls 2).

Nitnendo buys 30% of shares and will have enough to garantee MH exclusivity, and some resident evil titles here and there, without stoping capcom of investing on mobile games.

What happened with Bandai-Namco? I'm curious as to what you mean.

(your signature is too tall, by the way. Also the yoda GIF is too large in file size. Please correct, i'm going to bed...)


Basically what zero said. Before bandai bougth Namco, nintendo owned ~2,5% of Namco. one time, they tried to buy the entire company, but the gov didn't give them apporaval because would result on a monopoly(was in the good wii days). Some time later, bandai merged with Namco and nintendo shares where cut for ~1,78%. Or so i heard.

My gif :(



"Hardware design isn’t about making the most powerful thing you can.
Today most hardware design is left to other companies, but when you make hardware without taking into account the needs of the eventual software developers, you end up with bloated hardware full of pointless excess. From the outset one must consider design from both a hardware and software perspective."

Gunpei Yoko

Proxy-Pie on 17 June 2014

Inb4 Nintendo doesn't buy them, but Amazon does XP



Clyde32 on 17 June 2014
Never said:
Buying a big unprofitable third party to make games only on your platform might be too risky for Nintendo They're currently in trouble selling their games on all platforms how much money will Nintendo exclusivity lose them? A handful of smaller acquisitions might make more sense to Nintendo.

It would single handedly fix all Nintendo's woes about them having to few games though. Nintendo + Capcom is all they need to carry the console and gamers who object to buying a Nintendo console (because they need to compensate for having a small penis or something) might have a better time thinking of it as a Capcom console.


Ever heard of a game called Monster Hunter 4? You know, the exclusive 3DS capcom game that sold 4 million in Japan within the span of six months?