Though it was an overstatement; it isn't completly false at all. You managed to list 11 games out of the few hundred EA has published in the last few years; the amount of shovelware in comparsion to the highly rated titles is a sad fact EA still needs to change.

That is true, but then the assumption is that Shareholders want Take 2 to sell.  92% is controlled by institutional shareholders (the people who hired the current management team and board of directors), and only 6.2% of the shares outstanding have been tendered after 3 months of the bid.

I would say its probably much safer to assume Shareholders have already voted to keep the company the way it is and let management decided the outcome of the future, than to assume that Shareholders have already decided to sell/merge the company.

The actions of shareholders so far all show it to be the other way.

 Just think of Criterion. They seem free to do whatever they want under EA, and have made great games. Of course they make much shovelware, but it is not fair to say that everything turns to crap

 not true. If they see the merge as a good financial decission (a better one than the buy out) because they think they make more money with it (with low risk) they could go for a merge (because they would still hold parts of the company, rather then a buy out. To be honest, financial speaking I never understood EA offering so much.

A merger cannot be hostile and it cannot be forced by Shareholders.  If shareholders wanted to force a merger, they would have to go through the process of firing the management team and putting another one in place.  A merger requires management's blessing.  A takeover doesnt.

Financially speaking, EA is offering to buy up all shares of Take 2 directly from shareholders.  Once EA controls more than 50%, they own the voting rights of the company and can automatically purchase the remaining shares.

In this case, it is the shareholder's decision whether or not they want to allow EA to buy the shares they own.  As of now, EA has the option of buying 6.2%, a far cry from the 50% required.  This is also after 3 months of hostility.

But the whole point of my post was to show that everyone is ASSUMING, the key, ASSUMING, Take 2 either has to merge or be acquired (esp. the media and the investment banks since they need every fee they can get).  No one has discussed on whether or not Take 2 can survive on its own.

I hate EA.
Ubi is ok.
Nuff' said.

Where is Mr. Kerkorian when you need him? Buy big stakes in Take 2 and force them to re-enter talks with EA. Just like Yahoo.

I much rather have EA buying T2 that Ubisoft. EA isn't half as a bad as people say.